leadership – Page 22 – The Healthy Non-Profit

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!

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

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

June 15, 2012 DonorDreams Board development, organizational development

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

Today, we’re focusing on a post that John titled “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!

Excuse me, but I have a few questions

June 13, 2012 DonorDreams Uncategorized

If you are an executive director, fundraising professional or board volunteer of a non-profit agency, then you are a leader. There is no arguing this fact. It is a basic truism. As a non-profit consultant, I am always assessing the effectiveness of an organization’s leadership group, and one of the biggest things I look for inside the boardroom is “who is asking questions” and “what types of questions are being asked“.

Tony Stoltzfus wrote a book that is popular among many executive coaches — “Coaching Questions: A Coach’s Guide to Powerful Asking Questions“. At the very beginning of this book, he outlines some of the reasons why asking questions is more powerful than just talking and telling. The following are three of those reasons that I believe apply to your non-profit organization:

Asking empowers
Asking develops leadership capacity
Asking creates authenticity

Let’s zoom in and examine exactly what Tony says about the second reason . . . “asking develops leadership capacity”:

Leadership is the ability to take responsibility. A leader is someone who sees a problem, and says, “Hey — someone needs to do something about this! And I’m going to be that someone.” Simply asking, “What could you do about that?” moves people away from depending on you for answers, and toward taking leadership in the situation. Asking builds the responsibility muscle, and that develops leaders.

What questions do you ask yourself and others? What questions are board members asking often? What about donors . . . what are your donors asking you? Do the people who your agency serves ask questions. If so, what are they?

Today’s blog post is what I call a “springboard post” because it will serve as a launching pad for a series of future blogs. So, tomorrow’s post and next week’s posts will zoom in and look at powerful questions that different stakeholders typically ask and what you should do about it and how you should encourage it. So, stay tuned to DonorDreams blog, and in the meantime please share some of those powerful questions you’ve used or heard others use in the comment box below.

I think Rudyard Kipling stated it best, when he said:

I keep six honest serving-men,
They taught me all I knew;
Their names are What and Why and When,
And How and Where and Who.

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!

Cultivation and stewardship: Who’s on first? What’s on second?

May 30, 2012 DonorDreams Fundraising, Planning

Yesterday’s post titled “Time in the office versus time with donors” begged more questions than it answered. Today, we’re going to zoom in on one of those questions and examine it more closely.

Should the executive director be more responsible for relationship building than the development director?

I have always advocated that, regardless of how hard they try, a non-profit executive director cannot abdicate their role as their agency’s chief development officer. Even when an organization is lucky enough to have a fully staffed development department with talented fundraising professionals, the executive directors is ultimately the person who needs to provide vision and direction.

I think Harry Truman said it best when he said, “The buck stops here!”

Of course, this doesn’t mean that the executive director needs to be the person out on the street cultivating and stewarding relationships with every prospect and donor.

To answer the question posed at the beginning of this post, I believe it is as simple as taking an inventory of who does what well. While I firmly believe that prospects and donors prefer meeting the executive director and developing a relationship with him/her, there may be situations where the executive director doesn’t possess the requisite relationship building skills to cultivate and steward people to the extent necessary for a successful fundraising program. If this is the case, then the answer becomes simple . . . whoever is the natural “people-person” takes on the lion’s share of cultivation and stewardship.

It really can be that simple. Right?

How do you know if someone is a natural relationship builder? Here are a few things I lused to ook for when I interviewed fundraising professionals:

If their network is big, then there is a good likelihood that they are good at building relationships.
Do they keep in contact with their network? If so, then they are most likely someone who intuitively knows how to maintain relationships.
Have they ever “taken advantage of” someone and violated their trust? Trust is a foundational issue in building relationships, and it is something good fundraising professionals know how to navigate.
I always like to learn more about what is being talked about between a relationship builder and the person with whom they are trying to build a relationship. Why? Because good relationship builders are inquisitive and take an interest in the prospect or donor.

Again . . . while I personally prefer that the executive director takes on this role, it doesn’t always work that way and the fundraising professional might need to become the primary cultivation and stewardship person for the agency. It might also become something where certain board volunteers need to help step-in and help. Regardless, the executive director cannot abdicate this role completely and must find places where they are comfortable meeting prospects and donors.

In these circumstances, it is important to clarify roles and responsibilities and the executive director needs to take the initiative in doing this. Off the top of my head, the following are a few tools that can and should be used to achieve clarity:

written annual performance plan
weekly contact reports
written comprehensive resource development plan
weekly in-person checkpoint meetings
written cultivation & stewardship plan
Moves Management program

Doing an inventory of skill sets and assigning and managing roles and responsibilities for cultivation and stewardship activities will keep your agency from sounding like Abbott and Costello in their famous Who’s on First? comedy sketch. It will also likely help you answer the difficult question posed in yesterday’s blog post about how much time needs to be spent outside of the office compared to behind your desk.

Who is the person primarily responsible for cultivating prospects in your agency? Who stewards your donors? What tools and strategies are used to maintain clarity? Please scroll down and share your thoughts in the comment box below.

Here’s to your health!

Is your non-profit smarter than a fifth grader?

May 25, 2012 DonorDreams Board development, Fundraising, organizational development, technology

Today, we’re focusing on a post that John titled “The School Bus Won’t Wait“. In that post, he talks about an aging professional who ends up relying on an internet acquaintance to help him with technology challenges. As things turn out, his online friend turns out to be 12-years-old. As always, John’s post has multiple themes and meanings, but the main things I saw pertained to: “Technology. Adapting to change. And possibility.”

These themes are at play throughout society, and they are changing the non-profit sector in ways that couldn’t be predicted. Here are just a few examples that I’ve seen, heard of, or read about:

ePhilanthropy. Donors continue to contribute more via online channels. According to the most recent Blackbaud Index of Online Giving report, “… online giving increased by 9.8 percent for the 3 months ending March 2012 as compared to the same period in 2011.” Believe it or not, this has been the trend for quite some time.
The digital boardroom. Board volunteers are busier at work and the rate of retirement is rising. Time is a premium and some volunteers don’t want to take time out of their day to travel to a physical meeting. Retirees (esp. in colder climates) are splitting their time between their primary residence and a winter residence. Add technology into the mix and now board members are “conference calling” and using “Skype” to conduct board meetings. Documents are being distributed digitally and board members are casting proxy votes via email.
The paperless office? Ha! While that appears to have been a 1980s pipe dream, the reality is that there are tons of electronic tools at a non-profit organization’s disposal now. Donor databases replaced index card donor systems, volunteer files, and membership paper systems. One agency who I am very familiar with is upgrading their network server to include a few terabytes of hard drive space because a few gigs just didn’t hold everything. LOL

With change comes challenges. Isn’t that what life is all about?

Here are two tips that I hope you will take to heart as you read John’s blog post and contemplate “Technology. Adapting to change. And possibility.”:

Education doesn’t end when you receive your certificate or degree. If you want to survive, I encourage you become a “Lifelong Learner”. There are tons of free resource available to you on the internet. Carve one hour out of your schedule every week and visit an online resource like Network for Good’s Learning Center. There are tons of great articles there for you to read. There is even a section of this website where you can access pre-recorded webinars.
Plan to stay current. Technology is always evolving. Do you have a written technology plan in place to keep your systems from getting old? If you need help answering this question, then look at the computer sitting on your desk. How old is it? If it is 3-years-old or older, then you probably don’t have a plan in place or you aren’t funding it appropriately.

How is technology changing your non-profit organization? Are you adding fifth graders to your board development prospect lists? 😉 Please scroll down and share one quick example in the comment box below.

Here’s to your health!

Should Development Directors be allowed in the boardroom?

May 15, 2012 DonorDreams Board development, Fundraising, organizational development

A resource development colleague called me a few weeks ago. They were upset and pissed off after a recent board meeting, and they just wanted to vent their anger. As a good friend who was just asked to lend a shoulder to cry upon, I shut-up and listened. I didn’t offer any advice because it wasn’t asked for; however, the situation that was shared with me has been burning on my mind for weeks. It is such a serious issue that I thought I’d share it here and open it up for discussion.

In a nutshell, here are the facts that color this story:

The development director is a fixture in the boardroom and gives a “development report” at every meeting.
After delivering their report, a board member asked a question about what the development department might look like in the future.
While the development director had talked with the executive director about this issue in passing on a few occasions, neither of them had formally engaged on this subject in a meaningful way.
The answer caught the executive director off guard a little bit, and they jumped into the conversation with a “sharp tongue”. This response felt demeaning to the development director, and they felt “put in their place” in front of the board of directors.
In the days following the board meeting, the development director was verbally reprimanded and given what HR people would describe as a “verbal warning”.

I am very sympathetic to my resource development friend. It feels like the response was harsh; however, as a former executive director, I hated surprises in the boardroom, and I was a bit sensitive to how my employees interacted and engaged with board members.

All of this aside, I wonder what is the appropriate role for resource development professionals inside the boardroom. Is there one? Should the boardroom just be a place for an agency’s chief executive officer and the board of directors?

I am sure there are a number of you ready to share your thoughts about how important it is for fundraising professionals to have access to board volunteers and how strong relationships with volunteers are the key to a strong resource development program.

While I will be the first to agree with you, I keep wondering why does that need to occur in the boardroom?

Don’t resource development directors “have access” at resource development committee meetings? Special event planning meetings? Over a cup of coffee or lunch?

Isn’t the boardroom a sacred place where board members and their sole employee — the executive director — get to have frank conversations about the agency and its strategic direction?

There are so many other tangent conversations I could bring into this blog post such as:

What role should an executive director play in the agency’s resource development program when there are fundraising professionals on the payroll?
What should the communication protocol be for agency employees who report to the executive director and need access to board members?
Should development professionals guard against sharing their opinions with board members when the executive director hasn’t been fully brought into the conversation? If so, how? If not, why not?

However, I want to stop the conversation just short of those topics and just focus on the boardroom question. What staff are allowed in your agency’s boardroom? What function do they serve? What protocols are in place to ensure situations like the one I just shared with you don’t happen?

Here’s to your health!

Want to change your non-profit organization? Then change your people!

May 4, 2012 DonorDreams Board development, Fundraising, organizational development, Planning, volunteers

Today, we’re focusing on a post that John titled “Burn the Boats“. In that post, he talks about two different theories of change. One school of thought advocates that changing behaviors drives organizational change. The other school of thought speaks to the idea of changing the environment / structures to affect organizational change. I just love the story John shared in the beginning of his blog post by Napoleon Hill. If you have a little time today, I strongly encourage you to click-through and read Burn the Boats.

I see non-profit organizations struggle with this ALL THE TIME. One classic example that I’ve witnessed (and have seen over and over again) is how many agencies develop a resource development plan and then go about trying to implement it.

One example that bubbles to the top of my mind is an agency that was heavily dependent on a special events strategy to raise money. They were running a special event fundraiser every other month. After completing a resource development planning process, they came to see how damaging those activities were. They decided to cut the number of events in half and pivot strongly to an individual giving strategy focused heavily on person-to-person solicitation tactics.

One big challenge was that the agency’s staff were all event minded people. They were hired because of their skill sets and experiences in planning, implementing and evaluating fundraising events. Another big hurdle was that their board of directors and fundraising volunteers were all events people, too.

To John’s point in his post “Burn the Boats,” the organization tried to persevere with its people. It asked for technical assistance from its national office. Of course, they invested in training opportunities.

In the end . . . Do I really need to finish this sentence???

I’m with John . . . BURN THE BOATS!!!!

Jim Collins in his book “From Good To Great” talks about getting the right people on the bus and then finding the right seat for them. In situations like the one I just described, I think there are ways to have polite conversations with volunteers about finding a new seat for them on the bus when the environment on the bus starts changing.

As for staff, there are two options if you’re going to “Burn the Boats”. You either gracefully terminate staff (providing severance packages, etc) or you hire more staff with the skill sets you need to implement the new plan (and find new things for the old staff to do).

I suppose there are other less harsh ways to still “burn the boats”. For example, you can ask your biggest annual campaign donor to change their annual support from an outright contribution to a challenge gift. However, this still doesn’t change the fact that there are people being asked to do something they don’t have experience or well-developed skills to do.

I respect that this is a tough post with which to start your weekend. Sorry! Do you think John and I are being too harsh? Are there better ways to go about affecting change? Do you have any examples of change at your organization that you’d like to share? Please take a moment to weigh-in using the comment box below. We can all learn from each other.

Here’s to your health!

Stop hating on the donor because its not their fault that you’re broke

April 20, 2012 DonorDreams Fundraising, organizational development

Today, we’re focusing on a post that John titled “My Other Two Dogs“. In this post, he shares an old Native American story about two dogs as it is told by Harold Kushner in his book Living a Life That Matters. It is a great story about how every day most of us struggle to maintain a balance between good and bad.

While John’s post is complex and can easily take you in many different directions, I immediately started thinking about donors. You know . . . those generous people who write checks to your non-profit organization because they believe you’re going to change the world.

I have seen this tendency to blame the donor for our woes. It doesn’t happen all of the time. It typically happens during our darkest hour when a fundraising campaign is falling short of its goal or our agency’s annual budget is projected to slip into deficit.

I’ve seen it often enough to know that this behavior is not atypical. If you’re still trying to get your arms around what I’m talking about, here are a few examples:

“If all of our donors just sacrificed a little harder and donated what it likely spend on Starbucks coffee every week, then our agency would have more than enough funding to do everything that needs to be done!”
“If every person who lives in our community would just give us $5 per year, then . . .”
“Oh yeah, sure . . . who does that guy think he is blaming the economy and the housing market for his inability to donate $50 to the annual campaign. It isn’t an inability, it is an unwillingness. Geez, it’s just fifty bucks!”

I can go on and on with examples of where we blame the donor for our woes, but I think you get the idea.

I need to also confess that one of those examples came right out of my mouth yesterday. Yes, I am a bit embarrassed because I like to think that I am a bigger person than that and a more savvy fundraising professional. However, this realization simply confirms for me that John is right on target in his post “My Other Two Dogs“.

ALL OF US (or at least most of us) are faced with this struggle for balance every single day of our lives. It manifests itself in our personal relationships, and it is likely present throughout the work day. We must work at maintaining balance because it will not naturally occur. If you’re not vigilant, then you run the risk of slipping. In the case of fundraising, you run the risk of saying something in front of a donor, board member or volunteer that could have lasting repercussions.

If your non-profit organization is struggling with fundraising, you need to look internally. The following are a few questions I suggest you ask yourself:

What does your written case for support look and sound like? Does it convincingly “make the case” for donors to write a check or can it use some tweaking?
How do your fundraising volunteers use your agency’s written case statement? Are they using it? Or does there need to be more training provided?
Do you and your fundraising volunteers look and sound like they’re having FUN while soliciting for a special event or pledge drive? Or is the energy level down and do people sound like they can’t wait for it to be done and over?
Structurally speaking . . . what tactics are you using to inject a sense of “mission-focus” into your fundraising efforts?

As John suggests in his blog post, we need to keep “feeding” the good dog so that the “bad dog” doesn’t win. I hope some of these suggestions provide you with some “food”.

Have you ever found yourself channeling that bad dog? How do you guard against it? What do you feed that good dog to remain focused on all of the right things associated with your resource development program? Please scroll down and share a few of your tips and tricks in the comment box below. We can all learn from each other.

Here’s to your health!