by Susan Detwiler | Feb 24, 2014 | governance, leadership, mission, nonprofit, Standards
How’s your Board experience?
Should you delight your board? Should you not? Is this even a question you ever contemplated?
Stop Trying to Delight Your Customers* and The Secret to Delighting Customers*
were both published by Harvard Business Review: the first in 2010; the second in 2013. Very different titles, but very similar premises. A satisfied customer is one whose whole experience is satisfactory. Not just a single episode of customer service; or a single phone call experience. It is the gestalt of the experience with the company that either keeps a customer loyal, or sends her away.
The same is true for Board experience. Have you seamlessly delivered what you promised your Directors or Trustees when they first joined the board?
Did you set out Board expectations before they accepted a Board position? Are you holding them to it?
Did you promise to keep them regularly informed? Are you delivering?
Did they expect to have meaningful, generative discussions about the future of your organizations? Are you creating an atmosphere so that can happen?
Were they passionate about your cause when they joined? Are you feeding that passion?
Did you tell them you needed their wisdom and insight to plan for the future? Are you actually using that talent?
In the course of two, four, six years of board service, there are bound to be times when a trustee’s experience on a board will be less than satisfactory. There are going to be times when finances are tight, or a capital campaign stalls, or an Executive Director leaves, or there are obnoxious people taking up board space (no, never!). But overall, have you made their Board experience worth their time and talent?
The nonprofit world focuses on the competition for dollars. But the competition for good Directors and Trustees is also fierce. Good board members ask hard questions before they join your board, and will hold you to the answers. But they’re worth their weight in gold, because with an engaged, passionate, knowledgeable board, you can aspire to higher heights.
But they’ll only stay if their Board experience keeps them coming back for more.
______________________________________________
*Read Stop Trying to Delight Your Customers
**Read The Secret to Delighting Customers
by Susan Detwiler | Feb 3, 2014 | collaboration, leadership, management, nonprofit, Uncategorized
For years, the words Appreciative Inquiry seeped into my consciousness.
It began at a two-day national development seminar, and most recently at a five-day conference for lay leaders, nonprofit professionals and clergy. By this time, it appeared everywhere, either explicitly or implicitly; there seemed to be a whole track of sessions that demonstrated appreciative inquiry in different settings.
On a very simple level, Appreciative Inquiry begins with:
- appreciating and valuing what is;
- envisioning what might be;
- engaging in dialogue about what should be; and
- innovating to create what will be.
So what does Improv Comedy have to do with Appreciative Inquiry? Good question. Two main rules of Improv Comedy are Yes, and¦ and your main focus is on your partner.
First, whatever is thrown at you, you have to accept it and build on it. 
For example, if someone picks up a banana and uses it to call you on the phone, you can’t say, you idiot, that’s a banana! You have to go with the flow, answer the phone, and say, Hey! I was just about to call you “ your Mom’s here and wants to know what you did with her gold-plated antique chamber pot she inherited from your Dad’s Aunt Phoebe in Alaska! The point is, you have to accept what has been handed to you, and figure out what to do with it.
Second, with every sentence being a potential surprise, you have to focus closely on your partner, listen to whatever is being said and try to understand where she’s going with it.
In a nonprofit setting, if a board member says, our students aren’t showing up for tutoring, the response is yes, and let’s figure out the ideal situation. If you can envision an ideal situation, then you can work towards that ideal. If you say, yes, but they’re dealing with issues at home, the buses aren’t running at the right time, their parents don’t push them¦. you’re not adding to the conversation. You’re focusing on problems and seeming defensive, instead of hearing that the board member cares about the situation and inviting him to a shared vision of a better future.
Yes, and…
acknowledges that the comment was made,
appreciates that it is a concern,
inquires into what would be better.
And starts a dialogue about creating a better future.
by Susan Detwiler | Jan 19, 2014 | collaboration, governance, management, nonprofit
They both get a bum rap!
A committee is a group of people who individually can do nothing, but who, as a group, can meet and decide that nothing can be done. Fred Allen
A committee is a group that keeps minutes and loses hours. Milton Berle
Then there’s this rubber stamp I was given, that said, Great idea! Assign a committee to foul it up!
There is an image of nonprofit board committees as the place where ideas go to die a slow and lingering death; where process overcomes inspiration; where group-think strangles innovation.
But if you’re running an organization, it’s really hard to get anything done if you can’t segment off a group of people to work on specific jobs. How do you get people to work on these jobs? You invite them. Nicely.
The problem with committees is that word: commit.
That’s especially true in today’s society. Sometimes I feel so rushed and overwhelmed, that the thought of taking on another commitment sends me screaming in the other direction “NOOOoooooo!!!!! You mean, I have to come to meetings and be obligated for two whole years???
But if someone said to me, Hey, Janet has this great idea; Joe and I are going to help her make it happen. Can you join us? my answer is probably going to at least lead to a query for more information.
Asking someone to join the Finance Committee might be deadly. Asking someone to help figure out the best way to maximize the dollars we have available for our mission¦? Well, that’s intriguing.
Being offered an idea for engaging new supporters and telling them to give the idea to a committee is disheartening. Being asked to explore the idea with others and generate ways to make it work is an invitation.
Committees aren’t inherently bad. It’s how we ask people to serve that creates the deadly atmosphere surrounding them.
Invite people to MAKE THINGS HAPPEN. Let’s change the conversation.
by Susan Detwiler | Jan 1, 2014 | governance, management, nonprofit, Uncategorized, work
I resolve to do more (fill in the blank)¦¦ in the coming year.
Congratulations! But what are going to do less of?
A simple and powerful tool for any manager, Do, Delegate, Discard is especially helpful to Executive Directors who are the lynchpin between the Board of Directors and the staff. It makes you focus on making the most of your time, and helps you make best use of the talent around you.
First, write down everything you are responsible for. Everything. That includes bringing in office snacks, managing the $5000 library fund donor and organizing the annual gala. Making thank you calls to major donors, reviewing the copier contract, meeting board members for coffee and writing the copy for the eight page monthly newsletter. Writing the development and communications plan, keeping the FAQs up-to-date, hiring, evaluating and firing staff and developing the employee handbook. Whatever it is, write it down.
Now, make three columns next to the list: Do, Delegate, Discard.
For each item on the list, decide if it’s something ONLY YOU CAN DO, something you can DELEGATE TO SOMEONE ELSE, or something that doesn’t have to be done, i.e., DISCARD.
Caution! Even if you think that only you can do it right, that doesn’t mean that only you can do it. This is where perfectionists stumble. Consider “ an Executive Director earning $80,000 a year (plus benefits), and ostensibly working 40 hours per week (ha), is earning $48/hour. Does it really make sense for you to be the author of every article for the newsletter or to maintain the FAQs? Or should you be focusing on staff development, major donors and board interactions? If you honestly believe that only you can do the job, then mark the DO column. These items should be where your organization will derive the greatest benefit from your time.
Control freaks stumble when they contemplate handing off to a subordinate. Delegating is scary, but successful delegation ultimately pays off. Staff get the chance to shine and the satisfaction of being responsible for jobs well done. So into the DELEGATE column put reviewing the copier contract, keeping FAQs up-to-date, managing and writing the newsletter, reviewing lower level staff, drafting new handbook pages. It may mean time to train your staff, but developing your staff is ultimately what will make you – and your organization – even more productive.
Superwomen and Supermen stumble on DISCARD. There is a subconscious fear that you will be thought less of if you don’t do every. single. thing. But DISCARD may be the most powerful action you can take. It forces you to stop and think about why a job is done at all. Maybe the 8 page monthly newsletter should drop to 4 pages, or bimonthly, or not even exist. What purpose does it serve; would something else serve that purpose even better? Should stewarding the library fund donor be woven into the general donor stewardship program? Are all the board reports needed? Can you move to consent agendas? Should you drop the gala that nets $20,000 but has hidden labor costs of $50,000?
Deceptively simple, Do, Delegate, Discard is a powerful tool for managing your time, and empowering your staff. It’s a great way to begin the new year, and make room for all those NEW resolutions.
by Susan Detwiler | Jun 17, 2013 | philanthropy
Did you read the BBB, Guidestar, Charity Navigator letter about The Overhead Myth ? I did. And even as I cheered the message, it felt wrong. It was written to the wrong audience. The donors who commented were not convinced.
The same day I read Michael Schrage wrote in Harvard Business Review’s Good Leaders Don’t Use Bad Words, and I saw the problem; the authors were being lazy with their words. Instead of speaking to their audience’s needs, they were speaking to their own.
Nonprofits will certainly be better served if donors don’t focus solely on overhead as a measure of competence. But what’s the upside for the donors? Why should they care? That’s where the authors fail.
Donors should be looking for measures that demonstrate value to society. Are people’s lives being changed? How lasting is the change? How is the nonprofit making sure that it’s effective? What does it need in order to stay on track? These are the measures that donors should be looking at.
Instead of telling donors that overhead is the wrong measurement, we need to help them see the benefit of seeking alternatives.
Recent Comments