Executive Session

Executive sessions of the board can be dangerous.  They are mysterious.  The board meets alone unless they invite outside members to join them.  Executive sessions put the staff on edge.  Executive sessions are where candid discussion takes place and then the board comes back and make some wild decision.  Executive sessions are where a CEO’s fate is decided. 


Unless…

Executive sessions are regular features at the end of every board meeting.  If they are used as a way to give the board a reflective moment.  If they provide an opening for a board member to ask ‘the stupid question’ that everyone in the room wanted to address but nobody felt comfortable to inquire about during the regular meeting.  It is a moment for the board to pause and think about all the content they just absorbed during the regular course of business.   It can be an opportunity to ask the CEO what keeps them awake at night.  Or it is a chance to meet with an auditor and get their perception of the organization’s finances without the CEO and CFO in the room. 


How does your organization use Executive session?  Is it scary or enhancing?  Does it benefit the board or divide the organization?  Executive sessions can change an organization.

Photo Credit: http://www.jbai.com

Deadlines

I am involved with a small foundation that provides scholarships to youth so they may attend events that will have profound impact on their character.  There are three grant cycles during the year.  Invariably a youth group will forget to submit an application during there preferred grant cycle and contact us after the funds have been distributed.  Some of these groups are organizations the foundation has historically funded and some are new.  I am often find myself trying to accommodate the late applications but inevitably the size of the grant these tardy applicants receive are deeply discount compared to what they might have been awarded if the organization had applied on schedule.


How firm should grant deadlines be?  Ultimately, it is the youth who are impacted by fewer scholarship dollars since the funds are restricted and do not go towards general operating expenses.  If the foundation is trying to achieve a mission of adding value, is it best to stand firm on principal or better to increase the number of opportunities?  Is it better to benefit the intended recipient or sharpen the youth organization’s attention to detail?

One Call, That’s All

“One call, that’s all” is the motto of a local personal injury attorney, a plumber, and a window cleaner in our community.  I am sure there are more businesses who use the catch-phrase.

It makes me wonder how many social sector organization’s catch their clients, donors, volunteers, interested community members on the first call.  I often hear from volunteers who say it took many calls and even a personal visit before they were assigned a volunteering opportunity.  Donors who wish to ask a few questions before making a contribution speak of playing automated telephone system hopscotch.  Individuals calling to enroll in programs share colorful experiences of trying to complete the registration process.

The attorney catches the client on the first call because it means a potential windfall.  Why are many social sector organizations not meeting the same standard?  If you are congratulations, it is part of your competitive advantage! 

Connecting Your Tribe

I spoke with a colleague today who works for an organization that has traditionally created content.  The business pushed information out.  Recently the company decided to change their brand and position themselves as a key resource for survivors.  Now social media is being used to help survivors connect with each other.  For the first time the members of the tribe can speak to each other.  The organization is suddenly the center of the conversation.

Are you helping your tribe speak to each other?  How powerful would your cause be if you could help facilitate a broader conversation?

Dream Team

Yesterday’s financial market crash and recovery makes for dramatic headlines.  The system appeared to free fall for a few minutes and technology took control.  Tied into the market volatility is the impact of Greece’s debt.  Charlie Rose’s interview of Martin Wolf of the Financial Times brought to light observations about forming an ideal partnership.  He suggested that the original group of countries that founded the European Union (EU) made sense.  The core countries were connected to each other by similar cultures, geography, manufacturing, and markets.  When the EU expanded and additional countries were introduced to the union, there was a significant shift in the selection criteria.  Mr. Wolf’s point is that bringing Greece into the EU did not make sense as the Greeks shared little cultural, manufacturing, or market symbiosis with the original members.  Now that the Greek economy needs rescuing, Germany is challenged to find a compelling reason save Greece during its economic emergency.  The core members’ primary motivation is to save the EU simply to manage their own fate.

This real-time example is a reminder to set clear criteria.  Partner with organizations that are going to serve the team’s interest in both positive and challenging environment.  The current uproar around the Susan G. Komen Foundation’s marketing venture with Kentucky Fried Chicken reminds us that partnerships are not always simple.  Consider asking if the partnering organization ‘contribute more’ or ‘take more’ from a collaboration?  Are there conditions where the partnership is ideal?  How do you honor the criteria by which a partnership was entered?  How will you measure the effectiveness of the union?

Giving the Gift of Philanthropy to Your Kids

We Give Books and the Pearson Foundation released a powerful study focused on how to introduce teens to philanthropy.  What my parents considered charitable giving has morphed into a whole sector of social causes and opportunities.  The model my children will encounter intrigues me on a daily basis.  I distinctly remember my parent’s dinner conversations regarding their volunteer activities and service on nonprofit boards.  My own role in the social sector comes from a seed planted many years ago by parents willing to discuss their giving philosophy.

A top ten list of basic parenting practices emerged
that differentiates “giving teens” from “non-giving”
teens. “Giving teens” report their parents did the
following on a frequent basis.

1. Explained how I can help other people by
my actions.
2. Encouraged me to speak up in family discussions.
3. Spoke to me about the volunteering and
charity they do.
4. Supported me on things I cared about.
5. Told me why they were proud when I did
good things.
6. Encouraged me to be my own person.

 Read the rest of the top ten list and the entire report.

How are you reaching youth or your own children?  How does your organization make philanthropy a experience that rewards the whole family?  Is your enterprise engaging the next generation of donors?

Veteran or Old

In many professional sports you hear the term ‘rebuilding year’ when a team is no longer in contention for the playoffs.  It is a chance to add youth and new players in hopes of creating the chemistry to make a run at a championship.  On the other end of the spectrum is the philosophy of a team filled with veterans.  Players who have been there and won the sport’s highest crown.  These are sought after additions to any team as they have demonstrated a mastery of the game, maintained a high level of composure and built a legacy of achieving the ultimate goal- winning.  It is a knife’s edge that separates the thin line between the high value tag of ‘veteran’ and dreaded description of ‘old.’

How many social sector organizations qualify as veterans?  Venerable organizations that deliver consistent results and are held in high regard throughout the community?  When people speak about attributes in the community these organizations are mentioned.  The chamber of commerce refers to the organization in its promotional materials.  On the other side of the tracks is the cause that once was.  Perhaps the Founder could not let the cause grow gracefully or a board lost focus, programs became stagnate, or a scandal knocked the champion off its pedestal.

How do you keep your organization vibrant?  How do you assemble a group of champions without become a relic?  Do you allow for innovation?  Is the mantra, ‘we have always done it that way’ become your clubhouse cheer?  How do you play like a champion and not and old-timer’s game? 

Relapses and Failures

Consequences for one’s actions.  It is a mantra of many youth organizations (and parents).  I recently learned of a gang-intervention program in Boston, Massachusetts.  The organization, Roca has an intriguing philosophy.

Roca has taken Prochaska’s stages of change and adapted them for a very high-risk youth development model…As change is not easy for any of us, relapse is often part of the process and can happen at any point in the stages of change. Relapses can be painful, embarrassing, demoralizing; can make change seem impossible; or provide a (weak) justification for not changing. However, they are also the times where a great deal of incredible learning can take place and work can be done.

Allowing for failure and relapses is a powerful value.  This is not a three strikes and you are out program.  If there was no support for those that failed the gangs succeed in recruiting the most vulnerable youth and the mission is unachievable.

Does your enterprise tolerate failure?  Could supporting those who relapse be part of your organization’s competitive advantage?  Many rags to riches narratives are filled with chapters of failure prior to finding motivation and great success.  Could your cause be uniquely positioned to support those who relapse?

The Big Short- Nonprofit Edition

I read Michael Lewis’ excellent book, The Big Short this weekend while flying to and from meetings in New England.  It left me wondering how the investment banks were unwilling to wrestle with the potential risk and deficiencies perpetuated by the financial system.  I finished the book and wondered what other industry was built on a paradigm of false assumptions.  I began to scribble down the following questions for the purpose of a reality check for the social sector.

  • Is the social sector transparently designed to serve the public’s interest?
  • Do we need to design an identity statement to define the sector?  Is it ideal to have regional hospitals and national debt collection services classified in the same category as a local literacy organization?
  • Have we designed a system that is self-dependent and closed?
  • Are we feeding an insatiable fundraising monster?  Can the endless stream of gala fundraising events and annual appeals continue to sustain the sector’s many causes? 
  • Is the leadership teams (board and staff) committed to the mission?  If another organization is achieving the mission more effectively would an organization merge?  If an organization’s vision was reached, would it close the organization doors immediately (if a cure for cancer was discovered tomorrow would all the nonprofit cancer organization’s that seek a cure cease to exist)?
  • Should paid positions be capped or discounted by some percentage when benchmarked against the for-profit sector?  Does a nonprofit CEO need to demonstrate some form of sacrifice by being less-well compensated?  Or should the social sector pay a competitive wage?  What would be the impact on your community?
  • Will donors and funders dictate the social sector’s future?  Will organization’s diversify revenue source?  Will donors demand organization’s merge or pool resources?
  • Will volunteers continue to contribute their time, talent, touch and treasure to the social sector?
  • Is a revolt coming?

What questions keep you up at night?  Are there assumptions that need to be revisited?  Are we assessing risk within the social sector?  Do we have tolerance for new messages and perspectives?  Should we be more optimistic or pessimistic?