board of directors – Page 13 – The Healthy Non-Profit

Evaluating your non-profit board volunteer prospects’ social reach and network

December 6, 2012 erik Board development, organizational development, volunteers

I was recently engaged in an engaging discussion about board development with a great group of non-profit board volunteers. The range of topics in that conversation spanned issues such as prospect identification, evaluation methods, prioritizing prospect lists, cultivating prospects, recruitment process, orientation, recognition, and evaluation. It was one of those conversations that a facilitator loves because everyone was engaged and actively participating. There was an energetic dynamic in the room, and then someone asked a really tough question:

“How do we evaluate the scope of someone’s social network?”

This question stems from the discussion on the importance of diversity in your boardroom. After talking about the obvious (e.g. age, gender, ethnicity), these discussions always turn to the more difficult subjects including how to assess a prospective board volunteer’s social network and social capital. Of course, this is important because you don’t want a boardroom full of people who all walk in the same social circles.

Moreover, this is important because:

Fundraising — The collective network in your boardroom is related to the reach of your fundraising program, its appeals and potential future donors.
Board Development — Birds of a feather flock together, and the collective network in your boardroom will give birth to future boards. Board replicate themselves all the time!
Group-think — People who are close and come from the same walks of life can sometimes think alike, which can greatly influence board governance and important decisions.

So, what is the answer to the aforementioned question pose by this obviously super smart board volunteer?

Well, it is complicated and simple all at the same time. Ugh!

For decades (and probably centuries), board development committees have answered this question the old fashion way. They sat down around a table and talked it over. Those committees who were successful had a diversity of people sitting around the table and were able to assess a prospect’s social network in an anecdotal manner. They talked about what they see and hear about the prospect. Here are just some of the things they most likely talked through:

Does the prospect sit on other non-profit boards?
What church does this prospect belong to? Are they active? Who else belongs to that church?
What other groups does this person belong to? (e.g. Rotary, Kiwanis, country club, chamber of commerce, local booster clubs, etc) Who else belongs to those groups?
What else do we see this person’s name attached to? (e.g annual reports, donor recognition walls, local newspaper articles, etc)
How does this prospect’s network, reach, and social capital compare to what is currently sitting around our boardroom table?

This is what “old school” board development assessment work looks like. It is highly effective. It has a track record of working. It is highly dependent on a diversity of people with a diversity of perspectives engaging in such a conversation.

Of course, our 21st Century mindset and perspectives leads us to question old approaches and investigate new tools and approaches, and there is nothing wrong with that.

So, I recently opened up my board development toolbox and re-examined some very traditional tools such as:

board matrix
sample prospective board member information sheet
board candidate rating form

In doing that simple review, it occurred to me that there isn’t much substance to those tools from the perspective of assessing someone’s social network, social reach and social capital. The matrix does ask the board development committee to assess “community connections,” and the information sheet also asks questions about your prospect’s affiliations and other non-profit board service. While these tools nibble around the edges, it wouldn’t be difficult to tweak these tools to more directly address the question posed by our board volunteer at the beginning of this blog post.

However, there are some “21st Century” tools that your board development committee might want to start using when talking through the issue of a prospect’s network. Consider the following:

Do a Google search on your prospective new board members during the evaluation phase of your process. Talk about the results of that search.
Look at their online social networks (e.g. Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter). If no one around the table is connected to the prospect in that way, then: 1) that might tell you something in and of itself and 2) you might expand your reach and find someone on the board or among your network who is linked in such a way.
Use Guidestar to determine if they are associated with other non-profits in your community.

Of course, there is nothing wrong with the “old school approach”. In fact, one simple way that you can tweak this traditional approach is by including your prospective future board volunteers in the process. Asking them to help you answer a few questions about their network and their reach. If done appropriately, it wouldn’t have to feel awkward.

How does your non-profit organization tackle the question posed at the beginning of this blog post as part of its board development process? Please use the comment box to share your best practices. We can all learn from each other and save time by not re-inventing the wheel. 😉

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

Does your non-profit board use this time to “Take Stock”?

December 5, 2012 erik Board development, volunteers

Dani Robbins is the Founder & Principal Strategist at Non Profit Evolution located in Columbus, Ohio. I’ve invited my good friend and fellow non-profit consultant to the first Wednesday of each month about board development related topics. Dani also recently co-authored a book titled “Innovative Leadership Workbook for Nonprofit Executives” that you can find on Amazon.com.

board evaluation It’s the end of the year, which always seems like a good time to take stock. Did I meet my obligations? Did I rise to the occasion? Did I do what I said I would? Have I become what I aspired to be? Am I living an authentic life?

For me, an authentic life includes service. So, while I take stock of myself, I also take stock of my Boards, the ones I serve, serve on, volunteer for or am paid by. I encourage an annual Board evaluation process.

The vast majority of Boards do not evaluate themselves. It’s not the norm. I’m not sure why, but it makes people uncomfortable. Yet…Board evaluations are not intended to be report cards; they’re intended to be opportunities for development, reflection and growth.

I’ve seen evaluations done a few different ways, and there is no right way. The following two options seem to be the most prevalent; I’ve also seen anything and everything in between. The only wrong (and career terminal) way to evaluate a Board is for the executive director to do it or to not do it at all. Two options:

Turn the Board expectations into a self-evaluation form and allow members to rate themselves on a scale of 1-4. If you’d like to take it a bit further, include at the bottom a space to allow them 3 opportunities to commit to (and hold themselves to) future growth or hand it in to the Board Development committee who can hold Board members individually accountable.
Have the Board Development Committee assess each member individually against the Board expectations, including committee and meeting attendance, giving, event participation, introducing and soliciting new donors, and ambassadorship in the community.

I also encourage you to survey your Board members to determine their opinion of Board process and enjoyment of strategic and generative discussions. It’s not enough for them to assess themselves individually. It’s also imperative that entire Board systems are evaluated and improved or evolved, as necessary and appropriate.

Please note it is the responsibility of the Board Development Committee to ensure evaluations are completed. The executive director can encourage the process and can write the evaluation form, but they cannot evaluate the Board members to whom they report. The Board must evaluate itself.

We can all do better. We can all be more. We serve because we believe in the potential of our organization, our communities and our own ability to affect change.

Take stock, you might like what you find; if you don’t, you can start building new systems toward a stronger future.

What’s been your experience? As always, I welcome your experience and insight.

‘Tis the season to put your non-profit organization’s shared values to use

December 4, 2012 erik leadership, volunteers

values1 For the last few weeks, I’ve found myself in a number of non-profit boardrooms talking to board volunteers about a variety of difficult subjects. These difficult conversations covered the following areas uncomfortable areas: staff reduction, re-organization, service reduction, radical revenue enhancement, board transformation, and so on. In each instance, it felt like a “soul-searching” discussion . . . very big and very weighty. I found myself wishing for a magic pill that I could dispense that would make their path forward a little less difficult.

As I poured my morning cup of coffee and wondered what I should blog about today, my mind wandered back to this same question, but this time it wasn’t a “magic pill” for which my sleepy head wished and dreamed. This time is was a tool that I could hand them. Something like a compass?!?! And then it came to me like a bolt of lightning.

A year ago, I wrote a post titled “Does your non-profit have a soul?” It was all about the importance of engaging your board, staff, clients, donors, volunteers and stakeholders in a “shared values” exercise. One of the quotes in that post that jumped back out at me this morning after my revelation at the coffee pot was from Jim Kouzes and Barry Posner who stated the following in their book “The Leadership Challenge“:

“Shared values make an enormous difference to organizational and personal vitality. Research confirms that firms with strong corporate culture based on a foundation of shared values outperform other firms by a huge margin. Their revenue grew 4-times fast; their rate of job creation was 7-times higher; their stock price grew 12-times faster; and their profit performance was 750-percent higher.”

values2 So, one organizations might find some comfort in their shared values of:

Care
Empathy
Sustainability
Success
Respect

While exercising these values when talking about difficult subject matter won’t make those issues disappear, it will likely bring clarity to the boardroom and help people relate better to each other. Right?

Another one of the organizations I am thinking of has the following values posted on the walls around their facility:

Believe
Inspire
Lead
Innovate

I close my eyes and imagine a boardroom discussion focused on questions such as “Where are we going to raise more money next year?” and “What short-term cuts can/should we make to balance the budget?” Those discussions look different when I overlay their values on those conversations. Right?

‘Tis the season for giving and charity. It is also that time of the year when non-profit boards struggle with big, weighty issues like budget and revenue strategies for next year. My best advice to all non-profit boards is to take another peek under the tree and unwrap that tiny present you placed there years ago when you went through your strategic planning process.

Contained in that small package is your agency’s shared values. Use them as they were intended . . . as a tool to frame discussions and a backdrop to make tough decisions.

It might be the best gift that you’ve given yourself in a very long time.

What are your organization’s shared values? How do you use them? Can you recall an instance when your values helped with a difficult discussion or decision? Please use the comment box below to share your thoughts.

Here’s to your health!

Use video to help volunteers polish their case for support

November 29, 2012 erik Board development, Fundraising, technology, volunteers

I am helping a friend run for city council in my town. He is a great guy, and he will make a great council member. He is personable, down to earth, genuine, and just an everyday kind of person. He is funny, and best of all he is a storyteller. While these might be good building blocks for a servant leader on the city council, I am coming to the conclusion that these traits might not be so great for a “candidate”.

For example, good candidates have their well-polished elevator speech down to science. They knock on your door, you answer it, and they very succinctly tell you in 30 to 60 seconds why they are running and why you should vote for them. However, a good storyteller knows how to stretch a story. They are the master of delivery and timing. They weave and spin and divert and then . . . BOOM. . . they hit you with the punchline or the point of their story.

Needless to say, I’ve been working with my friend on how to polish a powerful and compact elevator speech before he starts knocking on doors. Here is what that has looked like:

We wrote a case for support.
We reduced the case down to a written script.
We refined that script down to something even more simple.

However, none of this has really helped because at his heart, he is a storyteller. Each new tool we’ve developed becomes something new for him to add to the bigger story. LOL

So, last night I decided to try one last trick that I had up my sleeve.

In a room full of 30 of his friends, family, and supporters, I asked him to deliver his case for support (aka his elevator speech). I handed everyone a worksheet with five questions. A few questions dealt with delivery and others addressed content. I asked that everyone fill it out and do so anonymously. I then pulled out my Samsung pocket video camera (similar to the old Flip video cameras), and I videotaped him.

You can probably guess where this is going.

His 30 to 60 second elevator speech turned into an eight minute story. It was funny, and people laughed, but it wasn’t an elevator speech that he will be able to use.

Next steps for me will be sitting down with him to review the critique feedback forms and view the videotape. After digesting this information, it will be back to the grindstone to continue the work of forging a powerful case for support.

The reason I am blogging about this experience on a blog focused on non-profit issues such as board development, fundraising, etc-etc-etc, is because it dawned on me that this same process can be used in variety of ways at your non-profit agency.

Why not use it to help fundraising volunteers polish their approach?

I like this idea because:

It is hard for people to step outside of their bodies to see and hear what they look like. Video is a tool that helps us do exactly this (albeit many people hate seeing or hearing themselves on video)
Achieving this vantage point can create a moment of clarity and focus people on fixing something specific in their delivery or pitch.
People often end up “off script” and speak from the heart even though it isn’t part of the written case for support document. Recording them and capturing some of those impromptu comments can help you refine your case and incorporate it into an elevator speech.

Yes, I know that no one likes to do activities like this, but sometimes good things aren’t necessarily the easy things in life. Right?

I also recently used my little Samsung pocket video camera to interview board volunteers prior to a board retreat. I asked questions like:

Why did you agree to serve on this board?
Why are you so passionate about this organization’s mission?
Why do you think other people should join you in serving on this board?
In the end, what do you want your legacy to be on this board?

You wouldn’t believe what comes out of people’s mouths. In fact, I think they are surprised at what comes out of their mouths.

When you ask someone to speak from the bottom of their heart, amazing things can happen. When you capture it on video and replay it back to them, it becomes a powerful tool for accomplishing a number of different objectives (e.g. engagement, reflection, etc).

Have you ever used video as a tool to help board members or fundraising volunteers? If so, what was your experience? If not, what barriers do you see that stop you from doing so? Please use the comment box to share your thoughts and experiences.

Here’s to your health!

Are some Executive Directors deliberately disengaging their non-profit board volunteers?

November 28, 2012 erik Board development, organizational development, volunteers

I’ve been on a board governance and board development kick lately. One of the big thought-leaders in this area is Richard Chait, who is a Professor at the Harvard Graduate School of Education and one of the authors of “Governance as Leadership: Reframing the Work of Nonprofit Boards,” and I am a big fan of his work.

I recently came across a white paper published by Bader & Associates Governance Consultants in Potomac, MD. It is a simple to read two-page interview with Richard Chait about his book and the idea of generative conversations in the boardroom. I keep re-reading this white paper every few weeks, and it sparks a new thought every time I read it.

For example, I read the following passage this morning:

“Generative governance engages and challenges trustees intellectually. It’s what leaders do best. Yet most boards spend most of their time on fiduciary work, and they devote little time to the generative mode.”

In other words, boards are talking more about things like “can we afford that” and “where is the money coming from for that” and not talking about “are we being impacted by a larger trend and if so what should we do about it“.

When I read the aforementioned quote this morning, a wicked thought popped into my head, and I wondered if non-profit executive directors purposely keep their board volunteers focused on the “little picture” in an attempt to keep them out of the decision-making on the “big picture”?

I admit that this is a cynical thought, but I just wonder . . . Hmmmmmmm?

It is so hard to build consensus with 15 or 20 people sitting around a boardroom table. A good facilitator makes it look so easy, but it really is a gift. From what I see from many of my non-profit friends, they are hired for their fundraising and program/operations skills. I can honestly say that I’ve never worked with a search committee that said “facilitation skills” were a top skill set they were looking for in an executive director.

Is it possible that we have a dynamic where the executive director is trying to lead and it is too difficult to get the group to make big decisions on big issues; so they focus the group on tactical issues because it is easier (and important to the day-to-day functioning of the agency). When it comes time to make those big decisions, the executive director engages a few key board members who are of like mind and have influence with their peers and the decision gets made.

The net impact of this approach is widespread disengagement among board members.

OK, so here is the question this morning. Did I just wake up on the wrong side of the bed this morning and cynical thoughts are rampaging through my head. Or do you think this is likely happening in a number of non-profit organizations in your community? The better question might be “what needs to be done to fix this, and are Chait’s suggestions this right perscription?”

Please join me by taking a good hard look in the mirror this morning and share your assessment in the comment box below.

Here’s to your health!

How do you deal with your inner “Non-Profit Possibility Girl”?

November 9, 2012 erik Board development, 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.

In a recent post (a very short but powerful post), John talked about “Possibility Girl” and the paralysis that comes with expectations, especially expectations that are very visible.

As I read John’s post, a number of non-profit questions formed in my mind:

I wonder how many non-profit boards (collectively) feel the same way as Possibility Girl?
I wonder how many board volunteers (individually) feel the same way as Possibility Girl?
I wonder how many non-profit executive directors feel the same way as Possibility Girl?
I wonder how many non-profit fundraising professionals feel the same way as Possibility Girl?
I wonder how many donors (individuals as well as organizations like foundations) feel the same way as Possibility Girl?

As you can see, John got inside my head this morning. LOL

Once I got past these questions, it became very clear to me that the bigger question that needs to be asked is:

“What can/should a non-profit executive director do with their board volunteers , staff and donors to help them get beyond this paralyzing ‘Possibility Girl effect’?”

I used to struggle with this question when I was an executive director (not that I had framed it in quite the same way prior to reading John’s blog post). With that disclaimer in mind, I will share with you a few things I think worked for me:

I liked to clearly set expectations well in advance. I used written volunteer job descriptions during the recruitment process, and I used a management by objectives system when it came to staff performance management plans. I really think clarity and transparency “right-size” expectations and put Possibility Girl in perspective.
I tried to celebrate and recognize big and small accomplishments. I really think celebration and recognition shrink the doubts that people have in their heads, and it provides proof that you aren’t “fake” or “bluffing your way through something“. Success breeds success and builds confidence.
I tried to integrate a sense of mission-focus into everything. I think this approach helps because it serves as a reminder that none of this was about me. It is about something bigger. This approach always allowed me to compartmentalize personal feelings, put them in their right place, and focus on the bigger things. It was a crutch that helped me and the groups of people I supported to “push past periodic feelings of inadequacy“.

Enough about me. What about you? How do you personally deal with you inner “Non-Profit Possibility Girl“? How have you helped your board, fundraising committee, and staff deal with her? I would love to hear a few tips from your corner of the non-profit world! We can all learn from each other and Fridays are great days to invest a minute or two in such an activity. Please use the comment box below to share.

Here’s to your health!

The role of your non-profit board?

November 7, 2012 erik Board development

Every time I speak on issues related to nonprofits, and I mean every single time, regardless of the topic, someone, usually a Board member or an Executive Director, asks “What is the role of the Board?” It has happened so often, and so consistently, that I don’t even wait for the question anymore, I just include the information. Then, of course, the question that follows or should follow is “What is the role of the Executive Director?”

The Board is responsible for governance, which includes:

mission, vision and strategic planning;
hiring, supporting and evaluating the executive director;
acting as the fiduciary responsible agent;
setting policy; and,
raising money.

Everything (Yes, I really mean everything) else is done in concert with the executive director or by the executive director.

What does that really mean?

It means the Board sets the direction, often with input from the executive director, and the executive director makes it happen, often with support from the Board.

It means the Board hires, supports, evaluates and (when necessary) fires the executive director. Likewise, the executive director hires, supports, evaluates and (when necessary) fires the staff. For Board members, that means that you work through the executive director if you have a problem or need something from the staff. For the executive director (even though they don’t need permission) having input from the Board before firing a staff member (especially one that is well known) will help build organizational cohesiveness and extend career longevity.

Fiduciary responsibility means that the Board (and not just the Treasurer but the whole Board) is responsible for safeguarding the community’s resources and ensuring accountability and transparency. The Board also must understand and formally approve finances, audits, and the 990. Fiduciary responsibility doesn’t end with finances; it also includes programs. Boards are entrusted to understand how and why an organization’s programs fill a need in the community, the numbers of people who participate in those programs and their impact, as well as how those programs connect to mission.

Setting policy is also the role of the Board. Policies are usually recommended, written and, later, implemented by the executive director, but they are voted upon and passed by the Board. Typical policies include personnel, code of ethics/conflict of interests, whistle blower, confidentiality, crisis management and/or communication. Your agency should, and does, also have by-laws (also called codes of regulations) which should be followed, periodically reviewed and if revised, voted upon by the Board.

The last piece of Board responsibility is fundraising. The executive director cannot raise money alone. The Development Director cannot raise money alone. The Board cannot raise money alone. Fundraising works best in a culture of philanthropy when both the staff and the Board are working together. The Board’s role is to set the fundraising goal, embark on the campaign, open doors, introduce staff, “make the ask” when appropriate, pick up the tab for lunch when possible, and thank the donor. The staff is responsible for training the Board, coordinating the assignments, preparing the askers with relevant donor information, drafting and supplying whatever written information will be left with the donor, including a letter asking for a specific dollar amount, attending the meetings as necessary and documenting the meeting in the database as well as writing the formal thank you note, and then creating a plan to steward the donor.

There is also a strategic and generative piece to Board service (or at least there should be). We have already reviewed strategic planning in previous posts, and I encourage you to now expand that to include strategic thinking. Is it not enough to have a strategic plan that made your Board members crazy and now sits on a shelf. Strategy is not a one day thing. Strategy requires direction setting, questioning and the committing of resources to ensure the destination is reached. It also requires the rejection of things that are outside the scope of our plan, or the revision of our plan. It necessitates having a culture that allows for and encourages questioning, and sometimes dissent. Board meetings should include robust discussions.

Finally, and least often, there is what Richard Chait describes as generative mode. Generative is a much deeper conversation about the underlying issues and how to impact them. Chait presents generative discussions as ones that “select and frame the problem.” He says “committees need to think not about decisions or reports as their work product, but to think of understanding, insight and illumination as their work products.”

Honestly, if Boards are just going to approve the things put in front of them, anyone can do that. We don’t need our community’s best and brightest to serve on our Boards for that. We do need our community’s best and brightest to lead, to govern and to be strategic about the needs of our communities and generative about the issues we face.

As always, I welcome your insight and experience.

Do you understand your resource development roles and responsibilities?

November 1, 2012 erik Board development, volunteers

Yesterday’s post was titled “Can you pass the board roles and responsibilities test?” and questioned how non-profit organizations can and should strive to keep board members focused on their appropriate roles. Included in yesterday’s post were a few fun test questions designed to help you to realize that answers to these questions aren’t always obvious, which is why thoughtful strategies must be developed and used to maintain clarity.

Before we move on to a new set of questions regarding board volunteers and their roles/responsibilities around resource development, we still have some unfinished business to transact from yesterday’s blog post. The following are answers to yesterday’s poll questions along with brief explanations :

Question #1: “The executive search committee hires the executive director?” While 44% of respondents said this was a true statement, the reality is that only the board of directors as a whole can hire the executive director. Yes, the search committee does much of the work and makes the recommendation to the board. However, technically speaking it is just a recommendation that doesn’t turn into an actual hire until the entire board votes to make it so.
Question #2: “It is a primary responsibility of the board to develop and monitor adherence to personnel policies?” Respondents were split evenly on this question with 50% saying it is a true statement and the other half saying it is false. This was a trick question and depending on how you read it, you are probably right. In reality, developing and monitoring adherence to personnel policies is a primary responsibility of BOTH board and staff. Remember, the board also has an employee to manage (e.g. executive director) and as such they are “monitoring adherence” as much as the executive director is doing so with the remainder of the agency’s staff. As for policy development, it is true that staff play a major role, but in the final analysis setting policy can only be done by the board (albeit with staff input and assistance).
Question #3: “It is a primary responsibility of the board to review the organization’s policies, procedures, and bylaws?” While 88% of respondents said this was a true statement, the reality is that like the last question this is a primary responsibility of BOTH board and staff who work together to get this done. In the end, policy making is clearly a board role, but staff play a supportive role in the review process including making recommendations and weighing in with their professional opinion.

Let’s put aside whether or not you agree with these textbook answers. The bigger point I am trying to make is that questions around board-staff roles and responsibilities can get fuzzy for trained non-profit professionals (see results above). So, it shouldn’t be a surprise that board volunteers need their staff to help them maintain clarity and alignment.

Well, that was a lot of fun! Want to try it again? Please take a stab and answering some of the following questions around non-profit board-staff roles and responsibilities specifically focused on fundraising and resource development (don’t worry, no one can see how you individually answer):

[polldaddy poll=6654135]
[polldaddy poll=6654141]
[polldaddy poll=6654146]

I will share the answers with you tomorrow, which means there will be two blog posts tomorrow with one focused on our traditional “organizational development” Friday topic and a second containing answers and explanations to today’s resource development poll questions. WOW . . .that is a “two-fer” on a Friday! What more can you ask for? 😉

How do you keep your non-profit board from becoming “unaligned” when it comes to clarity around board-staff roles & responsibilities in the area of fundraising? Do you use certain tools (e.g. an annual board re-commitment pledge, etc)? Can you share those ideas and tools with your fellow readers? Are there particular strategies that you use (e.g. resource development planning process, etc)?

Please scroll down to the comment section and share your thoughts, tools, and approaches with your fellow non-profit professionals. We can all learn from each other.

Here’s to your health!

Can you pass the board roles and responsibilities test?

October 31, 2012 erik Board development, organizational development

Every once in a while, I get hired by an organization to help clarify board-staff roles and responsibilities. I just love jobs like this because it allows me to re-visit fun board development content. It also allows me to brush up on elementary concepts that somehow seem to get lost in the inner caverns of my brain.

One of the tools I used last week was an exercise that I dug out of my former internal consultant toolbox from when I worked at Boys & Girls Clubs of America (BGCA). It was titled “Who Does What?” It asks participants to evaluate 10 different statements and determine if it is a primary responsibility of the board, staff or both.

I would love the share the exercise with you here, but the footnotes indicate that the exercise is copyrighted material by both BGCA and BoardSource. So, in an effort to be compliant with our society’s rules, I’ve reworded some of the statements and turned it from a “fill-in the blank” exercise to a true-false exercise.

Please take a stab and answering some of the following questions about non-profit board-staff roles and responsibilities (don’t worry, no one can see how you individually answer):

[polldaddy poll=6652026]
[polldaddy poll=6652035]
[polldaddy poll=6652041]

I will share the answers with you in tomorrow’s blog post. Additionally, I’ll introduce a similar board-staff roles &responsibilities quiz specifically focused on resource development tomorrow. So, please stay tuned.

I really love using tools like these with organizations, and I especially like doing it with tenured board members who think they know this material cold, because it is a good reminder that:

roles and responsibilities can have blurry edges, and
it is easy for a board to find itself “out of alignment” (like an automobile) over the course of time as a result of turnover and adding new volunteers to the board

If you are a Boys & Girls Club affiliate, you can find the entire “Who Does What” tool in the “board development” section of your intranet under the “Tools & Resources” link of the Board Resource Center. If you aren’t a Boys & Girls Club, you can go to the BoardSource website and find a document in the Knowledge Center titled “What are the basic responsibilities of nonprofit boards?” and turn it into a pop quiz tool that you can use with your current and incoming board members.

How do you keep your non-profit board from becoming “unaligned” when it comes to clarity around board-staff roles & responsibilities? Do you use certain tools (e.g. an annual board re-commitment pledge, etc)? Can you share those ideas and tools with your fellow readers? Are there particular strategies that you use (e.g. using the annual meeting or board retreat to revisit these ideas, etc)?

Please scroll down to the comment section and share your thoughts, tools, and approaches with your fellow non-profit professionals. We can all learn from each other.

Here’s to your health!

Does your non-profit agency pass “The Marshmallow Test”?

October 26, 2012 erik Board development, Fundraising, leadership, organizational development, Planning

In a recent post, John talked about something called The Marshmallow Test, which is a real life academic study related to impulse control. You probably know this by other names and expressions such as “A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush“.

John poses the question, “What happens when the environment is perceived to shift a bit?” Both he and the academic study conclude, “The promise of a second marshmallow holds no sway, if the promise is perceived as unreliable.”

So, I thought I’d ask a very simple question on this Friday morning . . . Does your non-profit agency pass “The Marshmallow Test”?

Confused? Let me give you a few examples to get you started:

If your organization doesn’t invest in and value professional development (e.g. very little training, no professional development plans embedded in performance management plans, few promotion opportunities, etc), then how does that impact your employees’ behavior in the workplace? Do they still strive for improvement or do they settle into the status quo?
If your organization doesn’t measure the impact of its programming, then how does that impact donor behavior? Does it influence how your fundraising professionals do their jobs?
If your organization doesn’t value the importance of planning and fails to involve board volunteers in strategic planning, then will that have a “disengaging” effect on board members? Does it impact what they’re willing to do on behalf of your mission?

Yes, today was intentionally a short post because John’s Marshmallow Test post really said it all, and I wanted to provoke you to think about your specific non-profit agency rather than share a fun non-profit story from my past.

So, have you given this question any thought? Does your agency pass the test? On what level were you considering this question (e.g. operations, human resources, resource development, etc)? Is your organizational structure designed to engage employees, volunteers and donors and result in them having some impulse control?

Please scroll down and use the comment box to share your answer. If you still don’t have an answer, please weigh-in on any thoughts this might have spurred. We can all learn from each other.

Here’s to your health!