**3. Discussion**

DC has made a great variety of activities accessible to a very large number of individuals and organizations. In contrast to other types of social exchange, the internet medium is quick, efficient, and direct, requiring minimum effort on the part of the user to accomplish goals, as opposed to traditional methods of interacting instead of "acts of reciprocity, negotiation and cooperation that once allowed businesses to build and maintain relationships gave way to optimized matching systems that undermined and diminished the role of trust" (Cheshire, Geabasi and Cook 2010, p.177). While it is clear that surmounting competition relies today on access and speed of access to sources of information, and the dissemination of that information to possible stakeholders, we must ask questions about the DCP link between digital communication and digital performance (Peltier & Schibrowski, 1995).

For nonprofits there is ambiguity about the extent to which digital communication enhances performance. There are some basic concerns about the extent to which nonprofits can successfully adapt tactics used by for-profit organizations for promotional goals since they often lack professional staff and there is a shortage of volunteers. In addition, nonprofits are examples of social entities that seek social goals, and standard digital communication often lacks the direct contacts considered as vital to social awareness. Moreover, nonprofit stakeholders do not agree about nonprofit performance. Some insist that nonprofits should not be concerned with the economic success of organizational activities, but with how much support they receive from social groups. It is less important whether they donate to a cause or even actively participate as members than being "aware of social goals" and embracing them. Nonetheless, board members and professional managers lacking continuous monetary support are confronted with difficulties in running the organization and completing projects, especially those which are related to provision of services. Focused on efficiency, monetary gain must be a central concern in their decision-making. Unfortunately, studies examining the link between digital communication and digital performance do not account for these concerns. For this reason we have introduced three dimensions that need to be taken into consideration, namely: type of stakeholder; performance effectiveness and efficiency; and individual and organizational levels of targeting.

This taxonomy enables a clearer view of the basic links that can be established, because "targeting' in digital communication via the Internet is essential for getting benefits related to attainment of effectiveness or efficiency-oriented goals. For example, it may be easier to get donations from organizations supporting the same goals. Private organizations such as philanthropic institutes are often more aware of nonprofit practices. They may be less willing to donate via the net, but are more likely to support goals indirectly. Similarly, public agencies supporting the provision of services are probably less interested in DC since their activities are not autonomous but reflect public policies and allocation of funds.

DC oriented towards public institutions will attain higher effectiveness, i.e. moral support and recognition of organizational goals in both service and advocacy groups. In many ways, this type of DC is more capable of raising public awareness, shaping organizational prestige, and increasing exposure to immediate and long-range goals of nonprofits. In such cases, expectations of increased efficiency, i.e. more donations and willingness to participate in organizational activities will be lower. However, when DC aims at higher personal contact with either individual or institutional agents, it will be more successful in attaining donations and contributions of all kinds.

It should be noted that some degree of effectiveness and efficiency is only possible when DC is highly sophisticated and costly. Some nonprofits, usually large international social and complex enterprises, will choose DC purely for effectiveness, though the impact of extended DC will probably have positive outcomes for efficient operation as well. For example, organizations such as Amnesty, Doctors of the World, Unique, Oxfam etc. have achieved high levels of contributions from effective use of the DC link. We therefore recommend using DC in the nonprofits, bearing in mind that direct involvement in attainment of a social goal is the rationale for participation. Providing "passive" support to a cause does not motivate individuals. The Internet certainly plays an important role, but it is essentially by physical presence that nonprofits are able to cope with the immediate and efficient achievement of social goals.
