The Non-Profit Prophet: Getting Control Issues Under Control

27 non-profit organizations in 10 years is a lot. From summer camps to international hospitals, private foundations to technology migrating from the for-profit world, I have met and worked with over a thousand people who already set themselves apart by giving back to their communities in meaningful ways. These people, many of whom have had professional success or realized lifelong dreams in other fields, have found the joy of purpose in working for the greater good. In fact, maybe they have even discovered something meaningful in helping someone coming up the corporate ladder behind them and they proceed to join a Board or Committee to share that wealth of information and know-how. One financial broker caught the bug during Hurricane Katrina when he was tagged with delivering a truck full of supplies from San Francisco to New Orleans, Since then, he has served on half a dozen Boards helping companies execute impact maneuvers (easier said than done). This guy understands that it takes more than a plan, there is always a need to work the plan, pack a box, pick up the phone, or drive something somewhere. 

And with those good feelings comes an open floodgate of creativity. Invariably, these people get involved because they believe in the cause and want to make the logistics of the non-profit or charity work better. Each person, accomplished in their own right, has had unique successes they can bring to the table.  And each person thinks that the skills and abilities that they are bringing to the table are the changes that the organization needs, either to survive or thrive. 

But you know better.

Organizations can’t realize 30 different visions of success. And sure, some Board members are good at advising into the gaps of what the organization’s strengths are, but many people, particularly first time Board members or people who are feeling marginalized, might be trying to fit the hole around a personalized-shaped peg. This is dangerous, and rarely leads to organizational growth. Some people have “friends” who can do a branding redesign or interior decorate an office, whether or not those skills justify their cost for the non-profit. Advising into an organization about problems they don’t have is more of the same.

When I was the CFO for a faith-based organization, I had spent about 12 months cutting expenses and creating efficient processes in the finance department. Finally, we were looking at budget models. Like many organizations, I wanted to introduce metrics into our budget so that there would be clear communication around expectations for our fundraising and development. How much money would we like to raise from new donors? How much from repeat givers? Who would be accountable for those numbers and milestones? We had just recently created a reliable donor management system in Salesforce and were finally entering data in a way that we could compare and contrast the types of donors we were reaching, with what types of programs and campaigns. But these types of measurements were all quite new to our Committee.

“Missy, you are trying to manage the Development department,” they said. “You are telling them how to raise the money that we are asking them to raise,” was the complaint.

“Actually, we are doing the important work of creating metrics around our donor base. Without measuring where money comes from, we will not know if we are falling short of our goals—or which goals we are falling short on—until the end of the year, when it is too late to do anything about it.” I said.

“Well, I suppose that’s a strategy.” was the response. One could tell that this Committee member felt strongly about the process we were taking and had intentionally contorted her role as an advisor— “could this work?” into the role of ultimate decider. I also had to wonder if there was a part of her that also wanted to operate solely on faith, rather than data and figures.

25-30 dreams and methodologies cannot coexist. There must be some order and some process for agreeing upon a singular path forward. This can be your gift to the organization, whether you are a Board member or in a staff leadership position—you can offer some perspectives on control. Every non-profit professional knows that part of their job is make the Board members feel valued and respected, and it is a lot easier if the Board members recognize it. 

So what should Board Control look like?

At the inception of the organization, the Board plays a very crucial role in defining structure and success metrics. Logistics, professional engagement, timelines for achieving milestones will all be decided by these unpaid volunteers who share the goals of creating this organization to fill a need.  It is exhilarating to work with an organization that has two or three people responsible for everything, and they divvy work based on free time, or training, or sheer will. They add to themselves as they need new skills; so maybe they ask an accountant to join to fill out the 990; or a marketing person to design a social media campaign. But everyone is working towards the same highest goal—to get the organization off the ground; and giving what they can to the purpose.

Over time, though, if the organization gets off the ground and begins to hire professionals, the Board only has three roles:—

·      to add to and replace itself (Governance)

·      to network and create ongoing funding sources for the work and the salaries of personnel (Development) and

·      to ensure that the organization meets its financial obligations (Finance).

These tasks can be active for Board members, and can strengthen and tie back to the the mission without interfering in the operations of the organization. Boards can find new and innovative ways to meet these goals—including creating committees that help them stay aligned to the needs of the organization.

Risk averse vs. Risk aware

A successful organization will always have differences of opinion. Particularly in these days of rapid advancement and change, there will always be people who want to study the situation to great detail, and who miss opportunities because of it. The argument is that nothing was lost if we wait and it nothing pans out. But this is inherently flawed thinking. The non-profit competes with all other potential draws for people’s interest and support. And in a world of limited resources, the people who are faster to the table— less prepared or not—will get the advantage of additional resources and market interest. Failing fast is the order of the day, which requires agreed-upon measurement and good analytics. 

It is no novelty that I was looking at introducing metrics in our non-profit—measuring the results of donors and gift management for non-profits is a growing for-profit business. Companies are capitalizing on the need for non-profits to understand the value they are creating in their communities, and be able to communicate that in the way that most people understand—in numbers and percentages.

One non-profit-- who has the terrific motto of “addressing inequity in the community”—found out that by moving quickly at the beginning the Covid pandemic—they captured 296 new donors in March of 2020. Because they understand the when and who—what zip code they were in and how to engage with them over the rest of the year, they were able to create measurements and understand their donor’s lifetime value. This changes the way they think and interact with their donors. 

This work happened because they could act quickly, and measure their impact.

A Board needs to be risk aware without imposing its own lack of risk-tolerance on the organization. This means that in defining those metrics, a stop sign should be developed early that lets people know when the project or test run has gone beyond the ability of the organization to support it in terms of resources. That is what failing fast means—understanding and communicating the fail point and agreeing upon when you go back to the drawing board.

A good Board can transmit their goals to the organization using clearly defined metrics. Discussing and agreeing upon what success means and how to measure it effectively are critical components of creating unifying organizational goals and agreement between the Board and Leadership. This is the type of control Board should be looking for, and one that is easy to communicate. 

So, what if someone on your Board is tied to influencing Process?

I hear you. In fact, this is natural. After all, Board members are volunteers, and have become involved in the organization out of their desire to feel purpose, to give back. This may even be true of some of your Leadership—retired from corporate life and reinventing themselves as non-profit professionals. If you have developed amazing processes in your career, it could very well be that those are beneficial to the organization, especially if they are struggling with things you may have seen and handled in the past. But…

Your role as a board member in the non-profit is not to solve process issues. It is not to impose process directives. It is to develop the mission of the organization and through that, the people and the staff. Then, and only then, have you given the organization legs to stand on, and done what you came to do—create sustainability.

Develop people

Developing people is hard. Many people come to work at a non-profit organization misguided. They may think that since they are working for a non-profit, that they have a job that isn’t reflective of “the real world”, and as a result represents a sanctuary from being held accountable, and they may have been correct— until the day you joined the Board. Your role in creating an organization that moves and shakes is to make sure that people are not hiding behind inability or lack of accountability. You are developing a mission for the organization that includes specific measurements and using those metrics you should be able to find where these people and inefficiencies are hiding. This is where you can succeed in your role and add value; by addressing the same accountability that you would in your own work and professional life.

One way to do this, whether or not you are making structural changes, is to align folks on the mission. Remind people who or what they are actually doing all this work for. I saw this chart for the State of Oregon, and I fell in love with it because of its powerful message that the people come first.

What if in your organization the people you are helping were at the top? How would it change your understanding of control? How would it change your conversations, and align you further?