Author: whatifconcepts

Empowering those that inspire so they can excel at the work that matters.

Try This

Would you enter a running race that advertised itself as covering an unknown distance?  If you were the adventurous type and decided to enter, how would you train?  Sprints, long runs, wait and see?  On the morning of the race everyone assembles at start, the gun goes off, and you start running.  How fast?  Some racers sprint, others start at a pace appropriate for a 100-mile endurance run, and a few just stand in place.  What are you thinking at this moment?


Try This:*  Select a running loop.  Have a friend start you without agreeing on a finish line.  Have your race official friend select a finish line while you are running.  Run your ‘race’ and see what happens.  Now, after recovering, try it again over the same distance. Now that you know the distance did you change anything?  Were you faster or slower?  How did you pace yourself?  Did you spend more or less mental energy thinking about the unknown?

Finish lines are important.  They help us focus, prepare appropriately, and expend resources wisely.  Running to an unknown destination is as much a mental challenge as physical.  I have competed in races where I do not know the course and found the experience to be taxing in a way that I cannot replicate if I return and compete in the next version of the event.  Our ability to import our experience from one event to the next is helpful.  I know what a half-marathon feel like.  Add some climbs or make it flat and I can adjust but I still have the muscle memory to cover the distance.  Competing without a defined finish line is completely different challenge.  If the finish is 100 meters I would be disappointed that I did not run faster but if the competition turns out to be 36 miles I am going to regret sprinting early.

Does your organization have a finish line?  Is there clarity about the course for your programs and events?  Are your team members and advocates running to reach a goal or running because somebody said ‘run.’

* Please do not attempt this running exercise without consulting a physician in advance or if you have any serious known or unknown health risks.  You can try this by substituting physical exercise with some other form of activity (like working on a puzzle with an unknown number of pieces).

Questions Before Countdown

I am a couple weeks from concluding nine years of service as a trustee at an independent school.  It has been a pleasure to serve and I have learned as much during my role as a trustee as when I was student.  Much has been accomplished by the school and some of it can be attributed to the Board’s leadership and partnership with the Head of School.  There is also a list of opportunities not seized and communications missed.  All this brings me to two questions that I recently came across in discussions with a consulting client. 

Before my term on the Board expires I want to….? 
If this organization could be anything I wish it were ….?
The answers to these questions may reveal much about our individual goals and areas of focus when asked of trustees (or staff, volunteers, donors, etc) in the early part of their terms.  
What questions do you ask those who serve your cause?

WWYD (What Would You Do)

I am reading Jon Krakauer’s, Three Cups of Deceit (free download for 72 hours) about the alleged controversy surrounding Greg Mortenson.  The real test in my mind is what would one do if this was your cause in the media’s cross-hairs.  Here is my playbook.

  1. Apologize to your readers, fans, staff, volunteers, students, teachers.  Take responsibility for the whirlwind of attention that is currently distracting the public from focusing on the cause.
  2. Offer to be interviewed by 60 Minutes or an equivalent national media platform.  Acknowledge discrepancies and take responsibility where  misstatements exist and offer to address them by a specific deadline (see number 5).
  3. Resign from the Central Asia Institute (CAI).  Ask the board and staff to submit and cooperate with a professional audit of the programs, financials, fundraising, and governance of the enterprise.  Hire well respected professionals to perform audits.  Greg should offer to fund these costs so they are not incurred by the organization.
  4. Effectively immediately, assign a significant percentage of the profits from Three Cups of Tea and Stones into Schools to benefit the Central Asia Institute (one can argue this should have been the arrangement from the time the first book was published).  No longer make the CAI purchase copies of the book for further distribution or sale.
  5. Make a personal call to the US Military, Jon Krakauer, international educators, and individuals who resigned from the board and staff to verify the importance of the work that the Central Asia Institute performs.  Allow them to honestly state their disagreements with how the Central Asia Institute was run.  Jon Krakauer acknowledged the importance of the CAI’s work during his 60 Minute interview.  The cause should not suffer due to the misdeeds of its founder.
  6. Consistent and constant communication about the actions being taken to verify the use of funds and resources.  Studies have shown it takes 18-24 months to regain public trust after a scandal.  Thoughtful and authentic strategies can condense this timeline but only if transparency exists.

I wish the Central Asia Institute much success but worry when I see these statements released.

Update: Here is the link to an interview Greg Mortenson did with Outside Magazine this week.  He clarifies some misstatements but stands by other narratives that are disputed by 60 Minutes and Krakauer’s book.  Take a moment to read the comments at the end of the article.  There are some HUGE fans of Greg’s work and then some individuals that are devastated.   The controversy is now becoming the purpose of Greg’s work and no longer the change he was trying to manifest. 

Great Advocate With Questionable Resource Allocation

I heard Greg Mortenson, the author of Three Cups of Tea and Stones to Schools speak.  I was moved by his commitment and ability to work in such a challenging cultural and geographical environment.  Suddenly, I find myself at a crossroads.  Is Greg Mortenson and his Central Asia Institute‘s purpose consistent with its actions? 60 Minutes took a look at his organization’s work and the narrative that has become the backbone of his pitch.  60 Minutes video here

Update: The New York Times ran an article this morning with more information.

Engagement

Running an effective volunteering program has been a theme for a few nonprofits I am in touch with.  Many find they are challenged to get volunteers to engage consistently.  One summarized it beautifully, saying there is a difference between volunteering and voluntold.  It is easy to say we have a need and ask the next person that comes along to fill the gap.  It is bit like filling open seats on an airplane, just take the next available seat.  The difference is that volunteering does not come with a contract or ticket.  It is an expression of a gift, sharing time and talent to assist an organization. 

 Volunteers don’t get paid, not because they’re worthless, but because they’re priceless.  ~Sherry Anderson

The great volunteering coordinators act like a concierge.  They get to know their clients, understand their passions and motivations.  Then they call on them when the perfect opportunity appears.  There are always a few people who say yes to everything but a majority readily decline opportunities that appear too generic thinking somebody else will step-up.  If you can engage potential volunteers with the right project you have taken an important step to deepening your cause’s relationship with an advocate.  It is a lot of work up front but nothing is more powerful than a highly functioning system for recruiting and engaging volunteers.  Daniel Pink identified autonomy, mastery, and purpose as the three keys for motivation in his book, Drive.  Interestly, volunteering removes one of the greatest hurdles to motivation (compensation rewards).  Take a moment to watch.
 
 

Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us

Liking (in return for a chance to win a prize)

I recently posted about the trend of organizations channeling contest participants into ‘liking’ their fan page in exchange for a chance to win a prize.  Here is my take.  You may as well go back to the beach when you were in First grade and agree to share your shovel and pail with a friend if they agree to do exactly what you say.  I recall that many of those experiences ended in tears.  Somebody breaks the verbal agreement by suggesting another way to construct the sand castle and the loaned item is repossessed and the offender banished from the project.  The idea that we can control other people’s behavior is one that has proven daunting over thousands of years.  However, when we loaned our extra shovel to a friend and explained the outcome we were trying to achieve, “building the super fortress of the most powerful king of planet Zum,” but allowed for autonomy, the experience is wholly different.  Rarely did your friends invite their friends when management was prescriptive.  However, when the building project was collaborative then other people wanted to be involved and invitations were extended.

Why not offer bystanders the chance to sign-up for your contest without being forced into ‘liking’ the enterprise?  Even better yet, why not have a contest that actually benefits somebody that has a need?  During our interactions surrounding the contest one can decide to ‘like’ your organization or continue on their journey.  Lastly, remember that the tide will eventually come in and wash your creation back into the ocean, just like the prize for the contest eventually needs to be awarded.  Those that were present just for the sand castle or the prize will depart if they have not already.  Those that were inspired will already be planning to build a bigger castle tomorrow.  

Who are you trying to attract?  How are they arriving and once they do, how do they engage?