The problem is clearly short-sightedness. But it is not short-sightedness about hiring, or salaries, or training, or recruitment. It is short-sightedness about what the sector has demanded boards hold themselves accountable for.
If you drum-beat that boards are accountable for the money the money the money, they will watch every penny and pinch it till it melts.
If you drum-beat that boards are accountable for ensuring their organizations are creating significant change in their communities, they will hold themselves accountable for doing whatever it takes to make that change happen. And overnight, hiring great people at respectful wages changes from being a “luxury” to being an imperative!
As a sector, we have promulgated Standards of Excellence that reward fiscal prudence over systemically aiming at creating a better world. None of us should be surprised that organizations then cut every corner they can, including wages and training - and that our communities are in pretty much the same shape they were in 10 and 20 years ago.
When the only report a board measures consistently every month is where the money has gone, why are we surprised they “cheap” everything? We have told them, as a sector, that is their job!
When this sector instead develops methods for measuring community results at every board meeting, and tells boards THAT is what they are accountable for, imagine what will change.
The key will not be fixing this or that symptom. The key will be looking differently at our work, and then governing and leading that work accordingly. We get what we aim for. When means become the ends - as has happened in this sector - that is the result we get. When means instead follow visionary end goals, everything else falls right into place, as if by magic. Really.
Hildy Gottlieb
Governing for What Matters
BYNonprofit veteran who never wants to be an Executi
I agree that nonprofits operate in a constant state of scarcity, which results in an impoverished mental state for many nonprofit workers. I would argue one of the biggest investments that gets deferred is in the area of technology. Trying to compete in 2008, with not even 1998-level technology (and tech know-how) is demoralizing and counter-productive.
On the interpersonal side, what amazes me is how many of the nonprofit leaders I speak to constantly complain about how busy they are, how hard it is to raise money, how far behind they are AND YET there is an undercurrent of pride in their voices. It’s as if by living in scarcity and feeling unable to achieve work-life balance they feel that they are truly giving back.
As a member of Generation X, I reject that. When I look at nonprofit leaders today and think about being one tomorrow, it is not appealing for that very reason. I see committed, caring people essentially killing themselves with stress and worry, AND in the process losing their ability to lead well, and I feel very sad.
On the point of the lionization: we do the same with CEOs generally, while everyone else toils in the shadows. I almost think that underlies why people select out of organizations to develop their own paths. Still, the established institutions will need enlightened leadership as transitions continue to mount, and we’re left with a dearth of visible options. I say visible, because I think people are there, but the implicit segmentation we do (“oh, they won’t be interested in that” or “we need person -X-” either by name or profile) gets in the way of thinking creatively about leadership profiles and the organizations they develop. The new model must be leadership that creates conditions for opportunity and effectiveness, so that people come to the sector and want to stay.
Apparently Congress recently passed a law that includes loan forgiveness for government and non-profit employees. It’s not an easy system - it requires you to pay 15% of your annual income towards your student loans for 10 years, then forgives the remaining balance, if you are employed for a government agency or non-profit for the entire 10 years. But it does help out those who need it most - “lifers” - as opposed to people who enter the non-profit world after a successful career in the private sector.
You make some excellent, substantial recommendations that will make a difference. As a leadership coach, I can offer that a focus on individual creativity can bring real benefits to organizations.One of my favorite business books is David Whyte’s The Heart Aroused: Poetry and the Preservation of the Soul in Corporate America. In the book, Whyte talks about the dark side that is created in organizations when creativity is stifled.
Our workplaces would be more productive and happier places if creativity was encouraged. By creativity, I mean the encouragement of self-expression. If an organization expects you to leash yourself to their dream, you’re stifled. The better approach is the integrating of individual creativity with the goals of an organization. It can be done. The starting point is the honoring of the individual. The organization treats each employee with respect and honesty. The integrity of the individual and the organization is a defended value. The organization is looked at as an organic system. The whole is the sum of its parts. The people who are there create the organization.
Clearly, honoring each individual’s creativity is not about anarchy. There has to be common purpose and a goal that people work toward. The common purpose is one that all employees can buy into and have input to. Everyone’s role matters. Creativity and self-expression are encouraged in furtherance of the common goal. The purpose is not imposed on others but is shaped and grown by the entire organization. Every employee has dignity in their participation.
Creativity implies movement and creation. That movement and creation feeds and fulfills the individual and fuels the organization. For creativity to thrive, hierarchy for the sake of authority has to go. Bully bosses, disrespect and disregard have no place. The individual and the commitment to a greater goal are the center points of a successful organization. The possibilities are limitless.
COMMENTS
BY Hildy Gottlieb
ON February 29, 2008 07:27 AM
Peter: Thanks for this - it is so very true.
The problem is clearly short-sightedness. But it is not short-sightedness about hiring, or salaries, or training, or recruitment. It is short-sightedness about what the sector has demanded boards hold themselves accountable for.
If you drum-beat that boards are accountable for the money the money the money, they will watch every penny and pinch it till it melts.
If you drum-beat that boards are accountable for ensuring their organizations are creating significant change in their communities, they will hold themselves accountable for doing whatever it takes to make that change happen. And overnight, hiring great people at respectful wages changes from being a “luxury” to being an imperative!
As a sector, we have promulgated Standards of Excellence that reward fiscal prudence over systemically aiming at creating a better world. None of us should be surprised that organizations then cut every corner they can, including wages and training - and that our communities are in pretty much the same shape they were in 10 and 20 years ago.
When the only report a board measures consistently every month is where the money has gone, why are we surprised they “cheap” everything? We have told them, as a sector, that is their job!
When this sector instead develops methods for measuring community results at every board meeting, and tells boards THAT is what they are accountable for, imagine what will change.
The key will not be fixing this or that symptom. The key will be looking differently at our work, and then governing and leading that work accordingly. We get what we aim for. When means become the ends - as has happened in this sector - that is the result we get. When means instead follow visionary end goals, everything else falls right into place, as if by magic. Really.
Hildy Gottlieb
Governing for What Matters
BY Nonprofit veteran who never wants to be an Executi
ON March 3, 2008 12:44 PM
I agree that nonprofits operate in a constant state of scarcity, which results in an impoverished mental state for many nonprofit workers. I would argue one of the biggest investments that gets deferred is in the area of technology. Trying to compete in 2008, with not even 1998-level technology (and tech know-how) is demoralizing and counter-productive.
On the interpersonal side, what amazes me is how many of the nonprofit leaders I speak to constantly complain about how busy they are, how hard it is to raise money, how far behind they are AND YET there is an undercurrent of pride in their voices. It’s as if by living in scarcity and feeling unable to achieve work-life balance they feel that they are truly giving back.
As a member of Generation X, I reject that. When I look at nonprofit leaders today and think about being one tomorrow, it is not appealing for that very reason. I see committed, caring people essentially killing themselves with stress and worry, AND in the process losing their ability to lead well, and I feel very sad.
Thank you for sparking this conversation Pete!
BY Vincent Robinson
ON March 5, 2008 01:53 AM
As the phrase goes, “Sing it, sister!”
On the point of the lionization: we do the same with CEOs generally, while everyone else toils in the shadows. I almost think that underlies why people select out of organizations to develop their own paths. Still, the established institutions will need enlightened leadership as transitions continue to mount, and we’re left with a dearth of visible options. I say visible, because I think people are there, but the implicit segmentation we do (“oh, they won’t be interested in that” or “we need person -X-” either by name or profile) gets in the way of thinking creatively about leadership profiles and the organizations they develop. The new model must be leadership that creates conditions for opportunity and effectiveness, so that people come to the sector and want to stay.
Glad to see your thoughts on this!
BY Dane
ON March 6, 2008 06:00 PM
Apparently Congress recently passed a law that includes loan forgiveness for government and non-profit employees. It’s not an easy system - it requires you to pay 15% of your annual income towards your student loans for 10 years, then forgives the remaining balance, if you are employed for a government agency or non-profit for the entire 10 years. But it does help out those who need it most - “lifers” - as opposed to people who enter the non-profit world after a successful career in the private sector.
BY Ann Vanino
ON March 9, 2008 05:05 PM
Pete,
You make some excellent, substantial recommendations that will make a difference. As a leadership coach, I can offer that a focus on individual creativity can bring real benefits to organizations.One of my favorite business books is David Whyte’s The Heart Aroused: Poetry and the Preservation of the Soul in Corporate America. In the book, Whyte talks about the dark side that is created in organizations when creativity is stifled.
Our workplaces would be more productive and happier places if creativity was encouraged. By creativity, I mean the encouragement of self-expression. If an organization expects you to leash yourself to their dream, you’re stifled. The better approach is the integrating of individual creativity with the goals of an organization. It can be done. The starting point is the honoring of the individual. The organization treats each employee with respect and honesty. The integrity of the individual and the organization is a defended value. The organization is looked at as an organic system. The whole is the sum of its parts. The people who are there create the organization.
Clearly, honoring each individual’s creativity is not about anarchy. There has to be common purpose and a goal that people work toward. The common purpose is one that all employees can buy into and have input to. Everyone’s role matters. Creativity and self-expression are encouraged in furtherance of the common goal. The purpose is not imposed on others but is shaped and grown by the entire organization. Every employee has dignity in their participation.
Creativity implies movement and creation. That movement and creation feeds and fulfills the individual and fuels the organization. For creativity to thrive, hierarchy for the sake of authority has to go. Bully bosses, disrespect and disregard have no place. The individual and the commitment to a greater goal are the center points of a successful organization. The possibilities are limitless.