leadership – Page 5 – The Healthy Non-Profit

Want to improve your annual campaign pledge drive? Look at “structure” first!

April 13, 2012 DonorDreams Fundraising, leadership, organizational development

Welcome to O.D. Fridays at DonorDreams blog. Every Friday for the foreseeable future we will be looking more closely at a recent post from John Greco’s blog called “johnponders ~ about life at work, mostly” and applying his organizational development messages to the non-profit community.

Today we’re focusing on a post that John titled “Fighting the Physics“. In this post, he shares a story about how a paper airplane cannot perform any better in spite of providing the owner more training, encouragement and financial incentive. It isn’t until the actual paper airplane is “structurally re-designed” that performance is improved. He uses this analogy to illustrate how some of us are unrealistic in our expectations when it comes to employee performance and productivity.

When I read John’s post, it made me think of all the non-profit organizations I’ve worked with in the last five years. In many of those engagements, it was my job to either help them:

plan-implement-evaluate a new annual campaign pledge drive, or
improve an existing campaign.

I cannot tell you how many of those engagements sounded EXACTLY like John’s blog post about the paper airplane. Looking back I suspect that I was “Fighting the Physics” more often than not. Too much training and not enough work around structure. <<Sigh>> Hindsight is always 20/20.

So, if your annual campaign is not producing the way you hoped it would, the moral of John’s story is to first look at “structure” before you jump to the conclusion that more training, encouragement or incentives are needed. The following is a short checklist of structural questions you may want to ask yourself:

How are you recruiting your volunteers? What tools are you using? Are they effectively setting expectations and providing clarity for volunteers?
How are you maintaining a sense of “mission-focus” throughout your campaign and helping volunteers focus on the real reason they are asking their friends for money? What tools and strategies are you using? Are they effective?
How are you instilling a sense of accountability and urgency throughout your campaign and helping volunteers keep the tasks they committed to from slipping off of their daily “To Do Lists”? What tools and strategies are you using? Are they effective?
What does “staff support” look like for the campaign? Is staff just organizing meetings and making phone calls to check-in on volunteers? Or are they “rolling up their sleeves” and going on solicitation calls with volunteers? Are staff “directing” or are they “coaching”?

John is so right on target! Before you jump to the conclusion that you need to recruit different volunteers or offer more/different training, look at how you have structured your campaign and look at the following systems:

Volunteer recruitment
Prospect identification
Prospect cultivation
Prospect assignment
Kickoff meeting and training
Reporting tools, systems and meetings
Solicitation tools and techniques
Donor acknowledgement and stewardship systems

In the end, you may conclude that your systems and campaign structure are fine and that you really do have a “people problem”. However, jumping to this conclusion first, before looking at some of the aforementioned issues, might result in you feeling like Bill Murray in this scene from Groundhog Day.

If you haven’t already done so, you really need to click over and read John’s blog post about “Fighting the Physics“. It is really good and it may just make you look at your annual campaign differently.

Have you ever looked carefully at your annual campaign systems, decided to make a change, and found that the structural fix worked? If so, please scroll down and share that example in the comment box below.

Here’s to your health!

Erik Anderson
Founder & President, The Healthy Non-Profit LLC
www.thehealthynonprofit.com
erik@thehealthynonprofit.com
http://twitter.com/#!/eanderson847
http://www.facebook.com/eanderson847
http://www.linkedin.com/in/erikanderson847

Should “We the People” be allowed to place failing non-profit agencies into financial receivership?

April 3, 2012 DonorDreams leadership

After dropping my partner off at O’Hare airport this morning, I drove back home listening to NPR’s “Morning Edition” when a story about the State of Michigan came on the radio. In a nutshell, Michigan has a law on the books that allows the state to “takeover” local municipalities who are failing and drowning in a sea of debt. This law gives the Governor the authority to appoint an “emergency manager” whose authority supersedes all elected officials in that community including the duly elected mayor and city council members. Of course, all of this is in the news because the City of Detroit is potentially the next target for takeover.

Many of you are probably wondering by now: “What does any of this have to do with non-profit organizations, donors, boards of directors and fundraising, which is what I typically write about every day?”

While listening to the pros and cons of this controversial law, I found my mind wandering back to non-profits and wondering “How would I feel about this if the story was about a failing non-profit agency instead of a failing local municipality?”

I think this is an interesting question. I even nibbled around the edges of this topic when I posted a blog titled: “Can a non-profit board contract out its management to a for-profit company?” back in September 2011.

Consider the following:

There are times when non-profit boards are ill-equipped to deal with financial crisis and end up making poor decisions in the board room that dig them deeper into debt.
Sometimes non-profit agencies hire executive directors who don’t possess the necessary skill sets to navigate the organization through such a financial crisis.
Non-profit organizations exist to provide services to people much like municipalities exist to provide services to citizens. So, a failure of the agency (as with the failure of a local government) impacts hundreds or thousands of people. Why should a failure of leadership on a few people’s part impact so many other innocent people who desperately rely upon the services provided (regardless of whether it is after-school programming or police/fire protection)?

I suspect that I have some people’s attention now. 😉 And some of you are now asking: “How could this Michigan law be adapted to a non-profit setting?” Well, what if the state passed a law that said any non-profit agency that runs a budget deficit for three years in a row must enter into a financial receivership arrangement with a third-party entity whose charge would be twofold: 1) restore liquidity and 2) minimize loss of services to clients.

Crazy idea? I am not sure. This is what the State of Michigan is doing with its failing municipalities. Why is this a good approach in Michigan and not a good approach for the non-profit sector?

Yes, I am being a bit of a “pot stirrer” today. But seriously . . . I think this is a topic worth talking about. Don’t you? After all, there are too many non-profit organizations who are on the verge of insolvency today, which means there are millions of American who rely on those services that could be adversely affected.

In the end, I suspect this boils down to a question about “freedom”. Right?

Do individuals have the right to fail in America even when that failure can adversely affect countless others? Or are we all our brother’s keeper and does it take a village to raise a child?

Hmmmmm . . . I hate it when NPR challenges my core beliefs like that. LOL Because before that story ran about Detroit, I would’ve told you that I didn’t think a Governor should be allowed to “takeover” a local municipality and override the will of the people when it comes to electing their neighbors to manage their community’s affairs.

After looking at multiple sides of the issue and applying it to other examples, I now think this issue is bigger and more complex than I originally thought.

What are your thoughts about whether or not failing non-profit organizations should be forced into financial receivership? Does your agency have the “right to fail” and end up affecting countless others who rely on you for service?

Please scroll down and use the comment box to weigh-in with your opinion.

Here’s to your health!

Erik Anderson

Owner, The Healthy Non-Profit LLC

eanderson847@gmail.com

http://twitter.com/#!/eanderson847

http://www.facebook.com/eanderson847

http://www.linkedin.com/in/erikanderson847

Would you please solve the REAL problem? Structure Drives Behavior!

March 23, 2012 DonorDreams Fundraising, leadership, organizational development

Today we’re focusing on a post that John titled “Close Cover Before Striking“. In this post, he uses the example of how matchbooks were re-designed to discuss an important organizational development concept — “structure drives behavior”. This is an important concept for all non-profit professionals to master if organizational excellence and mission-focused productivity is your goal.

At the Boys & Girls Club, I cannot tell you how many kids forget their barcoded membership cards every day. So, as I tried to apply John’s blog theme to this example, all I could think of is TATTOO that damn barcode on kids’ foreheads!

Needless to say, I abandon that blog post idea for something a little more rationale — donor contact reports.

Every time someone from your organization visits a prospect or donor, they should (in theory) fill-out a “contact report”. This report needs to find its way back to your agency, into the hands of the person entering data into your donor database, and typed into a contact record. Why? So, that the left hand knows what the right hand is doing. More importantly, the information a donor shares with you can influence many other things (e.g. how much they will be asked for during the next campaign, designing a custom stewardship program, building an effective Moves Management program and approach, etc).

Of course, few non-profit organizations are ever effective in convincing their volunteer solicitors to complete this extra form.

Hmmmmmm? John’s blog post got me thinking. This is likely a “structure” issue. So, how could this process be re-structured to get the desired result?

This topic is one that has bothered me for a very long time. I’ve tried everything including: talking slower, pleading, printing more forms, lecturing, simplifying the form, etc. I’ve even thought about investing in mind reading. As you can see, a new line of thought is probably warranted.

Here are a few thoughts I’ve had since reading John’s blog post (some might still be off-the-mark but I think I’m getting closer):

What about putting the “contact report” on the back of the pledge form? This could also re-enforce the idea that volunteer solicitors shouldn’t leave the pledge form behind with the prospect/donor. This could be a “twofer” solution.
What about taking the responsibility out of the hands of volunteer solicitors? Your agency could email each prospect/donor a short questionnaire a few days after they complete the pledge form. You could ask a few questions (both open-ended and closed) designed to yield important insights into why someone contributed, what they want to see your agency do with their contribution, etc.
If you don’t like the idea of a questionnaire, what about recruiting a team of volunteers to follow-up via telephone a few days after a donor makes a contribution to your annual campaign? The call could include a personal “thank you” and end with the volunteer asking if the donor minds answer a few questions designed to help the agency do a better job managing their generous gift and the priceless relationship.

OK . . . I’ve started the ball rolling with a few ideas. Please go back and read John’s blog post titled “Close Cover Before Striking” and use the comment box below on my blog to share additional ideas on how “re-structuring the process” surrounding your donor contact report might get better performance and better donor data.

Come on! This is an issue with which I’ve seen even the biggest and best non-profit agencies struggle. A few minutes of brainstorming can have a huge impact on so many other non-profit and fundraising professionals. It is Friday . . . how about “paying it forward” today?

Or perhaps you want to join me in advocating a TATTOO solution for kids and donors? 😉

Here’s to your health!

Is your non-profit organization on the road to Abilene?

March 16, 2012 DonorDreams Fundraising, leadership, organizational development

Today we’re focusing on a post that John titled “Jerry’s Trip to Abilene“. In this post, he uses Jerry Harvey’s story about one family’s ill-advised trip to Abilene, Texas to talk about a concept many people might refer to as “Groupthink“.

In John’s blog and Jerry’s story, none of the four family members really wanted to take a trip Abilene on that hot summer day in Texas. So, how did it happen? The answer is amazingly simple . . . take a self-sacrificing suggestion from one person and add it to three other people’s desire to accommodate the group and THAT is how it happens.

Ohhhhh, come on now! This happens at your non-profit agency all the time. Let me refresh your memory with this fictitious example:

The executive director explains to board members that something must be done. There isn’t enough private sector fundraising revenue being generated. If more donations aren’t secured soon, then the agency will run a budget deficit at the end of the year.

Someone speaks up and suggests the agency run a unique, new special event fundraiser that they just saw another organization run in a different community. Another person jumps on the bandwagon with a suggestion pertaining to venue, and another person jumps in with a suggestion pertaining to who should be recruited to chair the event. The last person shrugs their shoulders and makes a neutral comment about how this is the most excited they’ve seen everyone get about a fundraising idea in the last decade.

(Side note: the resource development professional has their head buried in their hands trying to choke back their tears.)

So, the event is held, the bills are paid, and it is discovered that a little bit of money was generated but not nearly enough to avoid a year-end deficit. During the post-event critique meeting, everyone seems to pile on negative comments, shake their heads and tell the group that they knew it wouldn’t work.

(Side note: the resource development professional still has their head buried in their hands trying to choke back their tears.)

What went wrong? Well, it is the same thing John Greco said in his blog, and the same thing Jerry Harvey said in his original Abilene story. (By the way, please circle back and read those links.)

So, what should you do to make sure this doesn’t happen to your non-profit organization?

Invest in diversity!

When recruiting boards and committees, make sure that you have a diversity of different kinds of people around the table. Too many non-profit organizations chase critical thinkers (aka contrarians) away because they can be “pains in the butt”. They are the people who like playing devil’s advocate, and they can be difficult especially when you’re desperately needing to build consensus. However, they certainly come in handy in situations when you can’t afford to take a trip to Abilene.

So, non-profit professionals need to be skilled at asking the right volunteers to get involved in the right conversations. Or perhaps we need to get better at facilitating constructive conflict. Or better yet non-profit professionals need to get better at leadership and applying a strong teachable point of view.

Did the fictional story about adding one more special event in an attempt to desperately raise some cash resonate? Do you have a story to share about a personal “trip to Abilene” that you or your agency might have taken? Do you have additional suggestions on how to avoid that long and hot road to Abilene? Please use the comment box below to weigh-in with your thoughts. Remember to also check out other blog posts on organizational development by John Greco at his blog johnponders ~ about life at work, mostly.

Here’s to your health!

Kissing While Driving for non-profit agencies

March 9, 2012 DonorDreams leadership, organizational development

Today we’re focusing on a post that John titled “Kissing While Driving“. In this post, he uses an Albert Einstein quote to investigate the perils of “multitasking” in the workplace by employees. He puts forward that employees who are running back and forth between various projects are likely only doing an “adequate” job at best for their employer because as Benjamin Franklin once said, “Haste makes waste”. More importantly John concludes:

this likely impacts employee engagement and loyalty,
can be dangerous for the company whose reputation is based on quality, and
is less than satisfying for employees who take pride in their work.

Reading John’s post brought me back to my “frontline” days of non-profit work. I honestly think this blog post is even more applicable to non-profit agencies because of how they behave in “resource deprived” environments. When I was the executive director of my local Boys & Girls Club, I used to laugh when people asked me: “What is your job?”

I used to describe my work as a daily “sprint” through a series of very diverse and challenging situations.

7:00 am — network with donors at Rotary Club
8:30 am — meet with development director about an upcoming special event fundraiser
9:30 am — prepare meeting materials for upcoming Finance Committee meeting
10:00 am — meet with program staff about a recent hiccup that was brought to my attention by a parent or collaborative partner
11:00 am — double-check the bank deposit against the donor database report and check log; go to bank and make the deposit
11:30 am — Troubleshoot a tech problem that an employee was experiencing (and was preventing them from doing their job)
Noon — Go to lunch with a donor or board member
1:30 pm — Hop on a conference call for the state alliance
2:30 pm — Last minute prep for the board development committee meeting
3:00 pm — Attend the board development committee meeting
5:00 pm — Walk through the clubhouse facility to see programs in action and catch staff doing “good things” as well as connect with the mission
5:30 pm — Respond to email and catch up on stuff that washed into my office throughout the day (possibly screening some cover letters and resumes for a job vacancy)
6:00 pm — Pull together some paperwork and process grant receivables
7:00 pm — Prep for the next day, do a little planning, or take advantage of the silence in the office and write a few sections for a grant application or upcoming newsletter
8:00 or 9:00 pm — Go home for some sleep so you can do it all over again tomorrow.

While every day wasn’t always like this, most days were this way. It is the cross that a non-profit executive director must bear when they operate in a resource deprived environment. It is exhausting, and it produces a situation where many mistakes are made. It is a minor miracle anything got done and that any progress was made. In the end, it was one of the top three reasons I chose to leave the frontline and go to work for the national organization.

Hmmmmm . . . yes, I’d say it was a lot like “kissing while driving”. I wasn’t very satisfied. I wasn’t as engaged in the things that were most important to the agency. I made mistakes and felt horrible about making them. I ultimately left for what I thought were greener pastures.

In hindsight, I wonder what I could’ve done differently:

invested in a volunteer program to expand human resources
engaged board members and donors in seeing and help solving these challenges (rather than celebrating the insanity)
adjusted the agency’s strategic plan to focus less on growth and more on deepening the impact

Of these three ideas, the one I think might bring the highest return on investment is the second bullet point that speaks to engaging board members and donors. As I look around at all of my non-profit friends, I see too many of them placating their boards by always saying “YES” rather than walking them through “cause-and-effect” scenarios pertaining to board room decisions (e.g. budget, staffing structure, new programming, etc). I also see many of them telling donors whatever they think they want to hear just to get another signed pledge card.

I have a hard time believing that if board members and donors saw what your day REALLY looked like that they wouldn’t want to jump in and help solve those challenges. Right? And with multiple people focused on solving these challenges, I suspect the odds go up dramatically that either the car gets stopped so the kissing can continue OR the kissing stops so that some work can get done.

In the end, it is your leadership that will solve this problem. Perhaps, it is a new Teachable Point of View that you adopt as the leader. Or maybe it is your embrace of tools like GRPI or RASI. Regardless, it most likely starts and ends with you. So, what are you going to do about it?

Are your days as crazy as the one I described above? What tools do you use to tame that beast? Have you ever engaged board members or donors in this discussion? If so, what were the results? Please use the comment box below to weigh-in with your thoughts. Remember to also check out other blog posts on organizational development by John Greco at his blog johnponders ~ about life at work, mostly.

Here’s to your health!

A parade of fundraising leaders and role models

January 27, 2012 DonorDreams Fundraising, leadership

This week at DonorDreams we are talking about what it looks like to be a fundraising “LEADER”. Today, we cap the week off by looking at one smart teenager and a few organizations that provide “thought leadership” in the area of charitable giving. I hope this week’s series of blog posts on fundraising thought leadership inspired you to become a teacher in your little corner of the world when it comes to philanthropy.

I’ve spent most of my life working in the youth development field. If there is one thing I know, it is that kids know everything. Just ask them! LOL So, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that at 14-years-old Freddi Zeiler wrote a book that “teaches us” how to: give time and money, donate goods, and organize charity events.

The book is titled “A Kids Guide to Giving“. I highly recommend that every fundraising professional secure a copy because we can all learn a lot as fundraising leaders from Freddi’s TPOV.

In Wednesday’s post titled “What is your teachable point of view around fundraising?” I talked about the importance of leaders developing their TPOV. Apparently, no one had to teach Freddi the importance of this idea because her TPOV came through loud and clear. To give you just a little taste, here are a few of the “ideas” she puts forth on fundraising:

Look into your heart.
Support a cause you love.
There are lots of ways to help!
You can make a difference.

It takes some non-profit professionals and volunteers a very long time to learn these inspirational and fundamental fundraising lessons.

As we talked about in Tuesday’s post titled “Are you and your non-profit agency fundraising leaders?” Noel Tichy believes that leaders are teachers. This aligns with what I think and how I end most of the posts here at the DonorDreams blog when I say: “we can all learn from each other”. It is for this reason I highlighted Freddi this morning as a fundraising leader. However, leaders don’t necessary have to be individuals . . . they can be organizations that embody and bring to life inspirational ideas, values and emotional energy and edge on the topic of philanthropy and fundraising.

Two such organizations in my mind are The Robin Hood Foundation and United Way of America.

The Robin Hood Foundation has been in operation since 1988 and focused on eliminating poverty in New York City. What I love about this foundation is their TPOV:

The foundation focuses on attacking the “roots” of poverty and not throwing money at alleviating the symptoms;
The foundation doesn’t just write a check and walk away from the project. They roll up their sleeves and partner with their grant recipients by providing and securing technical assistance to help maximize the potential of the program they just funded.
The foundation is results-oriented and helps their partners set goals, measure progress, collect data, and benchmark success. After working with their grantees on these parts of the project, they then hold them accountable to achieving all of it.

United Way of America is the grand-daddy of all philanthropic thought leaders in America. For the last 125 years, they have helped donors collectively find their philanthropic muscles and tackle difficult social problems in communities all across America.

I could spend hours talking about United Way’s workplace campaign. I could also spend days talking about their community impact model that focuses on big goals like improving education, helping people find financial stability during tough economic times, or promoting healthy lifestyles and communities. While all of this is inspirational, the thing that most inspires me as a fundraising professional is how United Way empowers many individuals with its message around giving, advocating and volunteering.

In my non-profit work throughout the years, I’ve bumped into too many people who are not wealthy and see themselves as tiny actors on the very large stage of life. These people have a hard time seeing themselves as philanthropists because they don’t think their ability to make a small charitable contribution will change anything. United Way works tirelessly as a “fundraising teacher” every year to empower donors.

The message that “even a few dollars per paycheck, when combined with everyone else’s few dollars, can change the world” is an empowering message and something we should all take to heart and learn to teach. We all need to dedicate ourselves to teaching donors how to make their money and time turn into something impactful. If every fundraising professional in America took this to heart, can you even imagine what those charitable giving pie charts published every year by Giving USA would look like? OH MY!

So, are you ready to embrace your professional calling as a non-profit fundraising professional or volunteer differently? What is your teachable point of view? What individuals (e.g. Bill Clinton or Freddi Zeiler) or organizations (e.g. Robin Hood Foundation or United Way) do you look to for inspiration to develop and inspire your TPOV?

Please scroll down and use the comment box to share your thoughts on these questions because we can all learn from each other”. 🙂

Here’s to your health!

Leader and philanthropist: Bill Clinton

January 26, 2012 DonorDreams Fundraising, leadership

This week at DonorDreams we are talking about what it looks like to be a fundraising “LEADER”. Today, we will continue our work by examining Bill Clinton’s teachable point of view around philanthropy, which he details in his 240 page book titled “Giving: How Each of Us Can Change the World“. Tomorrow, we will cap the week off by looking at a variety of organizations that provide t”hought leadership” in the area of charitable giving.

Earlier this week I wrote blog posts titled “Are you and your non-profit agency a fundraising leader?” and “What is your teachable point of view around fundraising?“. If I had to capture these posts in a few words, it would be . . . leaders are teachers and they always have a teachable point of view (TPOV). After reading Bill Clinton’s book on “Giving,” regardless of whether you’re a Democrat or Republican, it would be impossible to argue that Clinton doesn’t has a TPOV on philanthropy and that he uses his book as a vehicle to teach us how to be more charitable.

Clinton shares a wealth of “Ideas” (remember this is one of the three elements of a TPOV) through his book including: much still needs to be done in our communities; everyone can giving; charitable giving doesn’t have to just be money but can also include time or things or skills; and we have an obligation to each other (which kind sounds like Hillary’s “it takes a village” mantra).

Identifying Clinton’s “Values” (remember this is the second of the three elements of a TPOV) and principles throughout his book isn’t difficult. A few of those values were: duty, service over self, compassion, life, and self-sufficiency.

Finally, his “emotional energy and edge” (remember this is the final piece of the three TPOV elements) is loud and clear in every chapter of the book. I think this quote from Clinton captures it best:

“I wrote this book to encourage you to give whatever you can, because everyone can give something. And there’s so much to be done, down the street and around the world. It’s never too late or too early to start.”

This call to action echoes Dr. Martin Luther King’s inspirational words: “Everyone can be great because everyone can serve.” Clinton’s book reads like a manual for the average person in America on how a private citizen doesn’t have to have an extraordinary Presidential life story in order to make a difference.

Bill Clinton as a philanthropic leader and teacher? ABSOLUTELY!!!! And he is someone we can all learn a lot from.

Perhaps, my favorite part of this book is where Clinton reminds us of why donors give of themselves.

“Why do some people give so much while others give the bare minimum or not at all? I’ve thought about this a lot, and it seems to me we all give for a combination of reasons, rooted in what we think about the world in which we live and what we think about ourselves. We give because we think it will help people today or give our children a better future; because we feel morally obligated to do so out of religious or ethical convictions; because someone we know and respect asked us; or because we find it more rewarding and more enjoyable than spending more money on material possessions or more time on recreation or work.

When people don’t give, I think the reasons are simply the reverse. They don’t believe what they could do would make a difference, either because their resources are limited or they’re convinced efforts to change other people’s lives and conditions are futile. They don’t feel morally obligated to give. No one has ever asked them to do so. And they believe they’ll enjoy life more if they keep their money and time for themselves and their families.”

Sorry for including such a long quote from Clinton, but I find these words to be truly inspiring. I also believe that EVERY non-profit organization can use this passage to evaluate their comprehensive resource development program by asking:

What are you doing to demonstrate to donors and the community at-large that your agency’s programs “make a difference”?
What are you doing to show both large and small donors that regardless of how small the contribution might be that it is important, valued, appreciated, and transformational?
How does your agency and your staff, board members, volunteers and donors model the morality-values-principles associated with philanthropy? And how do you do this in a way that inspires others to jump on the bandwagon?
How are you asking others to join you? Is it all about the impersonal email, newsletter, social media post, telephone call or snail-mail letter? Or are you and your volunteers getting out into the community and “pressing the flesh”?
Studies demonstrate that people who make philanthropic contributions (e.g. time, talent or treasure) are “happier” people. Do you and your volunteers look happy or are you making charitable giving and service look dreary and hard?

I encourage you to read Bill Clinton’s book because it reads like a love letter to the non-profit community and an instructional manual for donors as well as non-profit organizations!

Have you read the book? What were your impressions or lessons learned? If not a high-profile leader like Bill Clinton, who have you looked to as a philanthropic leader? What life lesson did you learn from that person?

Here’s to your health!