We shall overcome! Celebrating MLK and non-profits 50 years later.

August 28, 2013 erik Uncategorized

Fifty years ago today, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and the civil rights movement marched on Washington D.C. and history was made. Today, all of us should take a moment to reflect and pay tribute to a great man and a powerful movement. However, I encourage you to also take another moment to think about the role that non-profit organizations played in Dr. King’s dream and the impact his message has on our sector.

First, let’s start in the beginning with this YouTube video of MLK and his famous speech of 50 years ago:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smEqnnklfYs]

When listening to Dr. King’s speech, I am most struck by how many non-profit organizations today are engaged in the struggle he articulated. His impact is still felt 50 years later, and his legacy is his gift of a “vision statement” for so many non-profit organizations.

The following is a list of non-profit organizations from 50 years ago. Do you know what they all have in common?

Alpha Phi Alpha
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)
Women’s Political Council
Southern Christian Leadership Conference
The Penn Community Services Center
Detroit Council for Human Rights
American Committee on Africa
SNCC Freedom Singers
The Fellowship of Reconciliation
The Martin Luther King Jr. Center for Nonviolent Social Change

Yes, these are all non-profit organizations with connections to MLK. If you’re interested, you should click-through to an amazing Blue Avocado article titled “Did You Know? … Ten Nonprofits that Shaped the Life of Martin Luther King Jr.”

When you go to GuideStar and type in the words “civil rights nonprofits” a list of 6,1,63 different non-profits come up under the category of Civil Rights and Liberties. While not all of these charities are tied to MLK, they are all connected to the legacy he helped sow.

Fifty years later, we use Martin Luther King Jr. Day to encourage our fellow citizens to use it as a “Day of Community Service“.

As I reflect on MLK’s accomplishments and use a non-profit lens to do so, here is what I see:

The man and his point of view was influenced by non-profits.
His movement was fueled by non-profits.
His “I have a dream” speech is a vision statement for countless civil rights organizations to this very day.
His messages and his tactics are his enduring legacy, and these things are still used by all sorts of non-profit organizations.
The national holiday celebrating his birthday has transformed into a day of service benefiting countless non-profit organizations.

It is an amazing legacy with non-profit fingerprints and connectivity associated with it. I hope you have a few moments to reflect on all of this today.

Do you have a dream? What is your non-profit organization’s dream? How is your organization’s mission and vision rooted in Dr. King’s iconic “Dream speech“? Please use the comment box below to share your thoughts or just leave a tribute to MLK.

Here’s to your health . . . “Let freedom ring!”

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

What does the non-profit leader of tomorrow look like?

August 27, 2013 erik Board development, Board governance

sleepless1 Last week a dear non-profit friend of mine from California couldn’t sleep. She tossed and she turned. Ultimately, she got out of bed, turned on her computer and started talking into a microphone. When I woke up in the morning in my bed in Elgin, Illinois, there was an email sitting in my inbox with a voice file attachment. Her words have tumbled around in my head for a week, and I’ve decided to enlist your support in dissecting them.

The gist of her recording pertained to non-profit boards. Here is a synopsis of what she said:

There are too many non-profit boards that just don’t work.
Too many board members either don’t understand their roles/responsibilities or turn a blind eye to certain roles that make them feel uncomfortable (e.g fundraising and resource acquisition).
Are there occupations that are better suited for non-profit board leadership (e.g. finance people compared to artists)?
Should non-profit agencies incorporate personality testing into their board development process because certain personalities are better suited to serving on a non-profit board?

After a week of contemplative thought, I honestly don’t know how I feel about anything she said. I am looking forward to you weighing in with your thoughts using the comment box at the bottom of this blog.

Here is what I have concluded:

Boardroom diversity is important. We don’t need all of the same types of people sitting around a table in a simulated echo chamber. (I am not implying that was what she was saying, but I do worry that it could be an unintended consequence.)
Understanding roles/responsibilities and executing them are vital to non-profit health. The non-profit sector needs to get better at recruitment, management and evaluation or suffer the consequences.
The characteristics and traits of an effective non-profit executive director (aka CEO) are changing with the times, and hiring the right person might make all the difference in the world when it comes to board development, board governance and team cohesiveness from the front line to the boardroom.

sleepless2 After listening to my friend’s recording, I started Googling around and searching for anything that anyone might have written about characteristics and traits of effective boards. I was especially intrigued by her question about incorporating personality testing into the board development process. After all, many workplaces are incorporating this type of assessment into their employee hiring process.

I didn’t really find much of anything that resonated, but there was some interesting stuff on Myers-Briggs personality testing that pertained to the non-profit sector. Here are some of the better links:

Nonprofit People blog: “An Introduction to Myers-Briggs“
Brad Rourke’s blog: “Myers-Briggs in the Nonprofit Workplace: How to Lead with J’s and P’s“
Nonprofit Resource Network: Resources Page

While I suspect you may find these links interesting, they still didn’t help me process what my sleepy California friend had ignited in my head. And then I came across an online post at Ivey Business Journal titled “Profiling the Non-Profit Leader of Tomorrow“.

This article focused on the executive director as the linchpin to what my friend had identified. They identified 15 “must-have” attributes that a non-profit leader must possess in order to be successful. Those attributes are as follows:

Competencies

Strategic thinker
Relationship builder
Collaborative decision-maker
Entrepreneurial achiever
Effective communicator
Change leader
Inspiring motivator

Personality Traits

High integrity
Adaptable/Agile
Perseverant/Patient
Interpersonal sensitivity
Passionate about the mission

Knowledge/Expertise

Financial acumen
Deep sector-specific knowledge
Understanding & valuing diversity

I suspect a number of these competencies and skill sets also can be applied to your board development process.

If I’ve piqued your curiosity — and I suspect that I have — then I encourage you to click-through to the Ivey Business Journal article and keep reading. Enjoy!

Take a good hard look in the mirror this morning. How many of these attributes do you possess? How do you know you possess them? Do you conduct 360 assessments asking for your employees’ feedback? If so, what do they say about you and these attributes? Does your board development process look for volunteers with these attributes? If so, what tools do you use to help identify these attributes?

In addition to sharing your thoughts about these questions in the comment box below, I welcome your thoughts about the question I asked earlier in this post about my friend’s online recording.

We can all learn from each other. Please take a minute out of your busy day to share with your fellow non-profit friends.

Here’s to your health!

What are your non-profit agency’s foolish consistency and hobgoblins?

August 23, 2013 erik Fundraising, Planning

Welcome to O.D. Fridays at DonorDreams blog. Every Friday for the foreseeable future we will be looking at posts 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 post titled “Adoring Hobgoblins,” John dissects the following quotation from Ralph Waldo Emerson: “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines.” He explains to readers that consistency can be a good thing, but it suddenly becomes a bad thing when it interferes with our good judgement and results in poor actions.

Reading this Emerson quotation set my mind down two different paths this morning. So, what the heck? Let’s go down two roads this morning.

Don’t have a written resource development plan?

It is a best practice in my book to engage board members and fundraising volunteers every year in a process that results in a written resource development plan (aka fundraising plan). It should provide definition and explanation to the revenue side of your agency budget.

Do you know how many non-profit organizations — big and small — with which I’ve worked that don’t do this? OMG . . . it is a crazy BIG number.

So, what do those organizations do if they aren’t operating with a resource development plan?

Yep . . . you guessed it. They are relying on “consistency” and sometimes it is “foolish consistency“.

For example, one organization I worked with many years ago didn’t see the need to develop an annual fundraising plan and pointed to their special event fundraisers as something they’ve been doing forever. One of their events had been run for more than two decades.

Their conclusion . . . “why waste time — that we don’t have — on writing this stuff down, especially when it hasn’t changed in two decades?”

hobgoblin Well, huh? Let me see here. Every good planning process begins with an assessment /evaluation which springboards off into goal setting, strategy development and action planning. If the organization I just referenced hadn’t been so “foolishly consistent,” they would’ve seen the following:

The revenue from their signature event plateaued 13 years ago and has been in steady decline ever since
Many of the people attending their event sit at corporate tables, and they do so anonymously. There were no strategies in place to capture individual donor data, which means the cultivation effect of that event is lost on those people.
Many of the individuals who were die-hard supporters of that event were likely capable and willing to contribute more, but there were no upgrade strategies in place. So, money was being left on the table.
There were hundreds of donors over a 20 year time span who had attended this event a few times and then stopped. There were no strategies to re-engage those lapsed donors either in the event or other places in the agency’s resource development plan.

If I’m not mistaken, these four bullet points are the personification of that “hobgoblin” in Emerson’s famous quotation. And, boy oh boy, what an ugly little hobgoblin it is.

I know that some people think of planning processes as a “foolish consistency“. I obviously DO NOT! In fact, I see it as just the opposite. A well-run planning process of any kind should:

help your organization look at things differently
keep a fresh perspective
engage in dynamic brainstorming
inspire change that keeps your agency’s growing

This brings me to the last portion of Emerson’s quotation “. . . adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines“. I would love to add the words “board volunteers and agency staff“.

small mind The board members and executive director of the agency I reference in the example above certainly were “little“. I say this because their “foolish consistency” and unwillingness to do any assessment and planning had locked them into being a certain size. When you looked at their agency budget, they had brought in the same amount of revenue for the last 10 years.

Think about that for a moment. When you factor in inflation, this agency was contracting and raising less and less money every year. Foolish? Yes! Hobgoblins? Yes!! YES!! Little? Yes!!! Yes!!! Yes!!!

If your agency operates with a December 31st year-end fiscal year, then your budget construction process should be starting soon. If this is the case, then your resource development planning process should also be starting soon.

Do you need help with that planning process? If so, I know someone you should call who can help . . . you know who I mean. 😉

The other road referenced?

In the beginning of this blog post, I said John’s post centered on Ralph Waldo Emerson’s quotation set my mind down two different paths this morning.

When I first read John’s post, I immediately thought of how many times I’ve heard from non-profit board members, executive directors and fundraising professionals the following words:

“That’s not the way we do things around here”

Not only are these words (or other words that sound or mean the same thing) the equivalent of nails on a chalkboard, but they are downright poisonous to your non-profit organization.

I’ve run out of space, but luckily Seth Godin did a nice job of succinctly and eloquently addressing this issue on his blog. If you have 15 more seconds, then you really need to click-through and read Seth’s thoughts on these nine dangerous words.

Can you identify your agency’s “silly consistencies“? If so, what are they? Can you describe those hobgoblins? If so, what do they look like? Please scroll down and share your examples and thoughts as well as what you plan on doing about it in the comment box below. Why? Because we can all learn from each other.

Here’s to your health!

Raising money — one, unproductive $5 sale at a time

August 22, 2013 erik Fundraising

Dani Robbins is the Founder & Principal Strategist at Non Profit Evolution located in Columbus, Ohio. Dani typically blogs about board development and governance related topics on the first Wednesday of each month, but I just couldn’t resist publishing this awesome piece that she wrote about fundraising. Dani also recently co-authored a book titled “Innovative Leadership Workbook for Nonprofit Executives” that you can find on Amazon.com.

Raising money — one, unproductive $5 sale at a time

By Dani Robbins
Originally published at Akron Beacon Journal and Ohio.com

My daughter recently has been asked to raise money for three organizations: our school PTA, our Temple and Girl Scouts. Last year, she raised money for the American Heart Association’s Jump-A-Thon. She is an amazing fund-raiser. I am incredibly proud of her. She’s 7.

We get a weekly fund-raising request from one organization or another – Market Days, sign up your grocery card, click this website — once a day. Can this really be our plan?

I do not want to go to our friends and family three different times (or more) this season alone to ask for $1 to $30 each time. They do not want to buy nuts, a magazine or an entertainment book. (OK, they may want to buy that.) They will buy whatever my daughter is selling to support her, just as I will buy whatever their children are selling to support them.

When I was a kid, we took our UNICEF cans along with us as we went trick or treating. I walked in the MS Walk-A-Thon, and I probably would have sold Girl Scout cookies had I stuck around long enough. My parents gave blood, supported a variety of charities and taught my brother and me that we each had an obligation to work to make the world a better place. I teach my children the same thing. Yet, even so, I keep thinking: “What are we doing?”

People give to people. I know it well. I’ve lived it. I teach it professionally.

Seventy-five percent of all giving in the United States in 2009 was individual giving. That’s giving, not buying. That may be why this makes me so crazy. lt’s because I know that selling things to raise money $5 at a time is not a good use of anyone’s time or precious resources.

Wouldn’t it be easier if the institution’s leader, or whomever you know the best, said: “We need this much money at a minimum, can you please invest in us – volunteer or support us financially or better yet, both?”

Some people don’t readily have an extra few bucks but have some time and are very willing to work to support institutions they believe in. Others have a few extra bucks they are willing to share, but no time. Some, who are a blessing to their communities, share freely of their time, and also their resources.

kidsselling2 There are exceptions to my general rule of “no selling”. The Girl Scouts and Boy Scouts sell cookies and popcorn very well. Their troops, which are volunteer-led, rely on those sales for most of their troop activities. Good for them! There are also
people who buy things who would never think to write a check to an organization. (To those people, I ask you to please find an organization that you believe in and write a check. Why should you? Because you can — and they need your help.)

The main reason that I advocate against selling things, in addition to the significant safety issues for our children, is the minimal return for the organization. Our community’s organizations have to raise money. They can spend time figuring out what to sell, coordinating the sale, selling and collecting money from the sale. Or they can spend time creating a plan to ask individuals for money, asking, thanking people and telling them what they did with their money.

Which is a better use of our time and energy? Which is a better return for the organization? Hands down, I advocate the latter.

Other than Scouting, let’s stop selling things or, at a minimum, asking our children to sell things. Let’s build our ability to ask for money. Let’s thank people for their money. Let’s tell them what we did with their money. Let’s keep them engaged. Let’s talk more about what our institutions contribute to our community and what they truly need to be viable. When our community’s institutions are viable, we are all better off.

This post was originally published at Akron Beacon Journal and Ohio.com and is republished with the permission of Dani Robbins. You can find this article at: http://www.ohio. com/editorial/commentary/’l 04925649. html

Please stop using the economy as your whipping post

August 21, 2013 erik Fundraising

Yesterday, I was on the phone with a board volunteer. We were talking about their organization’s annual campaign efforts. In the middle of that conversation, this volunteer launched into a full-blown rant about the state of the economy and why no one has any money anymore to give to charity. It was all I could do to keep from screaming. I am so tired of hearing this kind of thing.

I know. I know. Things are still tight. Recovery is slow. Some people are still hurting terribly. We’ll most likely never return to the days we knew before the Great Recession. There is a New Normal.

However, please humor me and take a look at the following chart from the Giving USA Foundation which was published on the National Philanthropic Trust blog:

charitable giving stats

Do you see what I see?

2007 was the high water mark for charitable giving
2008 and 2009 were nightmares. As our economy entered a state of free fall, so too did charitable giving
We’ve seen very positive growth in 2010, 2011 and 2012

We haven’t recovered everything that was lost in the crash. I suspect that will take many more years . . . BUT the growth is real and the sector isn’t in a state of free fall anymore. We’ve come out of the tunnel, and we’ve been on the other side for quite some time. It may not be what we had hoped for, but this is what recovery looks like. Deal with it!

excuses I am of the opinion that those of us who still use the economy to explain our shortcomings are simply making excuses. In fact, let me take it a step further. Invoking the economy to explain your poor fundraising performance is nothing short of excuse making.

If you have a moment, please click-through to the National Philanthropic Trust blog. They have captured a number of very nice philanthropy statistics all in one place. Here are just a few that I find interesting:

88% of households give to charity.
The average annual household contribution is $2,213 while the mean is $870.
Charitable giving accounted for 2% of gross domestic product in 2010

I am not suggesting that “Happy Days Are Here Again,” but can we please stop the excuse making?

If your fundraising efforts are dragging, there are likely many other explanations other than the straw-man argument of the economy. Furthermore, if you accept the economy as the reason, then you are likely blinded to all of the other reasons. Here are just a few of those possible explanations:

You have the wrong people sitting around the table
You’re using the wrong campaign model for the talent you’ve assembled around your table
You’re not stewarding your donors correctly
Your focus is too much on donor acquisition and not enough on donor retention
Your case for support is stale and not as compelling as it used to be

This list can go on and on, but you’ll never know the real reasons unless you invest in evaluation efforts and reject silly explanations such as “the economy ate my homework“.

So, what should an executive director or fundraising professional do when faced with volunteers who refuse to face facts?

Be a leader!

I’m not suggesting you tell volunteers they are wrong. Don’t launch into a full-blown rant like I’ve done this morning. But leaders lead and you may want to try doing the following:

Empathize . . . they are grieving the lack of results from their collective efforts
Agree with what is obvious (e.g. the economy is sluggish)
Inject truth into the conversation (e.g. people are still giving, donors are still being generous, charitable giving has rebounded nationally over the last three years)
Suggest that a more thorough critique of your situation might help uncover more facts that will help you make adjustments to next year’s efforts
Stand tall and make the case for thoughtful evaluation, ROI calculation and critique

There is a New Normal in America when it comes to the economy. What you did before the recession might not work now quite the same way it did back then. They only way to fix this situation is to not accept excuses like the economy, discover the real reasons, and put new strategies in place to deal with the New Normal.

I am tired of the excuses. In fact, I believe accepting those excuses is dangerous for your non-profit organization because it keeps you from moving forward. Do you agree? If so, how are you dealing with it? Have you had any success in moving your volunteers forward? Please use the comment box to share your success stories and strategies. We can all learn from each other.

Here’s to your health!

Non-profit CEOs need to be themselves

August 16, 2013 erik Uncategorized

In a post simply titled “You,” John talks about how important it is that people try to be themselves and not other things to other people. Not only is it important, but it is courageous, stressful and scary.

John’s post got me thinking about those days when I was an executive director. Looking back, I now see that on most days I was not trying to be ME. I was trying to be the position, which when you think about it is a crazy thing.

Here are just a few of the things I remember:

My CEO friend Karen was a hard worker. She obviously worked long, tireless hours and was attentive to every last detail at her agency. I saw her successes and thought I could replicate it by working insanely hard.
My CEO friend Marc was one of the best fundraisers I ever met. His polish and ability to effortlessly build meaningful and lasting relationships with donors was the key to his success. I saw his successes and thought I could replicate it by being friendly, approachable and social with donors.
My CEO friend Gretchen was soooooo passionate about her mission. She would give selflessly of herself until there was nothing left to give if it meant helping a client. I saw her successes and thought I could replicate it by constantly talking to anyone who would listen about my organization and clients.
My CEO friend Fred was persistent. He believed there was nothing in this world that couldn’t be successfully accomplished as long as you kept at it. I saw his successes and thought I could replicate it by bringing that proverbial “can of elbow grease” to every board meeting, committee meeting, and project.

Please don’t misunderstand what I am saying. I believe coaching and mentoring are very important when it comes to success. I am so grateful to everyone who influenced the type of executive director I became. If you don’t have coaching or mentoring relationships, I suggest that you figure that out quickly.

be you2 However, John’s post gives me cause for pause. I wonder if I was so wrapped up in what a good non-profit CEO looked like that I forgot to look in the mirror and be myself.

Maybe not … maybe so. It doesn’t matter because it is all in the past, and I can’t change any of it even if I wanted to. And yet that isn’t the case for YOU if you are still working on the front line.

If you haven’t done so yet, click-through to John’s post, read it and reflect upon these simple questions:

Are you being you? How do you know you are being you? If you are holding back, what are you afraid of? What would be the consequences of letting the entire you shine through?

Not totally related to this post, but still important questions you should be asking:

Are you letting your organization consume you?
Are you giving more to the agency than you are to your family or to you?
Are you taking professional things way to personally?

If you’re answering YES to any of these last few questions, then perhaps you’re not being YOU. You might be trying to be your organization or your position. Maybe … maybe not. But it is worth thinking about don’t you think?

Here’s to your health!

What revenue model is your non-profit agency using?

August 15, 2013 erik Board development, Fundraising

source of funds More than a year ago, I stumbled upon a fun article published in the Stanford Social Innovation Review (SSIR) titled “Ten Nonprofit Funding Models“. It provided clarity for me around what I was seeing in the non-profit sector. So, I bookmarked it and re-read it from time-to-time. Recently, I’ve found myself talking to a number of different non-profit professionals and board volunteers about this article, which is usually a sure sign that I better blog about it.

As you know, there are many different types of organizations calling themselves members of the non-profit sector.

Churches
Universities
Hospitals
Arts organizations
Membership organizations (e.g. chamber of commerce, etc)
Human Services/Social Services

Each of these types of non-profit organizations look very different. Each board has different wrinkles, and their revenue models also take on a different complexion.

The SSIR article by William Landes Foster, Peter Kim, & Barbara Christiansen names and describes ten different funding models:

Heartfelt Connector
Beneficiary Builder
Member Motivator
Big Bettor
Public Provider
Policy Innovator
Beneficiary Broker
Resource Recycler
Market Maker
Local Nationalizer

Some of you are probably wondering what each of these models means. I encourage you to click-through to the SSIR article and read it for yourself. Those authors do a great job of breaking down each of the models.

What I’ve found myself talking to many non-profit professionals and board members about lately isn’t which revenue model they’re using. My conversations have been rooted in what the authors of this article say in their final few paragraphs:

“In the current economic climate it is tempting for nonprofit leaders to seek money wherever they can find it, causing some nonprofits to veer off course. That would be a mistake. During tough times it is more important than ever for nonprofit leaders to examine their funding strategy closely and to be disciplined about the way that they raise money. We hope that this article provides a framework for nonprofit leaders to do just that.”

In my opinion, it is so true that many non-profit organizations have sought money wherever they can find it, especially once they realized that the economy isn’t going to just snap back into place and we now find ourselves in a “New Normal”.

board of directors4 So, the conversations I’ve been referencing throughout this post have to do with board development and not the actual revenue models.

I believe that non-profit organizations build their boards around their revenue model. For example, if your agency is highly dependent on fees, then you probably haven’t recruited world-class fundraising volunteers to sit on your board. The same holds true for organizations with a government funding revenue model.

So, when you start tinkering with your revenue model (e.g. adding an event, pledge drive, direct mail, etc), I believe it creates tension in the boardroom for two reasons:

You’re asking people to do something that wasn’t part of the original deal.
You’re also asking people to do something they aren’t likely good at doing.

If you find yourself in the position of having to tweak your revenue model, I suggest the following:

Facilitate a conversation in the boardroom and build consensus around the idea of changing or tweaking your revenue model. Make sure all consequences are understood and appreciated.
Ask your board governance committee to complete a new gap assessment based upon some of the new roles you’re asking board members to take on.
Focus your board recruitment efforts on bringing in new board volunteers to help fill your newly identified gaps.
Allow current board members to step off the board gracefully and help them find a new seat on the bus where they can still participate in your mission.
If you need a blended board to make your blended revenue model work, then deliberately talk about roles and responsibilities in the board room to avoid misunderstandings between volunteers.

The New Normal may have thrown your organization a curveball, but it doesn’t mean you need to go through a dysfunctional transition. A little bit of thoughtfulness and board engagement can go a long way.

Did you click-through and read the Stanford Social Innovation Review article? If so, what were your thoughts? Which revenue model is your agency using? Do you find yourself tweaking your revenue model in an effort to adapt to The New Normal? How is your board handling the transition?

Please scroll down and share your thoughts and observations in the comment box below. We can all learn from each other.

Here’s to your health!

Mmmmm … strategy for breakfast again?

August 9, 2013 erik Board development, Fundraising, organizational development, volunteers

In a post titled “Making Breakfast,” John talks about how “culture eats strategy for breakfast“. He is referencing the importance of your organizational culture in everything you do. Of course, John says it in a way that only an organizational development professional can:

“The strategy required specific organizational knowledge, competencies, and behaviors to effectively execute and deliver the results as envisioned. And the organization didn’t have those. So with every presentation of the strategy, I was conflicted. Despite being consistently motivated by the possibility, I was increasingly concerned about the capability.”

In 2006, I made what I’ve now come to see as a brave decision when I left the front line and took a job as an internal consultant working for a national non-profit organization. For five years, I woke up every morning (usually in a hotel room somewhere on the road) and learned over and over again that culture eats strategy for breakfast.

To broadly and simply define my job . . . I was “Strategy Man”. My employer armed me with a 110 page manual focused on how to plan, organize, develop, implement and evaluate an annual campaign pledge drive. In addition to that manual, I was provided tons of tools, templates and samples that filled my consultants toolbox.

Some of you might be thinking “Easy, peasy, lemon squeezy.” But you would be way off target. Why? Because culture eats strategy for breakfast!

So, picture this . . .

I walk into an organization’s boardroom and sit down with a group of agency staff and volunteer board members. I pull out my PowerPoint presentation and lots of other shiny objects. Nothing up my sleeve … right? This fundraising thing is easy. Making an in-person, face-to-face fundraising solicitation is as easy as following these simple 12-steps.

When I was done selling the sizzle (e.g. teaching fundraising strategies), I was often met with resistance, bombarded with reasons why it wouldn’t work and told why they wouldn’t do it that way (e.g. organizational culture).

breakfast1 Do you see it? Culture eats strategy!

If your non-profit organization has hired staff who don’t possess fundraising skill sets and don’t have a track record of success with resource development, then sitting through a meeting listening to “strategy” can be arduous and sometimes downright frightening. The typical response is “resistance,” which is what John means when he says culture eats strategy for breakfast.

The same explanation holds true for your organization’s board of directors.

If you are just recruiting warm bodies to fill chairs around your boardroom table without being intentional, then you probably have a boardroom of people who say things like: “Ask me to do anything, but please don’t ask me to fundraise.” (If I had a nickle for every time I heard that expression, I’d be retired and living on a tropical island sipping cool drinks in the shade.)

“If you want strategies to work, then you need to have the right people sitting around the table!”

Hire the right people. Recruit the right volunteers. Be intentional.

Last week, I was told by a board volunteer that he didn’t appreciate all of this talk about developing and following a board development process to increase the size of his board of directors. He kept arguing that we should throw process out the window and ask every existing board volunteer to ask a friend of theirs to join the board. Doing so would double the size of the board much quicker than how I was suggesting they do it.

breakfast2 Hmmmm … looking back at that meeting, I think he was cooking up a hearty breakfast for me.

Some of you are probably wondering if your hiring and recruitment practices are intentional. If you answer ‘YES’ to many of the following questions, then you are probably being intentional:

Do you have a board development committee focused on growing the board?
Do you use tools that set expectations for prospective new board members (e.g. written volunteer position descriptions and commitment pledges)? Do you share these tools with prospects before asking them to join your board?
Do you build prospect lists with the thought of filling gaps and acquiring volunteers with specific skill sets and experiences?
Are you doing some informal background checking (e.g. asking friends and acquaintances about their current commitments, passions, past experiences, etc) before prioritizing who you plan on approaching first?
Are you able to rattle off a list of characteristics and traits of a successful board volunteer? How about a successful fundraising volunteer?

If you want to succeed at whatever your organization is looking at doing, then first ask yourself if your agency “possesses the organizational knowledge, competencies, and behaviors to effectively execute and deliver the results as envisioned“. If not, then you need to work on organizational culture first before introducing strategies into the discussion.

How do you change organizational culture? Be intentional!

If you choose to plow forward with strategy with a blind eye turned towards culture, then you better be hungry for a large heaping breakfast plate. 😉

Have you ever had to change the people (e.g. staff, board, etc) who were sitting around your table? If so, how did you do it? What lessons did you learn? Do you have a very intentional board development process? Scroll down and use the comment box to share your thoughts and experiences.

Here’s to your health!

Non-profit Governance: The Work of the Board, part 3

August 8, 2013 erik Board governance

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.

Governance: The Work of the Board, part 3

Setting policy

By Dani Robbins

policies1 Welcome to part three of our five-part series on Governance. We have already discussed the Board’s role in Hiring, Supporting and Evaluating the Executive and Acting as the Fiduciary Responsible Agent. Today, let’s discuss the Board’s role in setting policy.

As previously mentioned, Boards are made up of appointed community leaders who are collectively responsible for governing an organization. As outlined in my favorite Board book Governance as Leadership and summarized in The Role of the Board, the Fiduciary Mode is where governance begins for all boards and ends for too many. I encourage you to also explore the Strategic and Generative Modes of Governance, which will greatly improve your board’s engagement, and also their enjoyment.

At a minimum, governance includes:

Setting the Mission, Vision and Strategic Plan,
Hiring, Supporting and Evaluating the Executive Director,
Acting as the Fiduciary Responsible Agent,
Setting Policy, and
Raising Money.

One of my goals for this post is to rectify the common practice in the field of people telling nonprofit executives and boards how things should be done without any instruction as to what that actually means or how to accomplish it.

What setting policy means is:

The board discusses and votes to approve (or not) all policies and plans. Policies are usually recommended by (and often written by) the CEO, also called the Executive Director. Plans are usually drafted by committee. Both must be approved by the Board.

Procedures, on the other hand, are set by the CEO, often in consultation with the staff. The difference is the difference between the rules and the law. You can get fired for violating a policy (law), but not usually a procedure (rule).

Policies, plans, and procedures set the boundaries for people to act.

policies2 I recommend organizations have the following policies:

Personnel
Financial
Crisis Management and Communication
Conflict of Interest
Confidentiality
Whistle Blowing/Ethics

Policies dictate what happens in defined set of circumstances. I occasionally get calls from people who want to create a policy they don’t really need because they are trying to avoid addressing an issue directly. Do not create a policy to avoid having a conversation. Have the conversation, and then decide if you need a policy.

That said there are policies you definitely need.

For example (and among other things), the personnel policy determines what benefits staff get; the financial policy sets who can sign checks and for what amount; the crisis communication policy determines who speaks for the organization; the crisis management plan dictates what to do if there is an intruder; the conflict of interest policy states how conflicts are managed; the confidentially policy requires a process to protect information; and a whistle blower policy provides a path to report violations.

A reporter sticking a camera in the face of your most disengaged staff member is not the time to decide who speaks for your organization. Having a crisis communication policy will make all the difference in the organization’s ability to continue to provide services after a crisis, and the community’s ability to be confident in your ability to do so. The absence of a single point of contact allows for a variety of messages from a multitude of people — who may or may not be affiliated with your organization — to be shared with the community, which at a best will dilute your ability to control the story and at worst will open the door to a new set of issues for people to judge you by. As all of our moms taught us, a reputation takes a lifetime to build and just a few minutes to destroy.

plans1 Policies address today. Plans take you into the future.

I recommend organizations have the following plans:

Board Development
Marketing
Resource Development
Strategic Plan
Succession Plan

Plans determine what path you will follow in what circumstances.

For example (and among other things), a Board Development plan dictates what process will be followed to bring on new Board members; a marketing plan determines what materials you will create and how they will be disseminated; a resource development plan lays out how you will raise contributed income; a strategic plan states where you are going as an organization and how you plan to get there; and a succession plan ensures continuity by outlining how leadership will be perpetuated.

Plans, policies and procedures can address or eliminate many of the issues that come up on a day-to-day basis that distract from your mission and moving the needle for your community.

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

Non-profit Governance: The Work of the Board, part 2

August 7, 2013 erik Board governance

Governance: The Work of the Board, part 2

Acting as the Fiduciary Responsible Agent

By Dani Robbins

fiduciary2 Welcome to part two of our five-part series on Governance. The first post reviewed the Board’s role in Hiring, Supporting and Evaluating the Executive. Today, let’s discuss the Board’s role as the fiduciary responsible agent, which is quite different from the fiduciary mode outlined in my favorite Board book Governance as Leadership and summarized in The Role of the Board. Fiduciary responsibility is one of the 5 pieces of the fiduciary mode, which is where governance begins for all boards and ends for too many.

As previously mentioned, Boards are made up of appointed community leaders who are collectively responsible for governing an organization. That includes:

Setting the Mission, Vision and Strategic Plan,
Hiring, Supporting and Evaluating the Executive Director,
Acting as the Fiduciary Responsible Agent,
Setting Policy, and
Raising Money.

What it means to meet your fiduciary responsibility is:

It is the Board’s role to:

Read, understand and approve the financials
Review, understand and approve the audit, as appropriate
Review and sign the 990
Understand how the programs tie to the mission and the number of people served in those programs as well as the program’s impact

What that means is:

Financial statements should be prepared by the assigned staff or volunteer and reviewed by Finance Committee, often Chaired by the Treasurer, and then presented, by that Treasurer, to the full Board every time the full Board meets. Members of the Board should receive and review the information in advance and come to meetings prepared to ask questions and continue to ask questions until they understand and are willing to have their name listed as having approved the financials. Once questions have been answered and all members are satisfied, the financial statements should be voted upon and either approved or sent back to committee with instructions to be addressed.

Please do not vote for something you do not understand. When I do this training with Boards, I often say, the Exec will just get fired; Board members will go to jail. I’m only mostly kidding. The Exec will likely go to jail too. Either way, the community and the law will hold you as a Board member responsible.

audit4 The audit is prepared by an independent accounting firm in an effort to assess if the organization is operating in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and also within their commitments. Different audits are required based on the amount of government funding that is received. The costs of such audits vary depending on the budget size, revenue streams, and also the quality of the financial systems and the need to for the auditor to clean up those systems.

Audits should be bid out, in conjunction with organizational policy, every few years. The auditor that is selected should conduct the audit and also come to the Board meeting to present their findings and answers any questions that Board members may have.

Auditors also prepare and should explain a management letter which includes suggestions on improvements that could be made. Such letters didn’t used to be, but are now regularly requested by funders so it is imperative the Board is aware of what’s included within and have discussed the ramifications of accepting, and also not accepting the recommendations.

Most agencies pay for an audit to be done every year; some less often but still on a specific schedule driven by policy. The audit is submitted with most grant requests, to the national office of most affiliated organizations, as applicable and is given out frequently to anyone who requests a copy. Some organizations post a copy on their website.

The firm that prepares the audit is usually also the firm that prepares the 990, which is the tax return that non profits file each year. The 990 should be reviewed by the Board, prior to being submitted, and should be signed by the Treasurer. It is often signed by the CEO, but it should be signed by the Treasurer or another member of the Executive Committee.

mission Finally, as part of meeting their fiduciary responsibility, the Board should understand how the programs tie to the mission, the number of people served in those programs as well as the impact of that program.

This does not mean the Board needs to be –- or even should be — in the weeds of programming.

It is the CEO’s responsibility to ensure the program’s creation, implementation, management and evaluation. It is the Board’s responsibility to understand how such programs are aligned with the mission and the vision of the organization, the impact of that program on the clients your serve as well as the number of people served by those programs.

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.

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