The role of your non-profit board?

November 7, 2012 erik Board development

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.

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.

Non-profit lessons on Election Day 2012

November 6, 2012 erik Uncategorized

I just love Election Day. There is a spirit in the air. People appear engaged. The precinct seems to run like a well-oiled machine. Systems are apparent and it feels like they work. For me, there is a feeling on connectivity to my fellow citizens as well as a historical connection to past generations. I just love Election Day!

As I stood in a variety of lines this morning, a number of different and random non-profit thoughts rattled through my brain. In an effort to be brief this morning, I’m just going to list those thoughts below so that you can run off to the polls and exercise your right to vote:

I believe the sense of engagement I feel on Election Day comes from people being able to express their opinion (aka vote). If non-profits want to replicate a similar sense of engagement, they should focus on asking clients, volunteers and donors their opinions (aka surveys, interviews, and focus groups).
I believe the sense of connectivity to something bigger comes from my knowledge of history (both news coverage and history textbooks). If non-profits want to replicate a similar sense of connectivity, they should focus on telling their story (including their journey line) and weaving it throughout their case for support.
The two men on today’s ballot who are running for President of the United States didn’t get there randomly. There was a severe vetting processes (aka Primary elections), and voters “kicked those tires” all in the name of determining whether or not they were worthy of being on the ballot. As so many non-profits look ahead to the beginning of 2013 and their annual meeting, they should remember the importance of “vetting” their board officers. Perhaps, this point is too strongly stated, but the bottom line is that we need to avoid asking “who wants to be a board officer” and put the effort into deliberately recruiting a slate for consideration (and recruiting people who have the time, ability and willingness to do the job rather than someone we can convince to hold the title).

Happy Election Day! If you already haven’t done so, please take a moment to go vote. It is one of the most fundamental rights we have as Americans. In fact, the office of “engaged citizen” (which we all hold whether we like it or not) is the most important unelected office in our great country. If you don’t do your job (e.g. cast an informed vote), then nothing works which perhaps partially explains why our governance systems haven’t worked very well in recent history.

As you most likely wait in a line today at the polling place, I encourage you to take a look around, observe what is unfolding around you and use those few precious moments of down time to apply what you’re seeing to your non-profit agency. You might just be surprised at what you conclude.

Here’s to your health! (And don’t stay up too late tonight watching Election night coverage) 😉

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

Work hard. Work faster. Non-profit competition!

November 2, 2012 erik 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.

In a recent post, John talked about increased competition and the “always-on, always-connected” escalating and fast pace pitch of the business world. He points to globalization as one reason for this phenomenon and concludes that it is a losing battle to fight. The only way forward is to adapt and RUN harder! I think the story from Thomas Friedman with which he starts his post really sums everything up nicely.

In non-profit terms, competition is an interesting topic to explore. If you pull a focus group of non-profit executive directors together and ask about competition, I know that the surface comments would all be about collaboration and sharing. However, having been part of conversations like these, I also know that when you go deeper into this conversation things change and you start to hear things like:

“That is MY donor.”
“They are trying to poach MY staff.”
“They are trying to recruit MY board member.”

Whenever I hear language like this from my peers, I have a tendency to roll my eyes and want to get on my bully pulpit and preach about how none of us can “own” a donor, volunteer, or staff person. However, I need to avoid do this because Thomas Friedman and John Greco would probably say that those are natural human reactions within the context of a competitive capitalist marketplace.

While it is this instinct that will probably save your non-profit agency, my gut feeling tells me that focusing on “the people” (e.g. donor, volunteer, staff, etc) is the wrong place to focus. If you want to keep all of these people engaged in your agency’s mission, then focus on the core reason these individuals decided to give you money as well as work and volunteer for you — they believe in what you do!

When each of these groups of people decide to get involved with your agency, they do so because they are drawn to your mission. So, if you don’t do a good job in measuring and demonstrating your impact, then your shiny allure will likely tarnish and thanks to the phenomenon of “competition” they will be drawn to another agency and another cause.

If your non-profit wants to compete in the 21st Century for limited resources, then you need to figure out what the United Way has been saying for more than a decade. You need to demonstrate your community impact.

Of course, this is easier said that done. Measuring your agency’s “real” impact requires resources, focus, attention to detail and development of new tools and processes. Combine these requirements with the “under-resourced” nature of the non-profit sector and we circle back around to John Greco’s blog post “Running (for your life)“. I really think that John’s conclusions apply to our challenges when it comes to measuring impact:

We need to accept this and stop fighting. The reality is that “our cheese has moved” and donors have stopped giving money just because they like us and what we try to do with our clients. Donors now focus on results and so should we. In the final analysis, our clients deserve it.
“Learning” is a survival skill.
The early bird gets the worm. Start doing something NOW. You run the risk of “paralysis by analysis” if you think too hard about something like this. You will get farther with a “trial by fire” mentality.

If you are looking for resources on measuring impact, click here to check out a presentation that I found online. It is kind of interesting, especially when you get to the balanced scorecard and dashboard information. The AARP example caused me to rethink a few things.

If you are looking for a new book to read on the subject of non-profit competition, David LaPiana’s book titled “Play To Win” looks really interesting. I might just make this my next reading project. Click here to read an article from The Foundation Center from the authors of this book.

Do you find yourself running harder and fast? How are you maintaining your work-life balance? Are you reconsidering how you’ve done things in the past and re-engineering work processes and systems? Are you making tough choices with your chart of work and your employees’ chart of work? When it comes to non-profit competition, what are your thoughts about focusing on measuring impact? Am on-point or off-base?

Please use the comment box below to weigh-in on these issues. We can all learn from each other.

Here’s to your health!

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!

Do I know you? And why are you asking me to join your group?

October 25, 2012 erik Board development, Fundraising, organizational development, volunteers

I am constantly amazed at how careless some non-profit organizations are with their volunteer recruitment efforts. Correct me if I am wrong, but building the right board, advisory group, or fundraising committee with the right people is at or near the top of every smart nonprofit professional’s task list. Right? Well, if this true, then can someone explain to me why I’m getting random emails and Linkedin requests from people I don’t know asking me to join something?

The following are a few excerpts from one recent email (names have been changed to protect the innocent):

“We are now accepting applications for the Associates Board. The Associates Board will provide young professionals with the opportunity to get involved in event planning, fundraising, social media, and recruiting . . .

To apply, please review the commitment, roles, and responsibilities, and our application procedures by clicking here.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact XXX XXXXXXXXX, our Associates Board President, at XXX@XXXXXXXXX.org.

Please feel free to forward this email onto any young professional who you think may be interested!”

There are so many things that concern me about an email like this. Here are just a few:

They don’t know me. They don’t know my skill sets. They don’t know if I would be a great fit for this volunteer opportunity.
They don’t have the time to review important things like roles and responsibilities with me? They made this a self guided activity.
So, they want me to think that I’m important enough to join their Associates Board, but I’m not important enough to call?
They’re giving me permission to forward their invitation to anyone? I now fear who else could be sitting around this table talking about issues such as “event planning, fundraising, social media, and recruiting”.

Here is another random request I received from someone I don’t know via LinkedIn (again, I changed the names to protect the innocent):

“Hey Erik,

Would like to have you as a member of the XXXXX National Fundraising Advisory Committee, what day and time can we discuss? Please check out our website at www.abcdefg.net for more information, I look forward to speaking with you!”

I must admit that I’ve sent out “messages in a bottle” like this, but I have never been so presumptuous as to ask someone I don’t know to do anything other than please take a phone call from me.

Have you ever had the pleasure of sitting on a board or committee with a group of very caring people who don’t have a clue as to how to do what they are being asked to do? If you have been spared this experience, I sincerely hope you never get the opportunity because it is frustrating.

I believe that non-profit professionals need to construct volunteer groups (e.g. boards, committees, etc) in much they same way they hire staff.

Put some thought in what skills the people around the table will need to accomplish what you’re asking of them.
Approach people who you believe possess such skills.
Be clear about expectations upfront in order to avoid misunderstandings. Share written volunteer job descriptions, roles & responsibilities documents, and written plans with volunteers before asking them to join.

Recruiting random people to do work for your organization is irresponsible. It can set people up for failure. It can also create horrible group dynamics and poor results.

If this blog post is not resonating with you, then let’s agree to do this. I will go to a very public place and ask for random volunteers to attend your annual campaign kickoff meeting with me. You will entrust us with pledge cards and some personal information about your donors. Let’s see how well this works out for you and your campaign, and we can talk about it at your post-campaign critique meeting.

We’ve all made mistakes in recruiting volunteers, and we can all learn from each other’s mistakes. Without embarrassing yourself or anyone else, please use the comment box to share a few lessons learned and explain what you’re now doing differently.

Here’s to your health!

Will the lawyer on your non-profit board really provide legal advice?

October 23, 2012 erik Board development, volunteers

An executive director friend and I went to lunch a few weeks ago to catch-up on life and share stories. The company was great, the lunch was good, and I learned something new about non-profit board volunteers who work in the legal community. As it turns out, some law firms seem to be requiring their employees to clear a number of hurdles before serving on a non-profit board.

This revelation came about when my executive director friend said something to the effect of: “. . . and now the lawyer on my board can’t even provide legal advice in the boardroom.”

As you can imagine, I heard that old record player needle scratching across the surface of a vinyl album (ugh . . . yes, I am dating myself and obviously don’t belong to the Millennial generation). I swear the restaurant went dead just like in those E.F. Hutton television commercials, and all I could utter was one simple word . . . “Huh?”

So, my friend went on to explain that a new board volunteer, who just happens to be an attorney, sent him a letter from his law firm requiring the executive director to sign-off on a letter of agreement outlining the conditions of their employee’s board service.

I had a difficult time wrapping my head around this concept and asked my friend to email me a copy of the letter. The following are excerpts from that letter (with the names excluded to protect the innocent):

“The Firm has adopted policies regarding circumstances under which a Firm lawyer may serve as a director for non-client companies, and prohibits such service without permission of the Firm’s Professional Responsibility Committee. An additional prerequisite to my service is that I obtain written acknowledgement from the non-profit organization (The Company) regarding the capacity in which I will be serving on the board, and certain other matters. By signing and returning this letter to me, therefore, the Company and the Board acknowledge the matters stated below:

I will be serving in my personal and individual capacity only. I will not be acting as a lawyer or providing legal services or advice to the Company. I will not be acting as an agent, partner or employee of the Firm.

The Company acknowledges that it is not now a client of the Firm, and understands that the Firm will not be able to represent the Company without first obtaining special permission from the Firm’s Professional Responsibility Committee, which permission is rarely granted or unless I resign as a director.

Because I will not be providing legal services or advice in my role as a director, there will be no attorney-client privilege protecting communications between me and the Company or the Board.

As mentioned, the Firm’s policy prohibits director service by Firm lawyers without Professional Responsibility Committee permission. The Firm’s policy also requires that the Professional Responsibility Committee reconsider this question at least annually. Although the committee has indicated that it will permit me to serve as a director of the Company, it is possible that the Committee could change its view on this question in the future. If this were to occur, I would have to resign as a director at that time.”

I must admit that I’ve read this letter over and over again in disbelief. A number of things raced through my mind each time I read it, including:

Why would I ever recruit someone from a law firm who I might one day want to retain for legal counsel?
Board volunteers are suppose to bring their “Time-Talent-Treasure” to their non-profit board service. If I can only get two of three, is it still worth recruiting an attorney to serve on the board? Or would they just make a better special event or annual campaign volunteer?
Why would I ever include an attorney on my board as part of a board officer succession plan when the Firm can yank them off my board in a moment’s notice?

I am sure that if I thought about all of this for another few minutes, I could come up with additional questions and concerns. But where is the fun in that when I can open it up for discussion with the awesome non-profit professionals and volunteers who subscribe to this blog?

What questions and concerns do you have when you read excerpts from this letter? Have you been asked to sign off on anything similar by an attorney serving on your non-profit board? Does this letter of agreement impact how you think about recruiting an attorney to serve on your board? Why? Why not?

Please use the comment box below to share your thoughts on this important board development subject. We can all learn from each other.

Here’s to your health!

Change 101: Sell-Sell-Sell and then Strategy-Strategy-Strategy

October 19, 2012 erik Fundraising, organizational development

In a recent post, John talked about the importance of “selling problems,” and he wasn’t referencing issues that sales teams experience. He literally meant taking your organization’s problems / challenges and selling them as things that must be solved.

A few weeks ago, I attended Boys & Girls Clubs of America’s Midwest Regional Conference as an exhibitor and trainer. One of the sessions I presented was “Transformation: Driving Lasting Change at Your Club“. In that training, I shared with participants a six stage process for leading change that I learned at a change leadership training offered by Linkage Inc.

Here are the six stages to that change model:

Make the case for change
Enlist stakeholders to develop vision & strategy
Communicate the vision and strategy
Remove barriers
Set milestones & acknowledge progress
Reinforce the change

If you click over and read John’s post and then click back here to the six stage change model, you will see the first three stages all deal with “selling the problem”.

Of course, this all seems to easy when presented in blogs and six stage models. What could go wrong, right?

Well, there is always that little thing called strategy development that if done incorrectly can lead your organization down a path towards bigger problems.

Let’s look at a real world example that many non-profit organizations deal with at one time or another. This is the issue of fundraising efficiency and productivity. Here is how I’ve seen this change initiative unfold too many times:

The agency needs to do better with its fundraising program.
The executive director sells the problem to the board. Facts, figures and charts all demonstrate the need.
The executive director and board members sell the problem to donors, who generous agree to help with their pocketbooks.
All of stakeholders agree that the strategy needs to be increased organizational capacity in the area of fundraising. The solution? Hire a fundraising professional! (or more fundraising professionals as the case may be)
The new fundraising professional joins the team, and the problem doesn’t get better (in fact it sometimes gets a little worse).

Huh? What happened?

In many instances, I’ve seen the executive director take a victory lap and then wash their hands of their fundraising responsibilities. The board does a similar celebration and then disengages from the resource development program. Board members think: “Phew! Thank goodness we hired that person to do all of our fundraising. Now I can focus on other things.”

Oooops! Maybe the problem was deeper and more complex.

When leading change, the first order of business for the non-profit executive director is “selling the problem”. As John points out in his example, if you can make this a self-discovery process for key stakeholders, it will be that much more powerful.

Immediately, after you secure engagement, strategy and vision development becomes critical because selling the right problem with the wrong solutions will get you nowhere fast.

I don’t mean to imply that the aforementioned strategy of hiring a fundraising professional is a wrong solution. However, understanding cause-and-effect is important and anticipating potential scenarios will help you avoid some heartache. Additionally, understanding the entire problem and being comprehensive in your strategy development is key.

Has your agency ever solved a problem without engaging key stakeholders in what the problem was in the first place? What was the result? Have you ever solved a problem and found yourself surprised that the solution didn’t solve the problem? What did you do? How did you correct course and change your change initiative? If you are a fundraising professional who has gone through what I just described, please share how you re-engaged your boss and the board and got things on track. Please use the comment box below to share your thoughts and examples.

Birds of a feather meets angry non-profit birds

October 18, 2012 erik Board development, volunteers

Yesterday, my post was more of a question than anything else. I hoped you would join me in wondering if most board development processes really just result in boards replicating themselves. For example, a board full of middle management white-collar employees will beget more of the same. I ended the post with more questions focused on the idea of board transformation and asked if anyone has ever seen this done effectively.

After writing yesterday’s post, I jumped in my car and started a multi-day business trip. At my first stop, I had the pleasure of being able to continue this discussion about: bird of a feather flock together, boards replicating themselves, board transformation, and other board development approaches.

It was a robust discussion, and it reminded me of why I love non-profit work. Here are just a few things that popped out of that discussion yesterday:

there is no doubt that boards replicate themselves,
birds of a feather do indeed flock together, and
board transformation (whatever that may look like) needs to be managed very carefully to avoid hurt feelings and damaged donor relationships.

All of this got me thinking about situations where I’ve worked with a blended board of directors. What I mean by “blended board” is a group of volunteers who come from significantly different social circles, groups, sectors, etc.

It exists . . . in fact many non-profits are actually pursuing this idea all in the name of “board diversity.”

I am specifically thinking of one organization who I’ve worked with, and their board room contains:

a few CEOs and big business people,
one or two blue-collar construction folks,
a few country club wives,
a handful of middle managers, and
a former client.

So, you’re probably still wondering what inspired the title of this morning’s post. Simply stated, the “birds of a feather” refers to yesterday’s post, and the “angry birds” reference is a cautionary tale for non-profits who are aggressively pursuing the idea of blended boards and diversity.

When you have a blended boardroom, there are two big things that I think executive directors need to be on the look-out for:

Avoid board segmentation

I’ve seen blended boards where the “business people” and “folks with tons of influence” take on certain responsibilities (e.g. fundraising) and let others off the hook.

Here is what I’ve seen when blended boards segment themselves into “those who can” and “those who can’t”:

resentment
exhaustion
confusion
condescension

Every road leads to a bad place, and I’ve never seen it end well.

Avoid volunteer alienation

I’ve seen blended boards who work very hard at maintaining uniformity in expectations, roles, and responsibilities. So, the “CEO-type of board member” is held to the same standard as the “stay at home mom on the board”.

While this might sound “fair” to some of you, I assure you that this road is equally ugly. Here is what I’ve seen in these situations:

feelings of inadequacy
feelings of incompetence
finger-pointing
excuse making
under-performance

What I’m trying to say this morning is that if you are one of those non-profit professionals who actively fights against the “birds of a feather flock together” phenomenon, then you need to also be on the lookout for “angry non-profit birds” syndrome.

Here are just a few quick thoughts in my head for my non-profit executive directors friends out there:

Make sure your board recruitment process is followed. You are the guardian of process at your organization. Resist board members requests that sound like: “Awww, let’s just ask Betty to join the board. You know she’s perfect. Let’s just cut a few corners in the process.”
Make sure that your board development process educates prospective board volunteers on roles, responsibilities, and expectations BEFORE asking them to join anything.
Make sure your board development process includes regular doses of “education and training”. Using small training modules in the board room and infusing training into annual campaign kickoff meetings and board retreats ensures your board volunteers are growing.
Manage relationships. When you see board volunteers struggling, don’t look the other way. You can either personally engage and provide coaching to a struggling board volunteer or you can employ other board volunteers to provide that coaching. The end result might look different in every situation with some volunteers growing into their board roles and others finding other more comfortable seats on the bus that don’t involve serving on the board.
Don’t set people up for failure. If someone is a bad fit for the board, don’t ask them to join just because they have a large checkbook. There is no shame in asking someone to sit that is a better fit for their talents and passions.

Do you have a blended board with lots of diversity? How do you manage it? How have you kept it from splintering into “us” and “them”? How have you kept individual volunteers from feeling out-of-place or like they aren’t pulling their weight? Please scroll down and share your thoughts and experiences in the comment section. We can all learn from each other.

Here’s to your health!

Who is minding the gap at your agency?

September 28, 2012 erik organizational development, Planning

Today, we are talking about one of the most important things that your organizations must do if it wants to achieve its mission and vision of the future. We are talking about “minding the gap,” which is something John talked about in terms of strategic planning.

At the foundation of every good strategic plan (or any plan for that matter) is “gap analysis,” which John summarizes well when he says:

“Which is a pretty fancy way of saying that the team spends some time comparing the current situation with the future state. Comparing actual performance with potential performance. Comparing current capabilities to projected capabilities.”

When I read this, my mind wandered to the countless evaluation sessions and SWOT exercises in which I’ve participated and facilitated throughout the years. However, I then read this in John’s post . . .

“The team doing the gap analysis rarely delivers the plans necessary to actually bridge the gap and achieve the future state. Look; it’s not that the team is a bunch of do nothing know nothing stiffs. Far from it; they are very often strong contributors, hand-picked for the job — logical, analytical; detail oriented, project planners and operational executioners. Without them, the current state would be nowhere near as good as it is.”

Now this stopped me cold in my tracks on a Friday morning because it is a powerful and true statement. It also made my brain hurt because it raises all sorts of questions that are difficult to contemplate on only 1/2 cup of coffee such as:

Who do you involve in your gap analysis?
How do you assess who those right people are when building your prospect list?
How do you keep the gap assessment from feeling like a judgement on your current team?
Are there different groups who mind different gaps in your organization? For example, who is minding the program/operations gap? The board governance gap? The fundraising gap?
What role should donors play in minding the gap? How can we get over our fears around exposing donors to the data that comes out of minding the gap? (Ditto these questions for board members as it relates to staff and programming)

So, here is the take away for me this morning . . .

Spend lots of time getting the “WHO” right,
when it comes to gap assessment and planning.

If you get this wrong, then it will likely haunt you for years and years to come.

Do you have any strategic planning stories that you would like to share about how you determined who the right people were and put them in the right seat of your strategic planning bus? Please share your experiences in the comment box below.

Here’s to your health!

Spend lots of time getting the “WHO” right, when it comes to gap assessment and planning.

Spend lots of time getting the “WHO” right,
when it comes to gap assessment and planning.