Nonprofit

Active or Passive

Is your organization active or passive?  Are you taking action to meet a need or holding steady?  Are you interacting or focusing on outgoing communications?  I am often struck by the lack of momentum in many great causes?  One annual report looks like another.  Each email blast talks about opportunity but the gap stays the same.  It is easy to get lulled into a sense of normal.  

Should I expect us not to make any real progress on shelters for homeless this year?  Is it right to just try and meet the existing need?  Should I expect education funding to be cut in a down economy and gifted and talented programs to be disbanded?  Should I expect little arts galleries to close but the big museum to stay open?  It is easy to accept these as facts.  Except when major events take place and the public’s attention and focus shifts to a specific cause.  The coldest winter in a city’s history suddenly forces a community to address homelessness with anxiety.  More shelters, more services and more donations.  


How do you remain active?  How do you demonstrate momentum?


On my travels to New York City I am often struck by how quickly commuters will race from the local to the express.  Hoards swarm across the platform and abandon the local train and then leave it looking almost abandoned at the platform.  Why stay on a train that is going to make eight more stops when I can get there in two?


Does your enterprise create momentum to feel like an express or are you just getting people involved in the cause?  Will they shift to a better organization with more momentum once they see the opportunity?

Social Media Recommendations, Less Valuabel Than Last Year

A current survey shows word of mouth is trending towards a less trust between friends who make recommendations on social media.  Last year the level of trust was 50%  this year it has fallen to 27%.  People were not always satisfied with the recommendations that received online, some of it erroneous.  Now they are looking for 3-5 additional recommendations before taking action or feeling more assured.  The research comes from Ricahrd Edelman who was interviewed on the Marketplace radio program.


With nonprofit organizations initially being the fastest sector of adopters of social media and relying heavily on Facebook and Twitter for marketing the impact of the survey may be noticeable.  How do you make sure you have authentic, transparent reviews of your organization?  Are you getting a variety of view points to give greater assurance that you are everything you claim to be?  Are you using a bullhorn to shout about your great programs or are your fans spreading the word for you?

Recognizing Volunteers

Just received the Annual Report from the Sun Valley Center for the Arts.  One of the fascinating elements about the report is that it lists volunteers before donors and provides a notation about how each volunteer donated their time and talent.  The report says a lot about an organization and its values.

How does your organization prioritize its recognition of volunteers, donors, sponsors, and in-kind donors?  Is your recognition consistent with the organization’s stated values?  Have you asked each of the aforementioned groups how they wish to be recognized and if the current process matches their expectations?  How have you been personally recognized by other causes that was particularly compelling?

Blame

Blame is easy, convenient and it provides a simple answer to challenging questions.  

  • Many political figures are masters of blame.  In brief ten second sound bite they address their talking points.  With outrageous metaphor they must outline how they as an individual, their party, and their legislation has been held hostage by the the opposition.
  • Nonprofits use blame.  Foundations are blamed for not approving grants.  Boards are blamed for not attending meetings or be disengaged.  Volunteers are blamed for not completing tasks professionally.
  • Donors use blame.  They give without condition but then blame the charity when they cannot get tickets to a sold out event or are seated poorly at a gala.
  • Members blame organizations for not getting enough benefits in return for their investment.  They become transactional with the institution.  Customer service becomes the focus instead of the organization’s ability to meet the mission.


Much of what incites us to blame is the lack of easy answers.  Blame covers large gaps in understanding with a blanket statement.  If you are using or hearing blame in your organization, pause and consider what questions have gone unanswered.  The power of being inquisitive can lead to extraordinary results.

Specialist vs. Generalist

Specialists are experts in a very specific area.  Specialist can wax an Olympian’s skis to run .01 faster, enough to win a gold medal.  Doctors specialize, you have a pediatric anesthesiologist in surgery as opposed to just a general anesthesiologist.  A travel agent can customize a vacation on cruise line in the Caribbean that best fits a client who uses a wheelchair. 


Generalist have a level of comprehension that covers a wide range of information.  According to Wikipedia, a generalist species may survive in a wide variety of environmental conditions.  Generalist are small town doctors who are miles from the big city hospital and must handle whatever walks into their clinic.


The world appears to be headed towards developing more specialists in the years to come. Have you seen nonprofit fundraisers specializing in annual fund, capital campaigns, planned giving, alumni relations, major gifts, leadership donors?  Look in the Chronicle of Philanthropy classified section and you can see the diverse requirements and specializations within the field of Development and Advancement.


Nonprofit boards are being made-up of more specialists.  The matrix many boards use for selecting new board members includes professional skills such as accountant, attorney, builder/architect, business owner, technology, human resources.  These are tremendous skill and clearly add value to the expertise of the board.  Rarely do you see the matrix list the attribute of ‘generalist’.  Who has the expertise to manage all the specialist information and mold it into a format from which a board can make the best decision?  Who has the vision that considers as many of the opinions and views before reaching a conclusion?


In the coming years, I believe generalist, an individual with the ability to think strategically and globally will become a specialist.  The available pool of generalist is being reduced every year as more individuals train to develop technical skills.


How does your enterprise balance the specialists and generalists?  Do you have the specialists necessary to tackle the details?  Do you have a generalist to bring the conversation back to 30,000 feet if necessary?

Checklists

Checklist Manifesto by Atul Gawande is a great reminder of how a simple approach builds long term performance and consistency.  Although the checklists reviewed by the author were developed and tested in the medical world with an aim at reducing infections and deaths the tactic is applicable far beyond the ICU.  The application of a checklist strategy to business and nonprofit worlds are evident and meaningful.  When preparing for a consulting engagement I often use a checklist to outline the client’s outcomes and manage the process.  Although it feels a bit like baby-steps it helps reduce the number of times a board retreat tries to do a 180 in the middle of the day because I missed the client’s intended outcome.  Why re-invent the wheel every time you appoint a new Chair for your organization’s largest fundraiser.  Imagine how much easier it would be to recruit a new volunteer to lead your next major event if there was clarity about the role and a template to follow.  Another opportunity exists with the orientation of new board members.  Many new board members take a couple meetings to get up to speed and begin contributing to the board’s deliberation.  Does a document exist within your organization to get the newest members involved more rapidly and effectively?  A few examples of unique checklists:

  • An outgoing Board Chair leaving a checklist for the incoming Board Chair.  The checklist outlines some basic strategies for general responsiblities over the course of the coming year.  Illustrations from the list: meet with each board member individually twice a year to hear their needs and thoughts; hold an annual gathering with the Advisory Council.
  • Board nominating procedures.  Have a checklist for the process that starts with identifying new board members and continues from cultivation to nomination.  Few boards have a wait-list of potential new board members and therefore the process is best not left for the last minute when it appears unprofessional and the pool of potential new board members may not be as anticipated.
  • Assessment of the CEO should be a consistent and transparent process.  How un-nerving for a CEO or Board Chair if the proceedure needs to be recreated each year or is only considered when a problem exists.
  • Roles of the board.  Give a checklist to each board member and allow them to mark the responsibilities as they accomplish them:  80% attendance of board meeting, Annual Fund contribution, serve on one committee or task force, attend three programs, advocate for the enterprise in a peer or business circle, write thank notes to 20 donors… the list is customized to your organization’s greatest needs but the steps are clear.



I have encouraged clients to take a few moments to design a simple checklist for some element of their organization that is critical but deemed reasonably simple.  One enterprise created a checklist for reviewing the financial statement during a board meeting.  Initially, only a few board member really knew what they were looking at during the report.  Now the Finance Chair walks step-by-step through the reports and everyone at the meeting understands the information and can truly fulfill their responsibility as a fiduciary.


What checklist might be most meaningful to your organization?  How would it change your organization’s effectiveness if you got the process correct almost every time?

Inertia
Most organizational planning sessions have the noblest of intentions. I frequently hear the following phrases in the preparation stage for a retreat.

Let’s really get our hands around the future of the organization.
We want to solve the big problems.
Everyone will know exactly what to do when we leave.
We can do this in a day.

I noticeably shutter when I hear those words. I am the first to champion enthusiasm and passion. An energetic group is usually a positive when facilitating as I do not have to spend lots of time getting the participant’s energy to somewhere above consciousness. As you enter and depart the retreat, the delta between an organization’s expected outcomes and that which was accomplished during the retreat is often sobering. Sometimes the list of expected outcomes looks like the paint the house, clean the garage, and mow the lawn in a Sunday afternoon schedule. A fact that has become increasingly clear to me is that the organization are going forward down their respective highways at 65 or 70 MPH. Nobody is going to pull off the road for a retreat. There is no motivation to come to a full and proper stop. The inertia of the organization’s speed is rarely taken into account when the planning process commences.

American Public Media’s Markeplace radio show had a facinating interview with K.C. Cole. She gave the following example,
“We all know that it takes energy to get started on something, whether it’s propelling yourself out of bed or propelling a rocket to Mars. What we don’t tend to appreciate is how hard it is to stop what you’re already doing. In fact, it’s relatively easy to blast your way to a distant planet compared to what it takes to slow down your spacecraft once you get there.”

Many organizations never calculate the force required to slow or alter their organization’s current path. The end result after the planning retreat is that the enterprise plots a path for the moon but remains in its current orbit with a few adjustments. It is not cyncial, it is science. Few people in the room consider the enormous amount of energy and time required to get people to act or move in a different direction.

Our current economic times have put tremendous pressures for change on financial institutions and yet the resistance to change has been extraordinary. Few calculated how difficult it would be to help banks dramatically alter what they had always done.

How do you account for your organization’s momentum when you commence planning? Which forward motion can serve you organization? Who is going to monitor the changes you wish to make? Do they have the power necessary to alter the organization’s course? How much energy is it going to take?

The K.C. Cole Marketplace interview can be listened to here: http://marketplace.publicradio.org/www_publicradio/tools/media_player/popup.php?name=marketplace/pm/2010/01/21/marketplace_cast1_20100121_64&starttime=00:18:36.0&endtime=00:21:29.500


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.