Posted on behalf of Reed Henderson, Henderson Consulting, Richmond, VA:
I think it would be helpful to know more about the reservations expressed by executives who anticipate challenges to the mission, identity and management of their organizations through participation in the Back Office Collaborative, an entity created to consolidate back-office operations and shared service platforms for participating organizations.
What is it about the direct management of finances and human resources that contributes to the core mission of a nonprofit organization? If significant savings can be achieved thorough collective action in areas not directly associated with the services provided by the organizations, why is that seen as an impediment rather than an asset, assuring increased leadership time and attention to the core business of the organization? Given that the board members of BOC are representatives from the participating organizations, how is it that the decisions of this body can be viewed as negatively impacting the organizations they represent?
I raise this issue because, as a retired nonprofit executive, I know that the sentiments expressed in the case study arise out of a strong commitment to the traditional nonprofit culture. They are not driven, primarily, by resistance to change. In my view, case studies such as this one point to the importance of better understanding the cultural impediments to the type of transformation BOC has been created to achieve, so that the optimal benefit from such innovations can be realized
It is critical for the nonprofit sector to achieve greater efficiency, effectiveness and impact. Organizational change is central to achieving this result. In my view, the logic for the change, and the types of changes that ought to occur, are clear. What is not so clear is how the mission and values of nonprofit organizations are preserved as this transition takes place. Nonprofits are not “like corporate America” – and the transformation that takes place must not assume that is to be the end result.
COMMENTS
BY Jenifer Morgan (SSIR)
ON January 31, 2012 04:14 PM
Posted on behalf of Reed Henderson, Henderson Consulting, Richmond, VA:
I think it would be helpful to know more about the reservations expressed by executives who anticipate challenges to the mission, identity and management of their organizations through participation in the Back Office Collaborative, an entity created to consolidate back-office operations and shared service platforms for participating organizations.
What is it about the direct management of finances and human resources that contributes to the core mission of a nonprofit organization? If significant savings can be achieved thorough collective action in areas not directly associated with the services provided by the organizations, why is that seen as an impediment rather than an asset, assuring increased leadership time and attention to the core business of the organization? Given that the board members of BOC are representatives from the participating organizations, how is it that the decisions of this body can be viewed as negatively impacting the organizations they represent?
I raise this issue because, as a retired nonprofit executive, I know that the sentiments expressed in the case study arise out of a strong commitment to the traditional nonprofit culture. They are not driven, primarily, by resistance to change. In my view, case studies such as this one point to the importance of better understanding the cultural impediments to the type of transformation BOC has been created to achieve, so that the optimal benefit from such innovations can be realized
It is critical for the nonprofit sector to achieve greater efficiency, effectiveness and impact. Organizational change is central to achieving this result. In my view, the logic for the change, and the types of changes that ought to occur, are clear. What is not so clear is how the mission and values of nonprofit organizations are preserved as this transition takes place. Nonprofits are not “like corporate America” – and the transformation that takes place must not assume that is to be the end result.