by Susan Detwiler | Jul 22, 2014 | fundraising, governance, leadership, mission, nonprofit
*Big Hairy Audacious Goal
I’m a really big advocate for starting any project with a Vision.
Where’s your horizon?
What do you need to get there?
What steps do you have to take?
Sometimes, though, even the steps to get there require a lot of little steps first. This is especially true when the people involved haven’t experienced much success.
That’s a pitfall of focusing on the Big Hairy Audacious Goal. As proposed by Jim Collins, et al, the BHAG is important for inspiring the troops. I agree, our BHAG “ our Vision “ is the horizon to which we are pointing all our efforts.
However, when the troops are downtrodden or haven’t worked together in the past, they may not have the self-confidence or a level of trust to focus on an audacious goal. In this case, small successes pave the way.
I watched this in action at a private school with an aging, authoritarian founder. The board of this school is hand selected by the founder and will not take a step without his approval. This founder does not let anyone but himself meet with those he considers major donors. The school is viewed as his school; a cult of personality.
The obvious question is whether the school will continue much beyond the founder’s life. Or rather, the question was obvious to everyone except, it seemed, the founder.
I met with a handful of lay leaders who knew they had to find a way to build supporters with a loyalty to the school, not just to the founder. They also knew the founder would resist every step of the way.
A Big Hairy Audacious Goal for this group would be for the school to have a true governing board, with a succession plan for the founder, deep and broad relationships with existing donors, and plans for growing the image of the school distinct from the founder.
That’s quite a BHAG. But the initial need was to inspire the confidence needed to act without the founder’s permission.
We began with just meeting to discuss the issues. It may have seemed like nothing happened, but the mere fact that the meetings were being held began the process of instilling confidence in the actors and a trust in each other. Having meetings about board and school issues without the founder was a huge step.
Discussions revolved around ways to engage prospective supporters and advocates without relying on the founder. They knew that trying to wrestle existing supporters from his stewardship would cause a head-on collision. Instead, they sought ways to expand the circle. It took six months to get to the point of reaching out to potential supporters, yet those six months of meeting for a shared purpose served to build confidence.
Although certain the new ideas were unnecessary, the founder was willing to let the lay group reach prospective supporters outside his circle. After persevering, they reached one high-profile but previously unappreciated individual who became convinced of the group’s sincerity, the value of the school, and ultimately, the value of their BHAG. Together, he and the lay leaders crafted a process that used his influence to approach the founder and reinforce the goals of the group.
As I write this, there are still many steps to take. The culture is slowly changing. The founder is still reluctant to release the reins, but he has accepted that change is needed.
I don’t know if this school will be able to make all the necessary changes. However, I do know that without first building self-confidence in the lay leaders, they would not be in a position to make any changes at all.
Have you encountered boards reluctant to take on Big Hairy Audacious Goals? Try building confidence with small successes.
And let me know if you have other examples! You can reach me at: sdetwiler@detwiler.com.
Susan
by Susan Detwiler | Jul 5, 2014 | governance, nonprofit, social media, Uncategorized
I had occasion to do my first self-video this week. It was a one-minute spot to introduce a program I’m presenting at an upcoming nonprofit conference.
No problem, right? Go into my Macbook Pro. Fire up the Photo Booth program, and record my introduction.
Then reality set in.
I needed to be sure of what I was going to say, so I didn’t stumble.
My computer is generally below my direct line of sight, but I didn’t want to be looking down at the camera.
How do I look at the camera and still read my notes? How does my hair look? Is my office tidy?
After a little manipulation, I raised my computer so it was directly in front of me. I typed my notes into a document so I could see them on the screen as I looked at the camera. I stacked the books behind me, combed my hair and put on lipstick.
I recorded the spot. Then I recorded it again “ apparently I tend to swivel in my desk chair when I talk. Then I recorded it again “ I also tend to bite my lip during pauses. Then I recorded it again “ I stumbled over a few words.
In all, it took a full hour and 10 takes before I was satisfied. The DonorPerfect conference organizer laughed and said that was on the low end for all his staff who were recording videos.
Wow. Way to internalize a lesson I’ve been telling nonprofit boards about for the past few years!
When you see organizations with great social media presence, they make it look easy. This very small episode is a reminder that it’s not easy. It takes work to have a great presence. It takes planning and it takes forethought.
The idea for video promos came from a smart, full-time communications professional, who is coordinating the video uploads for all the conference facilitators. It’s part of a comprehensive marketing campaign that integrates with the organization‘s educational goals. It’s not scatter-shot. It’s planned and strategic, with specific objectives and accountability.
When Directors and Trustees suggest you get a college or high school student to do the social media, feel free to show them this post. If you want a consistent message, and a fully integrated consistent presence in front of your clients, supporters, members, volunteers and staff, it takes planning and it takes time.
Once upon a time we told people to learn computer programming. We don’t anymore. Computers are now just a tool we all use to get our work done. That time has come for social media. Social media is now just another tool in a well-rounded marketing plan.
Have you had an experience that reinforces a lesson in nonprofit planning and governance? Let me know! Perhaps we can share it so others can learn, too! You can reach me at: sdetwiler@detwiler.com.
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 | Dec 10, 2012 | governance, management, mission, nonprofit, Uncategorized
I’ve been living in a bubble. I attended a seminar by an attorney who works with nonprofits, talking to other attorneys about the world of nonprofits.
Her talk was a shocking reminder of just how widespread misconceptions about board service are. I’m becoming used to standing on a soap box and expounding with great assurance about the relationships between boards and executives. But every time I hear a professional presenting outdated ideas about board service, I am still shocked.
What she did was no different from so many other professionals, who know their fields very well, but are less informed about trends in governance. In this case, she launched immediately into the legal duties of care, loyalty and obedience, without setting the stage of what the whole point of a board is. She declared that board retreats could be done maybe every two years, or three if that’s when the full board has turned over, and used the word boring to describe board meetings. She referenced the never-changing agenda of “minutes, financial report, directors report, old business, new business,” and said that sometimes there just isn’t anything going on that’s important for the board to talk about.
There is so much I’ve learned from these professionals. An attorney describing the validity of term limits in ways that other attorneys can understand them; the legal ins-and-outs of confidentiality. But I cringe at the depiction of board service that they’ve conveyed. No one in their right mind would want to be on a board, if they thought that board service was as they describe.
So I have a new challenge. Apparently, I’ve been living in a bubble, where I communicate regularly with like-minded individuals. We see board service as a noble investment in our communities while being fully engaged with others who also see value in the mission, ensuring that nonprofit organizations have the resources with which to continue their work.
The challenge is, how do I—how do WE—get the word out to other professionals, so instead of undermining our work, they are also missionaries for the role of boards and board service?
And, since I’m living in a bubble, what misconceptions do I have, that I need to be disabused of, so I can reciprocate in my work, and provide an accurate picture of their field?
Any ideas?
Recent Comments