So You Want to Serve on a Nonprofit Board...

Interviewing for a board position is serious business.  Strong, effective governance is essential to successful nonprofits.  The capacity of a board to govern effectively is the result of careful selection, orientation, and education of members.  Those seeking to contribute to organizations through board membership have a responsibility to interview prospective organizations—to make sure the fit is right for them and to make sure their time, talent, and treasure will be effectively used.  Best-practice nonprofits seek out savvy candidates who ask good questions and enjoy the opportunity to engage in such conversations.  By interviewing effectively, you are actually helping nonprofits improve their processes.

First, visit the website and review the programs and activities before you interview members of the board or staff so that you are well-informed.  Make sure you speak with either the board chair (preferably) or the chair of the recruitment committee and the CEO.  Take time to ask good questions.  If you are serious about an organization, ask to speak with at least one other board member and the director of development. 

I’ve developed this set of questions to help you on your quest.  Ask them and you will learn a lot; and you’ll have a good sense whether it is the right match for you.

  

1.     What is the organization’s vision?  Its mission?  Its core values?    

These are the basics.  Can they recite clearly and articulately top of mind?

2.     What is the cause you are championing?  Why are you passionate about it?  What’s the big deal?  Why do this?  What are your most essential programs?  How do they impact the community? 

These questions will tell you whether they are passionate about the organization and understand how to express its value proposition.

3.     What are the specific expectations you have of your board members? 

Best practice boards will have something in writing that they can share with you.

4.     What are the strengths of the current board?  What are areas you are seeking to strengthen through recruitment? 

This is further evidence of how much attention and care they are giving to recruitment.

5.     How large is the board?  Who else serves on the board? 

You want to know who you will be working with.

6.     How much board meeting time is spent on reports?  On strategic thinking?  On brainstorming?  On mission impact?  On major gifts fundraising?

This will tell you how well your time will be spent.  Best practice organizations use consent agendas and expect board members to read materials in advance.  Most usual and customary reports are placed in the consent agenda.  Most board time should be spent on strategic, generative, high-level thinking.

7.     What committees are in place?  Do they have work plans? 

This will tell you whether they use committees effectively to supplement board meetings.

8.     Can you describe your board orientation and education process? 

Both are critical to effective boards.

9.     Do you have conflict of interest policies in place?  Is there a strong sense of ethics in place?

Transparency is critical to effective governance today.

10. Is the board focused on outcomes and impacts?  Are there good dashboard indicators and metrics of success?

Constituents and donors expect pragmatic success measures.

On top of this do your homework.  Ask the CEO for a copy of the budget.  Ask about the sources and distribution of revenue, cash reserves, and endowment.  Ask about (or look up) the backgrounds of other board members and what they bring to the organization.  Read the bylaws.  Do a Google search to see if anything interesting pops up.

The more you pay attention to your selection process, the happier and more effective you will be.

Cheers,

Jim

The "D" Word

Giving USA Report Reveals Depth of the Recession and Competition for Resources

The long-awaited Giving USA report hit the stands today.  There will be much said about these numbers, not the least of which is that last year's total giving projection was significantly reduced upon review of IRS tax returns. In the report released today, Giving USA reduced total giving in 2009 by 8%, from $304B to $280B.  This means that giving dropped off  by 6.5% between 2008 and 2009.

2010 is up from 2009; for a free copy of the extensive executive summary, click here. Some highlights:

• Total giving: $291B, up 3.8%
• Individual giving: $212B, up 2.7% 
• Corporations: $15B, up 10.6%, though there's a notable increase in in-kind giving
• Foundations: $41B, flat--almost half of foundation giving came from family foundations.  

If you want to read a rather dire, but reasonable analysis of the numbers from the Nonprofit Quarterly on the human services perspective, click here.

In all of the reporting I've read, there has been little commentary on what I think is the most important aspect of the trends: the difference between charitable giving and charitable receiving.  Nonprofits experience of giving is mitigated by the growth of the sector.  I've written on this before, but this report brings even more clarity to this distinction.  Simply, the growth in the number of nonprofits is outstripping the growth in philanthropy. Let me show you exactly what I mean using Giving USA charitable giving numbers and the IRS nonprofit census.

Between 2001 and 2010, annual charitable giving had grown by $58.6B, an increase of 25%.  During that same period, the number of nonprofits grew by 415,643, an increase of 48%.  If one does the simple math of dividing the number of nonprofits into the dollars given, dollars per nonprofit (in current dollars) is 15% less.  In inflation adjusted dollars, its a whooping 31%.  During the recession, it has been most intense.  Between 2007 and 2008 giving per nonprofit dropped by 8.4%, and between 2008 and 2009 by 10.4% (in current dollars).  And it appears to be flat between 2009 and 2010.  Conversations with my colleagues and clients confirm these numbers as consistent with their experience.

This simple calculation alone is revealing.  And it doesn't even figure in the growth curve of nonprofits.  I haven't yet met a development professional who isn't expected to raise more money each year.

So, what are nonprofits to do?  That's a tough question.  The number of nonprofits has been growing at about 45,000 per year for the last 10 years.  The number of donors per nonprofit has also been declining--particularly the retention of new donors.  And wealth in America--both annual income and assets--is being compressed upward to wealthy people.  (Click here for a fascinating study on income in America by Emmanuel Saez.)

Nonprofits that will thrive will be innovative and strategic.  They will have compelling vision and mission statements.  They will know how and where they are different from others and how and where they can collaborate.  They will build and broaden their bands of passionate believers.  They will focus on competent and connected board members.  They will create sustainable major gifts programs.  And they will find ways to generate income in addition to charitable gifts.

It's not easy.  And it takes engaged leadership who are committed to the cause and willing to invest the time and energy to get there.  But, I believe those who do will thrive.

Still cheery and optimistic,

Jim

Snail Mail Trumps Online Appeals for Emotionally Engaging Donors

It's interesting that direct mail--no matter how much we complain--still performs better than online media.

If you are a fan of The Agitator, I'm sure you have read the reports and their sound analysis of the effectiveness of direct mail.  An unusual and interesting dimension of direct mail v. online was brought to my attention thanks to communications expert Lisa Sargent.  She recently pointed her readers to a fascinating case study by Millward Brown.  Collaborating with Bangor University, they found that the "research strongly suggests that greater emotional processing is facilitated by the physical material than the virtual."

The research showed that physical materials (1) leave a deeper footprint in the brain; (2) involve more emotional processing, which is important for memory and brand association; and (3) produce more brain responses connected with internal feelings, suggesting greater internalization.

So, in addition to going out and buying some note cards--rather than texting your dad for father's day, don't cut back too quickly on your direct mail budget.  It's likely still worth the cost of paper and stamps. And please don't email your thank you letters!!!  As Jennifer Aaker, professor of marketing at Stanford University School of Business, noted from her own research, people need both warmth and content to deepen their connection to your organization and your cause.

Cheers,

Jim

QR Codes Have Arrived

I now have my own QR!  Want to try it?  Take a pic of this with your smart phone and you'll go right to my website.



QR (quick response) codes are easy to create and are useful to any organization, especially those reaching out to Millennials.  There are many free online services you can use to create them.  Just Google "QR Code."

QRs can be used to link to anything you can create on line:  website, video, pdf, etc.  Print QR codes on your documents, your stationery, your publications, wherever it makes sense.  You can even promote your organization as going green, as you direct your constituents and prospects to online sources for information rather than paper--even meeting agendas.  As iPads with larger screens than smart phones become more popular, QR will become even more viable.

Soon, maybe everything we need to see will be out there in a cloud just waiting for us to log in.

So, have fun.  Enjoy.

Jim

Values and Vision: The Foundation of High Performing Teams

A few days ago, I wrote about Tribal Leadership and what the authors’ research revealed about high performing teams.  Today I want to address two fundamental characteristics of any high performing team:  core values and a compelling vision.

The defining characteristic of the highest performing teams is that their foremost concern is to achieve a noble cause.  This laser focus enables them to make extraordinary breakthroughs and achieve unmatched results.  One of the most compelling points made by the authors is that these teams have a crystal clear grasp of what they stand for and what they live for.   

Core Values:  What does your team stand for?

When high performing teams articulate their core values, they are not describing a set of tenets or a creed to which they ascribe.  Rather, they are describing what they are, what they embody, what they deliver.  High performing teams live their values—through their relationships, through their programs, and through their communications.  Though there are many examples, for the sake of space, let me point out two:  KID (Ft. Lauderdale) and Miami Rescue Mission.  Through a series of thoughtful discussions these teams arrived at very meaningful core values.

For KID, they are Trust, Family, Compassion, Safety, Wisdom, and Tenacity. To get a sense of what this means to them, just look at their annual report.  It’s the best I’ve seen.  For Miami Rescue Mission, they are Compassion, Hope, Restoration, and Transformation.  In July, the Mission will celebrate the culmination of a year long process of exploring the meaning of these values with everyone throughout the organization.  The values of these two organizations permeate in all that they do-- their programs and activities, their policies, how they relate to  those in need and to one another, how they talk about what they do, and how they plan for the future.  This conscious attention to values is having a powerful effect throughout each organization.

Vision:  What does your team live for?

How teams view their cause is seen through their vision.  The vision of high performing teams is literally what they live for, what they aspire to bring about in the world.  For these teams, vision is not an exercise of self affirmation, or how they can be the best.  It is a statement of how the world will be different—transformed—for those they serve because of the work they do.  This type of vision imagines a perfected future.  It is believing in something that does not yet exist—but should.  These teams have visions that stir passions and inspire people to act.  

Some examples of compelling vision statements include:  "Every child is born perfectly healthy." (March of Dimes);  "No one is homeless." (Miami Rescue Mission); “A Community of Safe and Healthy Children in Loving Families” (KID) and "A Montana where communities thrive in co-existence with abundant wild places." (Montana Wilderness Association).

These vision statements are not Pollyanna notions.  They have been created by a team of individuals who live for their realization.  Though their visions may not be achieved in their lifetimes, these teams are inspired to give their highest and best—and to celebrate each and every accomplishment along the way.

Being part of a team devoted to a cause allows one to leap beyond personal limitations; to be part of something very significant.  But, it takes shedding the need for individualistic self-preservation—which allows a realization that through such a process your gifts are magnified.  And, you discover, you don’t lose anything—you become more, not less.

Jim

Are You Looking in the Mirror or Out the Window?

Many of you have probably heard me rave about a recently published book, Tribal Leadership, by Dave Logan, John King, and Halee Fischer-Wright.  In a rigorous eight-year study of about 24,000 people in more than two dozen companies, the authors found that the success of companies depends on the effectiveness of its team's tribal culture.  While many companies had adequate teams, only about 25% broke through to be outstanding--like the Apple team that developed the iPod.

The authors found that organizational cultures evolve  through stages, and that each stage grows out of the previous.

1. The lowest stage identified by the authors is composed of people who are alienated and express their behavior through despairing hostility.  Fortunately, only two percent of tribes are stage one, and they are likely not to last--due to embezzlement, theft, cheating, etc.
2. Stage two tribes, 25% of  all workplace tribes, are not really teams.  They are what I call the Dilbert crowd, passively antagonistic people who believe "my life sucks" and are neither interested nor prepared to do anything about it.  
3. Half of all workplace cultures are stage three--with good reason because we train stage three cultures from kindergarten through graduate school.  Stage three is comprised of individuals competing to be the best.  Winning is personal, knowledge is power, and the winner gets promoted.  Trust is not a premium.  Synergy is not in the vocabulary.  
4. Stage four is where it gets interesting. Stage four, 22% of all tribes, is arrived at when individuals have an epiphany:  "Together we can be greater than our individual strengths...  and my value is not diminished through collaborating openly."  This team develops tribal pride.  These tribes still need an adversary--another tribe, another organization, etc. to compete against, but they commit to shared core values and hold one another accountable.  Thus, they perform well above the individualists of stage three.
5. Stage five comprises 2 percent of the workplace culture.  Stage five tribes no longer concern themselves with competition with others, but with serving a noble cause and having  impact.  The authors describe this tribe's mood as innocent wonderment.  "This stage is pure leadership, vision, and inspiration.  Life is great."  These are the teams that change the world.

Tribes one through three (and to a some extent, tribe level four), look in the mirror more than out the window--where members are more concerned with how they are surviving, achieving, or performing as compared to others.  And many nonprofits--whose missions speak to a tribe at level five--are often entangled in level three and four habits.  We see evidence of this in many ways--hero leaders, lack of integration among departments (or within departments), vision statements that speak about being the best rather than impacting the lives of those the organization serves, and competition between nonprofits serving a similar cause.

It takes courage, insight, discipline (and an epiphany) to develop a level five tribe--a team capable of collaborating across organizational boundaries for a greater good.  But the payoffs are huge.   Tribes that achieve level five are made up of people who aspire to a noble cause and share core values.  The authors recommend that leaders who want to develop level five tribes need start with defining what the tribe stands for (core values) and lives for (the cause).  Then they need to provide leadership to help the tribe determine:  What they want (outcomes).  What they have (assets).  What they will do (behaviors).

As the authors of Tribal Leadership note, the level of the tribe can be diagnosed from the language tribe members use.  To achieve level five, tribes need to replace their mirror with a window.  They need to relinquish their focus on shortcomings, self concern, preservation of the status quo, and posturing in exchange for a focus on the possibilities, on securing a greater good for the people they serve. When achieved, level five tribes have extraordinary power because of their ability to connect to others who care deeply.  As the authors describe, level five tribes "form ever growing networks with anyone whose values resonate with their own."

May we all discover our noble cause.

Jim