Author: whatifconcepts

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

Content vs Process

I attended a meeting recently where the chair of the meeting was doing their best to manage the agenda but also be the most active conversationalist during each discussion. They got so wrapped-up in sharing their point-of-view that they failed to recognize that many of the attendees were distracted, working on their Blackberries, or simply day dreaming. Even those who remained engaged in the dialogue were demonstrating obvious signs of frustration. It was a great reminder of the two roles of content and process that are critical to any meeting. As a consultant and facilitator I constantly remind myself which of these responsibilities I am managing. When I facilitate a retreat or meeting, I am process focused. I want to know each step that needs to be completed in advance of the session. I am focused on keeping time, generating written notes reflecting each comment, managing the agenda. What I do not do is participate in the discussions. When I am consulting, I am usually involved in the content. I have been hired for my expertise and professional knowledge. If required, I can bring in a facilitator to help manage the process role.

If you attempt to wear both hats, it is a bit like being the dealer and chip leader at a poker tournament. You cannot effectively focus on the fulfilling your duties to deal and manage the deck while playing your hand. Be clear what role you are managing. A good Board Chair is often managing the process at at a board meeting. If they feel strongly about being deeply involved in the deliberations (content), they should have a Vice-President or another board member take over the process role which afford the Board Chair a chance to participate in the discussion. Many board meeting dysfunctions can trace themselves back to the lack of clarity around the two responsibilities of process and content.

Do you consider process and content when running a meeting? Can you ask others to manage the process if you input is required on the content? When electing a Board Chair or Committee Chair do you consider their ability to manage these two roles?

Authentic Moments

End of the year solicitations from nonprofit and charitable organizations have flooded the mailbox. Some are amazingly well crafted. Others try and create a moment or message that appears forced. Thinking of authentic moments I remember two that I just rediscovered on YouTube.


1980 Olympic Games in Lake Placid, two literal giants of the sport are battling for the gold medal. The result of this race changed the way future races were scored with the races only timed to the tenth of a second in the future.

Or this epic battle that had all of Norway screaming and a finish that is remarkable.

You cannot fake the passion and intensity of an authentic moment. Remember to celebrate the moment and be honest in your message.

Tolerance


I have learned many of the most important lesssons from people who initially said things that annoyed me. Consider how tolerance of outliers has changed our relationship with icons today. A few quick examples:

  • The Cabinet of Abraham Lincoln
  • Helen Keller
  • Jackie Robinson
  • Bill Gates
  • Lance Armstrong
  • Rudolph the Red Nose Reindeer

Sometimes you do not grasp that you are following an outlier. As a kid I celebrated the success of Bill Koch, the only US Olympic medalist in cross-country skiing and winner of the season long World Cup. In 1976 he raced on waxless skis to win a Silver medal. Waxless skis would be like driving a Ford Taurus in a NASCAR race. He later adopted the technique of skating and revolutionized the way cross-country skiing was contested. He was so successful that the former powerhouse countries protested and eventually divided cross-country skiing into two techniques for racing, traditional technique and free technique (skating).

Are you allowing those who do not represent the conventional view to have a voice in your organization? Do you allow them to speak and does your organization really listen and consider their message? Do you seek out individuals with different view points? Would a unique perspective change your deliberations and decision-making?

Master Craftsmen and Outliers

A friend commented to me that they work in the nonprofit sector because they can see the cathedral they are building daily. When they worked in the corporate sector they felt like a stone mason that never had the joy of seeing their work’s contribution to the greater good. If you consider this for a moment, one of the competitive advantages for a social sector employee is that they have a chance to change the face of a community and witness the impact of their work everyday. Staff members are often associated with the nonprofit that employees them when in public in much the same way that a community member might recognize a fire fighter or police officer out of uniform. The sense of contribution is a powerful force. I believe that there is plenty of opportunities for many enterprise to maximizes the emotional resonance that a sense of contribution brings to a workplace.

The Gallup organization has a great evaluation instrument outlined in Marcus Buckingham and Curt Coffman’s book First, Break All The Rules. There thirteen statements. As an example, number 9 reads, “The mission/purpose of my company makes me feel my job is important.” When evaluated along with answers to the other statements inquiring about having the right tools, understanding the expectations and receiving recognition, the Gallup organization found a correlation between remarkable teams and those that failed to meet expectations.

Do you find opportunities for the staff to be recognized for their professional talents? Does the staff get a chance to see the cathedral they are building and understand how their effort contribute to the structure? Is the mission of your organization making their job feel important?

Opportunity: Storm Warnings

Severe weather warning seems to captivate us. You can be going about your day and suddenly the threat of an impending meteorological event changes your perception of the moment. When I lived near a ski resort in Idaho, the joke was that the Weather Channel’s red screen was a guarantee that the forecast of 1-2 feet of snow would equate to a micro-inch. The storm warnings were often regarded as a jinx. Yet the excitement about an impending storm was palpable in the community. For some of us, a weather alert is an opportunity. Surfers race to the ocean to catch the increasing swell on the front side of an approaching hurricane. Skiers anticipate feet of powder to blanket the slopes. Others react in fear. Approaching storms require emergency actions. Flood preparations might require sand bags to be filled. Windows are shuttered, shovels are purchased, food is horded, travel is delayed.

Much of what happened during the end of 2008 and 2009 had the impact of a tsunami. Budgets were devastated, donors appealed for more time or greater understanding in fulfilling pledge payments, the number of users sky-rocketed or plummeted depending on the program. Social service organizations were swamped. Higher education and the arts were left wondering what happened to their endowments and how to offset the lost value.

There was no Weather Channel red screen flashed in front of the nonprofit sector warning of impending chaos. A year later, many organizations have right-sized, evaluated budgets, merged, dipped into reserves, or ceased to exist. Questions that were never really taken seriously when done in the comfort of a generative approach prior to the recession now have the Board’s attention. The memory of these events will slowly drift away and the scars will be heal. I have been encouraging many nonprofits to use this unique moment in time to address issues that may not resonate for another generation.

What questions need to be answered to best position your organization to succeed and sustain itself in an uncertain future? Said differently, what one one thing does your board need to accomplish to secure the organization’s future? Who do you need to engage to succeed? Are you still uniquely positioned to be a leader in the sector or are you still the ‘best kept secret’ in your community? Are you surviving or thriving?

Fans vs. Donors

Fans

  • Pay money to attend their team’s games and events.
  • Central focus is on the game on the field.
  • Purchase and wear clothing with the team’s logo.
  • Follow their team on any availible media (cable television, internet, talk radio).
  • Frequent chat rooms.
  • Wake-up at midnight to welcome home their newly crowned champions at the airport.
  • Hold season tickets. Often passing the tickets down to younger generations.
  • Take their friends, business associates and kids to the game.
  • Fans can almost always find somebody to give away their tickets.
  • Pay to sponsor the team- want to have their business associated with the team’s brand.

Donors

  • Pay money to attend events- may receive a reduced price as a donor or member.
  • Wear clothing with your organization’s logo in appreciation for a donation.
  • Nonprofits use social media more effectively than any other sector- the question is anyone listening, are donors following?
  • Bring family and friends to events from time-to-time.
  • Donors are typically passive.
  • Frequent social events that may also highlight an organization’s programs.
  • Donor Recognition ranges from wanting prominent naming opportunities to complete anonymity.

Nonprofit organizations spend so much time cultivating donors but we do not always think of making them fans of our organizations. What would change if your donors were fans first and donors second?

Train to Race or Race to Train?

Elite athletes train to race but most athletes race to train. The difference is that a professional athletes design a program and schedule a plan to build fitness and speed for specific competitions. This approach is process focused. Many amateurs go for the event approach. They race which then gives them motivation to train. A race result from one week inspires or motivates training for another week before they race again. The race remains the focus and they construct as much scaffolding (training) that can be assembled around the event. This strategy is more of an organic approach to a fitness plan. Panning is based on the race. An elite athlete typically takes a more holistic view, managing both the process and content. A few races are identified as the primary objective and then additional races and training are planned to build the best fitness level to maximize performance at the highlighted competitions.

To quote Seth Godin’s blog entry from December 10th, “Events are easier to manage, pay for and get excited about. Processes build results for the long haul.”

Is your organization event focused, in the race to train mode? Does your organization take a train to race approach and link the events to strategic priorities? Do you monitor the process? Which approach will help you win the Gold?

7x

If you were notified that your projected lifespan had been reduced by a ratio of seven (a day now equals a week), would you do anything differently? What would if look like if you were informed that you lifespan had been extended seven-fold (each week is now 49 days long)?

Running with our dog during a cold snap yesterday I was amazed by her joy of generating a frosty fur coat. I began to ponder a dogs lifespan. If a year in a dog’s life is equal to roughly seven years in a human, each day is essentially a week for a dog. Scarcity of time makes for some interesting adjustments in priorities. A run for her is a weeks worth of living, no wonder she is excited to get out.

Many nonprofit organizations and foundations have a belief that they will exist in perpetuity. Others believe they will continue until a cure is found or a cause is no longer relevant. This sense of an open-ended engagement is powerful and yet challenging. How do you keep motivation and generate a sense of urgency in front of your board and staff along with your donors and constituents? I see staff members who joined organizations with a passion for solving a problem or meeting an essential need and now find themselves on a pseudo corporate treadmill ticking off the years. Governing documents are designed to extend the life of most nonprofits and foundations unless a sunset clause is embedded. Most strategic planning retreat do not focus on how to put the organization out of business because the need has been met and no longer requires the enterprises programs; rather the planning retreats focus on positioning the organization as being the leader and thriving in the future.

If your organization was informed that it had seven years to tackle the most important issues and then would be disbanded, what actions would you take? Does your enterprise seriously discuss a future without your presence? How do you embed a sense of urgency in the deliberation of your organization’s work? How do you renew the passion of your followers and fans?

Nonprofit Concierge

I recently had an opportunity to visit with the nonprofit conservation group, Scenic Hudson in Poughkeepsie, NY. This is a tremendous enterprise focused on the preserving key land in the Hudson River Valley. One of the pleasures of the visit was the tremendous thought that had been put into planning the tour. As we reached each site a Scenic Hudson staff member or key leader from a partnering conservation group was waiting to give a brief tour of the specific project. I mentioned to the Executive Director that I felt as if I was part of a bank heist since we switched vehicles and pick-up drivers repeatedly to expedite our travels.

The lasting impressions from the visit:

* Gained a wonderful appreciation for the programs and priorities of Scenic Hudson. Connected with 4 staff members, 1 board member, 2 volunteers, and 1 strategic partner.
* Explored 4 different projects on foot and drove past countless others. Stood at key viewpoints and was able to see property that Scenic Hudson had deemed classified as critical.
* My time and hopefully Scenic Hudson’s resources were used effectively (and efficiently). And I made an online donation on the train ride back to NYC.

The epiphany that I believe would serve numerous social sector causes is to think of yourself more like a concierge. How can you customize a meaningful experience for individual advocates or donors? What would be a great use of your limited resources and the guests time? How do you orchestrate an experience that would be so memorable that your guest could be reminded of the event and immediately be transported back to a powerful memory? If you selected 5-10 individuals to focus on, what might be your organization’s return on this type of investment? What would you like a Mayor, foundation president, celebrity, journalist, or prospective board member to experience?

Celebrity Gold(dust)

Everyone has been following the top celebrity endorsement deal this past week- of course I am writing about Stephen Colbert’s sponsorship of the US Speed Skating Team. When the US Speed Skating Team lost Dutch bank DSB as its primary sponsor, creating an immediate shortfall of $300,000 to the association and $50,000 to the athletes, Colbert Nation pounced. Online they raised around $250,000 and the sponsorship deal was inked on the show. A donate now button is prominently displayed on the Colbert Nation website’s homepage. Additionally other sponsors have jumped on the Colbert PR coat tails.

No all is well with the Colbert Show’s endorsement deal. One of the leading US speed skaters has Olympic gold medalist Shani Davis referring to the new patron of the sport as a “jerk”. Most of the team has readily accepted Colbert’s fundraising assistance, media spotlight or at least tolerated the attention with humor. What was slated a PR stunt as much as an awareness campaign is bringing out an ugly division within the team.

With the endless details in the Tiger Woods saga changing daily, anything I post will be outdated by the end of the day. I will however suggest that the charities supported by Tiger Woods both directly and indirectly are pondering new ways to position their partnership with the world’s number one golfer. Those that have hooked their funding train and image to Tiger now must considering the future in ways that most have never been unimaginable weeks ago.

A celebrity endorsement of your cause is a powerful tool. It brings media and attention, things most nonprofits can only garner when they are in middle of turmoil or receive a ridiculously large donation. Managing celebrity partnerships requires a unique set of expertise and lots of communication. Most celebrities become well know for something other than their work in the social sector. ‘A List’ individuals tend to be magnets. They can attract a lot of postive attention but they also attract less than desirable press (either in rumor or fact).

How can you position your enterprise to partner with the right celebrity? Do you add them to your Board (what decision-making talents can a celebrity bring that currently missing from you Board)? Is there a role that is best suited for a celebrity within your organization? If the celebrity cloak falls off tomorrow, would you still want to have this person associated with the organization? What would be the one thing that a celebrity could do for your organization? Are you focused obtaining that primary objective?