organizational development – Page 15

John’s puppies provide perspective for non-profit organizations

July 20, 2012 erik organizational development, volunteers

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: “Puppy Perspective“. In that post, he describes two different perspectives that he and his wife have on the exact same occurrence. The event in question has to deal with John’s dogs and the daily arrival of their mail carrier. While John’s post is cute and fun to read, you should really click over and read it for yourself because John’s dogs tell an important story about one of the biggest challenges every non-profit organization faces.

“Perspective” is a funning thing. It can sometimes feel like one of those circus fun house mirrors.

Think about how many different stakeholder groups your organization has:

Executive director
Fundraising professionals
Program staff
Clients
Donors
Board volunteers
Fundraising volunteers
Program volunteers
New prospective or incoming board volunteers
Prospective new donors

OMG . . . the list could go on and on, and John’s post “Puppy Perspective” very clearly shows us how common it is for different groups to have very different perspectives on the same thing.

This phenomenon means that building consensus around important decisions can sometimes feel like “Mission Impossible”.

When looking back at some of the organizations I’ve worked with on planning, implementing and evaluating an annual campaign, I now clearly see how different perspectives made implementing change difficult. To illustrate this point, the following is a short list of stakeholders and what I am sure they were thinking as they listened to me talk about running an annual campaign:

Staff — Ugh, this is so necessary, but this sounds like a lot of work and there is no time.
Board members & fundraising volunteers — Sitting down in-person with a donor and asking for money? That sounds scary!
Donors — OMG, another fundraiser? How many more times will they come back and ask for money?
Program staff — Why can’t people just give money and leave us to our important work? Outcomes measurement is so hard and takes time away from actual program time.

Everyone has a different perspective, and this makes getting something done very difficult. This is why non-profit executive directors must be highly skilled at driving change. When they aren’t good at getting everyone on the same page, then nothing happens and the non-profit organization dies a slow death.

Our friends at the Change Management Learning Center offer some interesting tutorials, training, and books that you might find helpful when developing your case and leading change.

Are you regularly on a different page than your board volunteers? If so, how do you manage that and close the gap? Has your agency’s fundraising staff found themselves at odds with program staff? How have you eliminated those silos and facilitated peace throughout your kingdom? Please use the comment box to share a story or an approach that has worked for you. We can all learn from each other.

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

Can you put your finger on what exactly ‘non-profit leadership’ is?

July 13, 2012 DonorDreams organizational development

Last Friday, we talked about John’s blog post titled “I Disagree. Now What?” and related it to the idea that sometimes non-profit organizations need to decline a contribution from a donor because it has too many strings attached or doesn’t align with your agency’s strategic direction. We spent a lot of time in last Friday’s post talking about when you might have to say ‘NO’ and how to minimize how often that happens.

Since last Friday, John posted an interesting follow-up piece titled “Obeying: Murky Middle Ground,” which is the basis of today’s post about non-profit leadership.

In John’s post, his readers find murky middle ground to the idea of “obeying” because an employee can mildly comply with the organization’s direction without actively supporting it. I’ve seen it way too often, and I bet that you have, too. Here are two examples I’ve witnessed in recent years:

An executive director asks their fundraising professional to help with writing the agency’s resource development plan. The development director was overwhelmed and saw it as just “one more thing” that the executive director was unloading onto their already heaping chart of work. So, they dragged their feet and submitted the bare minimum, knowing it would result in more work for the executive director in the end.
A fundraising volunteer agreed (albeit grudgingly) to work a few pledge cards for the agency’s annual campaign. They missed every report meeting and dodged every phone call. One week before the deadline, they disregarded every best practice and all of the training they had received and picked up the phone to solicit their prospects.

John is so right when he says, “For leaders, with respect to ‘obeying’ the bar is raised significantly. It is not enough to comply. Compliance is not the same thing as commitment. Leaders must . . . actively support. They must be committed to the course of action.”

I’ve recently heard a group of non-profit friends talking about the distinction between LEADING and MANAGING when it comes to non-profit board volunteers, fundraising volunteers, executive directors and fundraising professionals.

Of course, I find it very interesting that no one seems able to agree on what constitutes “LEADERSHIP“. For example . . .

Wikipedia defines leadership as: “A process of social influence in which one person can enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task“. They go on to describe other theories and definitions around the concept of leadership.

The Team Technology website defines leadership in relation to management in the following way: “Leadership is setting a new direction or vision for a group that they follow (ie: a leader is the spearhead for that new direction). Management controls or directs people/resources in a group according to principles or values that have already been established.”

Noel Tichy looks at leadership through a teaching lens and describes leadership as, “Developing managers into leaders at all levels is the key to sustained success of any organization. The winning organizations will possess a ‘virtuous teaching cycle’ where everyone teaches and everyone learns in order to provide the ideas, energy and the edge needed to make the right decisions.”

Is it possible that the idea of non-profit leadership is highly complicated and downright confusing at times? Of course! Is it also possible that all of these competing definitions may not be competing at all . . . they might all describe this complicated idea? Yup!!!

Let’s deconstruct all of these definitions:

Is an effective non-profit leader someone who brings other people together and rallies them to do something for the greater good of the organization and society? YES, and this makes them a collaborator and supporter, too.
Is a leader someone who has a vision? Of course! Not only can they secure buy-in from others, but they actively engage folks while simultaneously rolling up their sleeves to work on that vision.
Are leaders teachers? You betcha! Good leaders develop other leaders and do so through mentoring and on-the-job leadership programs focused on projects and experiential learning.

I bet that we can go on and on today talking about how leaders have a higher calling and must do more than just “obey” . . . they must buy-in, actively support, teach, provide vision, and collaborate.

What did we miss? What else do you see leaders doing at your non-profit organization. Please use the comment box below to share your point of view on what describes “leadership”.

Here’s to your health!

Saying ‘NO’ to donors and minimizing how often it is done

July 6, 2012 DonorDreams Fundraising, organizational development

Today, we’re focusing on a post that John titled: “I Disagree. Now What?“. In that post, he describes “the sound of righteous indignation hitting managerial prerogative,” and the lessons learned about when it is right to disobey and when it is not.

John’s post could send me off in a number of different HR directions this morning, but I am in a resource development mood and want to talk about donors — those investors in your mission.

When I read “I Disagree. Now What?” it got me thinking about all of those times I’ve seen donors throw their dollars around. They want you to develop and launch a new program. They only want their contribution to support certain programs or certain activities.

Thinking back upon those situations reminds me a lot of the boss character in John’s post. This got me wondering: “Is there ever a situation when a non-profit organization can say ‘NO’ to a donor and use their contribution in a manner that is inconsistent with the donor’s wishes?”

To be honest, I can’t think of any situations where you can take someone’s money and disregard their expressed intent. However, that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t say ‘NO’ . . . you just need to do it by declining to accept the contribution.

While it is hard to say ‘NO’ to money, especially in today’s philanthropic environment, non-profit organizations need to know when it must happen. If you’re having a hard time thinking of when this might be appropriate, the following are a few examples of when I might do so:

When Bernie Madoff calls and wants to write me a big check.
When a company whose brand is inconsistent with your non-profit image wants to contribute (e.g. Hooters, local bar, strip clubs, the tobacco industry, etc)
When a donor’s wishes are not compatible with your mission.
When a donor’s wishes are not compatible with your strategic direction.

In my experience, the first two examples are easily identifiable and actionable for most non-profit organizations. It is the last two examples that are very challenging.

For example, it might make sense for you to accept money to develop a new intergenerational program that brings kids and senior citizens together, but it might not be a strategic priority for your organization. As a matter of fact, it might distract from other more important and pressing strategic initiatives.

Declining a donor’s contribution is really hard and should be done rarely, which is why having the right mindset, approach and tools in your fundraising toolbox is important. John does a really nice job addressing this issue in his post:

When John says, “Pick your battles” . . . I read this as: “Don’t over-solicit. Be very thoughtful about when and what you ask your donors to support.”
When John says, “Some things I can’t control, but I can influence” . . . I read this as: “Cultivate new prospects and steward existing donors significantly more than you solicit them, and only solicit when it feel right.”
When John says, “Craft my argument, with data and facts” . . . I read this as: “Develop an amazing case for support and train fundraising volunteers to use it as the foundation of their solicitation.”
When John says, “Make my case in a compelling fashion” . . . I read this as: “Convince donors to support your mission and the agency’s strategic direction. Demonstrate how doing so aligns with their philanthropic wishes and dreams.”
When John says, “Take my hits; the pain is temporary” . . . I read this as: “Once in a blue moon, you will have to politely turn down a donation. It will not be the end of the world.”
When John says, “Seek to understand even while I strive to be understood” . . . I read this as: “The listening-to-speaking ratio involved in donor interactions needs to significantly favor listening. Doing so will improve the odds of understanding, which in and of itself should minimize the number of times you have to say ‘NO’ to a donor because you are able to align the solicitation with their known interests.”

Non-profit organizations should strive to never be in the position of having to say ‘NO’ to a donor, but they need to be prepared to do so.

Have you ever been in a position of having to say ‘NO’ to a donor? If so, how did you go about doing it without damaging the relationship? What mindsets, approaches and tools are in your fundraising toolbox to ensure that you are rarely in this position? Please use the comment box below to share your answers.

If you are responsible for HR at your organization or are currently at odds with your boss, I encourage you to click over to John’s post titled “I Disagree. Now What?” and read it from that perspective, too.

Here’s to your health!

Playing nice with each other in the non-profit sandbox

July 5, 2012 DonorDreams organizational development

Since opening my non-profit consulting practice almost a year ago, the most number of phone calls for assistance relate to starting a new non-profit organization. Just this morning, I saw in LinkedIn’s non-profit discussion group that someone posted a note asking for help with starting a non-profit organization.

Why is it that every time someone has a new idea, they want to start a new non-profit organization to do it?

I find this knee jerk reaction so interesting and confounding. Instead of starting a new organization, it could be “Ah-ha, I have an idea and think I’ll take it to a non-profit organization in my community that does similar things and work with them on starting a new program.”

It has become my standard operating procedure to sit down with these nice, well-intentioned individuals who call me asking for help and beg them to please not start another non-profit organization.

Why? Because every year tons of new non-profit start, and every year tons of other organizations go out of business. It is hard to create, build, and sustain a non-profit organization. Bylaws and incorporation paperwork, board development, staffing, fundraising, donor engagement, program evaluation, outcomes measurement, annual IRS 990 tax filing, and on and on and on.

When I opened my consulting practice, The Healthy Non-Profit, I decided to do business as a LLC. It was a page or two of paperwork, 15 minutes of time, and a small sum of money. Poof! I was a business owner and entrepreneur in no time. I didn’t even have to break a sweat.

I guess all of that time, paperwork and money required to start a non-profit is a result of the preferential tax status Uncle Sam bestows upon you.

The truth of the matter is that the last thing the non-profit sector needs is more struggling non-profit organizations competing for similar resources, which brings me back to my original question.

I suspect part of the problem is that many people want to start a new organization rather than partner and collaborate because existing agencies don’t play nice in the sandbox. Sure, everyone says the right thing about partnering, collaborating, and creating alliances, but our actions say something entirely different.

I don’t think this is malicious behavior. I suspect it is because non-profits are under-resourced and stressed out. The last thing they want to consider is adding a new program and figuring out how to fund it.

Of course, the irony is that this behavior in part contributes to tons of new non-profits being created every year, which places a burden on the sector and adds stress to your under-resourced agency.

I think that non-profits need to learn how to play nice with each other in the sandbox and with others who come with new program ideas.

Has your agency been highly collaborative and entrepreneurial about starting new programs? Please use the comment box to share your story and best practices? Do you disagree with my observations about how little “real” collaboration takes place in the non-profit sector. If so, give it to me by leaving a comment with data illustrating your point.

Here’s to your health!

Founding Fathers have the answer for today’s non-profit leadership deficit

July 4, 2012 DonorDreams organizational development, Planning

It has been said more than once on this blog as well as in many other places on the internet that non-profit organizations are challenged from an executive leadership perspective. Compensation packages are poor. Boards make bad choices. Evaluation is the exception rather than the rule. Succession planning is more talk than anything else. Let’s face it . . . today’s non-profit executive leadership picture is less than rosy.

However, tomorrow’s executive leadership picture is likely going to get much worse according to The Bridgespan Group who recently carried out a study on executive leadership issues focused on non-profits with revenues greater than $250,000. Click here to read a copy of the executive summary.

The bottom line according to this study is:

The non-profit sector will need 80,000 new leaders in 2016;
Non-profit agencies lack the size and resources to develop its leaders from within;
The non-profit sector lacks robust management-education and executive-search capabilities.

By the way, Happy Fourth of July 2012. I decided writing about this subject today because it feels especially appropriate.

I’ve always looked at what the Founding Fathers did in Philadelphia in 1776 as an exercise in organizational development and leadership, and I’m convinced that non-profits can find lots of answers to their challenges just by studying history.

I can mentally picture George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin sitting around after a tough day at Independence Hall working through issues dealing with how to sustain the country in the long-term.

If I were to guess, the idea of having both a federal government and 13 independent sovereign states bound together into one governance system had a lot to do with checks and balances and not trusting big government. However, I also suspect there was some thought given to how separate governance models at the state level would create a training ground and leadership engine for the executive, legislative and judicial branches of the federal government.

Even if this thought never crossed their minds, it still turns out to be genius!

As you go about celebrating Independence Day 2012, I encourage you to chew on the following questions:

Does your non-profit agency have a written succession plan? Is it real orjust something on paper?
What does your training and professional development program and budget look like?
What leadership opportunities are you providing staff members to help them gain the necessary experience to step-up and lead in the future?
Are there places (e.g. structures, committees, groups) inside your organization where people can “cut their teeth” and learn how to be a leader and develop skills?
If not, what does the constitutional convention look like for your agency to make those adjustments? Who is sitting around the table?
Much like the states interact with one another, are there other non-profits in your community who you can collaborate with around issues of succession and leadership?

Here’s to your health! And have a happy and safe Fourth of July!

Effective non-profit professionals KNOW what is inside their circle of influence

June 29, 2012 DonorDreams leadership, nonprofit, organizational development

Today, we’re focusing on a post that John titled “X the Concerns“. In that post, he talks about a person’s circle of concern versus their circle of influence. More importantly, he speaks to the impact of focusing on things outside of your circle of influence and the consequences that come with that behavior.

“When we focus on things that we really can’t do anything about, we are actually expending valuable time and energy that could have been used to work on those things that are inside your circle of influence, those concerns that you really could do something about.”

I see executive directors and fundraising professionals get paralyzed by this all the time. Non-profit organizations are so under-resourced, and everyone is wearing too many hats. So, when you don’t have a clear understanding of what is inside your circle of influence and what isn’t, then things seems to get worse.

Here is a short list of things I’ve seen many of my non-profit friends worrying about recently:

Will the economy double dip?
How much of a cut in city funding will we have to take?
Will Mr. & Mrs. John Donor renew their contribution this year?
Will the State of Illinois pays its bills this month or will my accounts receivable line grow a little larger?

If you go through the exercise that John suggests in his post “X the Concerns,” some of you might put all of these things outside of your circle of influence. After all, you have no control over whether or not a donor writes a check to you this year. You can’t control the dysfunctional and broke State of Illinois. City staff and council members are going to do what they are going to do when it comes to allocation of funding.

Right?

Well, I say “not so fast!”

The difference that I see between very high functioning non-profit professionals and people who struggle with working in this sector is that the high functioning individuals KNOW what they have influence over, and they focus on it like a laser.

Take the example of Mr. & Mrs. John Donor. It is true that you cannot make someone donate to your organization; however, it is a mistake to put this outside of your circle of influence. Doing so dramatically increases the odds that you won’t secure that contribution. However, placing this donor inside of your circle of influence means investing time and resources in cultivation and stewardship activities. In the end, you can’t force them to sign that pledge form, but you are able to greatly increase your odds by not leaving things like that to chance.

Great leaders have this instinctive ability to KNOW what is inside their circle of influence even when at first blush it seems to be outside.

So, what should you do if you lack that instinct? Does that mean you are ill-suited to be a non-profit executive director or fundraising professional?

Maybe?

If you are smart and figure out how to overcome this obstacle, then you are well on your way towards being an effective leader who doesn’t get paralyzed by things that you can’t control and who doesn’t succumb to fatalistic impulses that undermine your efforts.

Those who I’ve seen “figure it out” have done so by embracing collaboration. They engage a wider group of people in answering the question “What is inside our circle of influence?” and “What should we do?” I’ve also seen these individuals invest in executive coaching services to help find perspective and question their instincts.

Again, if you haven’t read John’s post “X the Concerns,” then click over and do it now. Go through the exercise. Afterward, take a step back and re-evaluate by asking: “Are there things that I initially put outside of my circle of influence that might belong inside? If so, what should I do about that?”

Are you paralyzed about things that you have no control over? What do you do to get unstuck? How do you KNOW that everything you place outside of your circle of influence really belongs there? Please share some of your thoughts in the comment box below because we can all learn from each other.

Here’s to your health!

Your non-profit space is affecting donors, staff, clients, and board

June 22, 2012 DonorDreams leadership, organizational development

Today, we’re focusing on a post that John titled “Admit the Effect“. In that post, he talks about how our behavior is a function of our environment, which means if you want a something different from your employees (or clients or board members or donors), then you might want to look at changing the physical work environment before you change the performance management plan.

The effect of space on donors

When I first became the executive director at the Boys & Girls Club, our administrative office was located downtown in an old building that still had kind elderly gentlemen operating the elevators. In an effort to save money, my predecessor rented an office on a floor that was under construction and our rent was greatly reduced to compensate for the inconvenience.

Within the first 18 months of being on the job, we conducted a resource development audit for evaluation purposes prior to writing the agency’s first resource development plan. As the consultant conducted confidential interviews with approximately 30 donors and supporters, it became very clear that our administrative space was a problem.

Donors were judging us based on that space, and their donations reflected it. Many donors openly expressed doubt that we’d ever be able to raise the necessary $3 million to build a new clubhouse facility. When asked why . . . many donors pointed to our administrative office and simply said they can’t even raise enough money now for modest office space.

Needless to say, we moved our administrative office because we wanted our donors to see us differently and we needed a different behavior . . . we needed them to participate in the capital campaign and invest in our future. In other words, behavior is a function of our environment.

The effect of space on clients

The Boys & Girls Club clubhouse used to be a small 2,000 square foot house that must have been at least 75-years-old. The space was designed for a small family of four or five. It was never meant to be an after-school space for 50 to 75 kids. The computer lab was squeezed into the basement adjacent to the arts and crafts corner, which also doubled as a homework space when kids first arrived. Do I even need to tell you what it was like for those many kids to share a one toilet bathroom facility? Ugh!

I can remember being so frustrated whenever I’d visit the clubhouse because it always seemed like staff were dealing with behavior issues more than running the valuable after-school programming that I wanted and needed them to run. Don’t get me wrong. The staff did their best and always got the job done, but I oftentimes thought to myself: “Darn it! These kids don’t behave this way at school.”

Why was I surprised that those kids were putting their feet up on furniture and acting like they would as if they were at home after-school? I shouldn’t have been surprised because the house looked and felt like their home. It didn’t look for feel like school or any other institutional building that they’ve ever been in.

Today, the new 15,000 square foot Boys & Girls Club clubhouse is a reality. It is a testament to an engaged group of donors who invested in an organization’s future, and it is a beacon of hope for future generations of kids. I walked into the facility the other day, and my first reaction was: “Wow, these kids certainly act differently than I remember. As a matter of fact, the staff act differently, too.” Duh . . . behavior is a function of our environment.

Have you ever changed the physical environment at your agency to get a different result? What message does your existing space send to your donors? Where do you host your board meetings and have you ever thought about changing the location to get a different result? Please use the space below to share a quick story. We can all learn from each other. If you haven’t clicked over to read John’s post “Admit the Effect,” I encourage you to do so now because it is really good.

Here’s to your health!

How many monks vs revolutionaries are on your non-profit board?

June 15, 2012 DonorDreams Board development, organizational development

Today, we’re focusing on a post that John titled “Forward!“. In that post, he talks about monks and revolutionaries and how crying out the battle command “FORWARD” means different things to those two groups of people. You really need to click over and read John’s post because it hits the nail on the head.

After reading “Forward!” two thoughts came into my head as it relates to non-profit organizations.

The existence of the “executive committee” is dangerous, especially if you aren’t careful about who sits on that committee.
There are so many different decision-making paradigms that non-profit boards can use to make tough decisions, but few ever pay attention to these options.

Executive Committee

I believe that BoardSource is the non-profit sector’s leading authority on all things board governance. In an article titled “Should nonprofit boards have execuitve committees” they say:

“An executive committee can be an efficient tool, but not every board needs one. An executive committee should never replace the full board. “

I go a little farther than my diplomatic friends at BoardSource. While there are certainly times an executive committee makes sense (go read the BoardSource article), I think those circumstances are far and in between, and most non-profit organizations should banish their executive committee to their organizational waste bin!

As John talks about in his post titled “Forward!,” your board of directors has people with different values and agendas. If you boil it down in the same way John did, then you have people who thirst for change and you have people who fight against change. This dynamic is at play all around us (turn on CNN and spend some time following the Presidential election coverage), and it is at play in your boardroom.

If you have an executive committee full of “revolutionaries” (as John puts it), then you have set-up a sitution where a small group of board members can cry “FORWARD” and drag the rest of the board of directors with them (including over a cliff). Chaos reigns!

OK, my example might be a worst-case scenario . . . but I’ve seen it happen with my own two eyes.

Perhaps, a more common situation is where board members who aren’t on the executive committee disengage and stop attending board meetings. Yes, this can be the executive committee’s fault because the disengaged board member doesn’t see the urgency in attending board meetings or ensuring that quorum is attained. Why? Because the executive committee can always meet and take care of any pressing issue.

Ugh! If you must have an executive committee, I encourage you to use it sparingly and only in emergency situation. Most importantly, pay attention to who you put on the executive committee and make sure there is a balance between “monks” and “revolutionaries”.

Decisions-Decisions-Decisions

If you’ve heard it once in the boardroom, then you’ve heard it a million times:

“All those in favor, say aye. Those opposed say no.”

Ahhh, yes . . . .Roberts Rules of Order, bylaws, majority rule . . . BUT it doesn’t have to be that way. There are many different decision-making paradigms that exist and some are better in certain circumstances.

If you have been reading recent posts at DonorDreams blog, then you know that I am on a Tony Stoltzfus kick as I re-read his book “Coaching Questions: A Coach’s Guide to Powerful Asking Skills“. Tony suggests there are 13 different decision-making strategies and he offers a variety of questions to help frame issues when using each of those paradigms. The following are just a few that you might find interesting for your board when making certain decisions:

Cost: What would it cost in terms of time and resources to do this? What would it cost if you don’t do this? What’s the cost if you don’t decide or let circumstances overtake you?
Alignment: How well does this decision align with your passions, your values, and your calling?
Relational: How will this course of action affect the people around you? Who will benefit, who will be hurt?

There are 10 other decision-making strategies that can be used to frame boardroom decisions, but I won’t steal Tony’s thunder. You really need to go purchase his book!

If John is right, then you have monks and revolutionaries in your boardroom. Some decisions will be tough to make. Sure, you can tilt the scales by making sure there are enough of one kind of decision-maker voting in the manner that you want and need . . . OR . . . you can be strategic and thoughtful with how you frame issues and engage board members in approaching certain decisions.

There is nothing that says you have to always use a majorty rule voting paradigm. After all, I bet that there are certain things in your organizational bylaws that require a “super majority” vote. So, why not employ a consensus building model in certain circumstances? It isn’t right in all circumstances, but it is sometimes.

Does your organization still operate with an executive committee? If so, when do you activate that group and what decisions do they typically make? Does your board use different decision-making paradigms in certain circumstances? If so, please share the specifics and how that has worked for you. You can share all of your thoughts using the comment box below.

Here’s to your health!

Questions every non-profit executive director should be asking

June 14, 2012 DonorDreams Board development, organizational development

Yesterday’s post was titled “Excuse me, but I have a few questions” and it introduces a series of posts this week and next week focusing on the importance of asking questions as well as on who should be asking what. Today’s post looks at the executive director and some of the more powerful questions they could and should be asking.

As I mentioned yesterday, Tony Stoltzfus explains in his book “Coaching Questions: A Coach’s Guide to Powerful Asking Questions” that there are many reasons why asking questions is important. I highlighted the following three reasons:

Asking empowers
Asking develops leadership capacity
Asking creates authenticity

I believe the very first reason in this list explains why non-profit executive directors need to get better at asking questions of their board members. The following is what Tony says about “asking empowers”:

. . . roughly 80% of the time, I find that they already know what to do: they just don’t have the confidence to step out and do it. Self-confidence is a huge factor in change. When you ask for people’s opinions and take them seriously, you are sending a powerful message: “You have great ideas. I believe in you. You can do this.” Just asking can empower people to do things they couldn’t do on their own.

Sure, Tony is talking about executive coaching in that passage, but in some regards executive directors serve as a coach to the board of directors. At least sometimes . . . right? (Yes, that job involves a weird little dance and sometimes the board leads and other times the executive director leads. Sigh!)

I cannot tell you how many non-profit executive directors tell me that their board members are disengaged. While there can be many reasons for this phenomenon, one reason could be that the executive director is doing too much talking and not enough asking. Think about it for a moment.

When I decided to open The Healthy Non-Profit LLC last year, I saw a blog post from Seth Godin titled “Questions for a new entrepreneur“. After reading it, I posted it to the bulletin board in my office. I periodically go back and re-read it because the questions he suggests a new business owner ask are right on target. Here are a few of those questions that I think are applicable to non-profit executive directors:

Are you aware of your cash flow? What’s your zero point? What are you doing to ensure you get to keep swimming?
What’s your role?
Are you trying to build a team?
Why are you doing this at all?

Circling back around to the idea of engaging board members, here are a few questions I found in Tony Stoltzfus’ book “Coaching Questions: A Coach’s Guide to Powerful Asking Questions” that I believe non-profit executive directors should be asking of their board members in committee meetings and in the boardroom:

Where do you see this going?
How do you want things to turn out? What’s the best possible outcome?
What do you think this looks like from the other person’s point of view? (e.g. donor, client, staff, etc)
How do you feel about that?
What are the real issues here?
How should we make this decision?
What do you need to know to make a great decision?
What would a great decision look like?

I believe the following Ralph Waldo Emerson quotation can best summarize how important a good executive directors can be to their board of directors, especially if that executive director knows how to ask really powerful questions:

“Our chief want is someone who will inspire us to be what we know we could be.”

What questions do you hear being asked by executive directors? Are they powerful and engaging questions? Please use the comment box below to share a few examples.

We will continue this series of posts focusing on the fine art of “asking questions” next Tuesday because tomorrow is “Organizational Development Friday” with John Greco and Monday is, of course, “Monday’s with Marissa”. Tuesday’s post will focus on powerful questions that board members should be asking both of themselves and their executive director.

Here’s to your health!

Do you have “balance” in your non-profit life?

June 8, 2012 DonorDreams organizational development

Today, we’re focusing on a post that John titled “Catch More Life“. In that post, he talks about work-life balance, values and dreams. I think this is an especially appropriate post for this Friday because we’ve been talking about time management all week-long, which begs the question of work-life balance.

I loved John’s post this week because it came at just the right time in my life. A few weeks ago, I celebrated a huge anniversary — the day I decided to let go and “free fall” in life. It was the end of May 2011, when I left my job at Boys & Girls Clubs of America. I wasn’t sure what I was going to do, but I knew that I couldn’t stay on the path that I was on.

After taking the summer to decompress and think things through, I realized that life is too short and decided to cease the moment. I started blogging. I invested time in doing things that made me happy. I opened my own small non-profit consulting practice in October 2011 and resumed what I love doing, which is helping non-profit organizations build capacity.

I promised myself that I wouldn’t do any assessment or evaluation work on my decisions until October 2012, but the anniversary of my departure from Boys & Girls Clubs of America threw me a curveball and I started asking:

Was this the right decision?
Am I making enough money to sustain the consulting practice?
Do I need to go back to work for “The Man”. 😉 (Sorry, Fred)
Do I need to change certain things about my consulting practice?

I started feeling the anxiety that comes with assessment and evaluation . . . until I read John’s post.

While I’m still not sure that I’ve made the right decision or if I am on the right path with my new business, I feel better about putting my anxiety away until October. I also feel a little better about the decision I made a year ago because at the core of that decision was exactly what the fisherman in John’s post is trying to do.

I also find myself concerned this morning about the state of the non-profit sector. Philanthropy News Digest reported a few years ago about a study conducted by the Meyer Foundation:

“. . . young nonprofit staff are concerned that challenges such as work-life balance, insufficient lifelong earning potential, a lack of mentorship, and overwhelming fundraising responsibilities may prevent them from becoming nonprofit executives.”

As I look at this report finding and then look at the fisherman in John’s post “Catch More Life,” I find myself nodding my head and thinking that the word “challenges” is an under-statement.

If you are an executive director, you shouldn’t dismiss this phenomenon because it fundamentally threatens the long-term viability of your agency. Perhaps, the best thing you can do is:

Sit down with your employees,
Figure out what they value in life and offer to help them achieve it while they work at your agency,
Help them develop a career and life path, and
In the final analysis, appreciate their choices as you figure out how to simultaneously meet your agency’s needs.

If you are a board volunteer, you should take a hard look at this report and do a number of things like address it in your organization’s strategic plan and compensation & benefits plan. You should also demand that your executive director model work-life balance and promote it.

If you are a donor, please consider funding capacity building initiatives that help non-profits grow their fundraising muscles, which in turn will bring more resources to throw at this challenge.

The non-profit sector is at-risk and we are our own worst enemies. Is it possible for the fishermen and businessmen from John’s post to co-exist in the non-profit sector?

Do you personally have a work-life balance challenge? How are you addressing it? Does your agency have a balance issue with regards to the organization’s culture? Are you addressing it? If so, how? Please scroll down and share your thoughts in the comment box below.

Here’s to your health!