Year: 2010

Posted on

Social Schizophrenia

Person working with a mouse at their office desk

On which side of philanthropy’s great divide do you stand? More importantly, where do your donors and potential donors stand?

The divide used to be less noticeable, but with the explosion of social media over the past five years, tweeting, blogging, and linking has brought the great divide to the forefront.

On the one side are those who assume that “social capital” belongs in the public domain and should be applied to the public good. The “public good” is defined by broad terms such as social justice and environmental ethics.

On the other side are those who are productively and satisfyingly engaged in personal philanthropy … where one’s giving is a personal expression of one’s own values, concerns, interests, (hopefully) vision, and, yes, even whim.

Do donors have a social obligation to subordinate their personal philanthropic passions to a group-think standard for how and why they should give? Isn’t that part of what we pay taxes for – how successfully have THOSE dollars been used to create social equity? Will a philanthropic “free social capital market” be any more successful – or socially just – than, say, a Goldman Sachs-school market?

The divide is more than polemics. If you think this debate has no bearing on your own nonprofit, think again. Where you stand on this issue will affect everything from how you frame your case, to how you package your appeal, to how you interact one-on-one with your supporters and those you serve.

Private philanthropic money … public good or private vision?

And what, in essence IS philanthropy … “love of mankind” or “obligation to mankind”?

Food for thought.

Farewell and fare well until next week …

——————

For more resources, see our Library topic Nonprofit Capacity Building.

——————

Posted on

Designing and Building Real-Time Learning Systems

The word "learn" spelt with letter blocks

Marv Weisbord’s Model – Two Critical Paths to Change

Marv Weisbord’s model “Two Critical Paths for Improving Organizations” suggests, that when it comes to improving our organizations, the first question is, “Who is going to be involved? The second question is, “What is it they are to go about improving?”

The answer to the first question is on the one hand, “experts,” and on the other hand, “everyone.” The response to the second question is on the one hand, “isolated problems,” and on the other hand, “whole systems.”

Historically We Used “Experts” to Guide Change

As he points out, historically we have thrown “experts” at isolated problems. We have brought in outside consultants to provide recommendations and prescriptions about the problems that plague us. Experts have advised us how to improve productivity and how to improve communications.

This is dealing with problems as “technocratic challenges.” We believe that these decisions and solutions are made visible to us by expertise. Functional specialists determine what needs to be done, by other people who have to implement.

We need to be astute in locating and gaining this expertise, setting the conditions where they can analyze the problems, and making sure people do what they are told to do to solve the problem. This is the way we tend to go after our problems and we have a lot of them.

Historical Approaches Weren’t Integrated

During the late 1960’s and 1970’s, the Quality Circle movement took root and managers tried to get everybody to address these isolated problems. The problems still were not integrated into a meaningful perspective, because most managers had many demands and problems, and no real sense of how all their efforts tied together.

Without thinking systemically, most people were trying to do the best they could within their areas of influence. The idea was to mobilize everybody’s focus and energy to try to improve. This got reduced into trivia; people spent hours discussing the quality and color of hand towels in the rest rooms.

The movement was abandoned after awhile and lost credibility, although more than a few local improvements were made although the quality movement has contributed immensely in statistical process analysis and many other tools.

Advent of a Whole Systems Perspective

At the same time, a few reflective scholarly consulting practitioners were experimenting with ways to improve whole systems. (Starting with the work of Emery and Trist and others in the socio-technical approach to organization development, consultants were being influenced by the “systems view” espoused by Bertalanffy, C.W. Churchman, Kenneth Boulding and Katz and Kahn to name a few.)

Systems’ thinking was taking hold in the academic and consulting community — today it is a well-grounded perspective. Everyone in organizations talks about systems, and new hires into organizations can go on at length about the theories and concepts. The problem has been getting this knowledge used in highly functional organizations.

The early specialists were not just interested in elegant industrial designs. They were aware that organization effectiveness is a function of technical and social systems integration, and that true performance was the joint optimization of both variables in the design of work. Thirty years of research and collective wisdom has produced the insight that performance change can only be achieved when everyone is involved in improving the whole system.

So What’s Next for Guiding Change?

The trick is how to make that happen.

  • How do we get everyone involved in improving whole systems?
  • How does change happen without a “hand off” or a “roll out”?
  • How do leaders make it happen in “real time” not just talk about it, but do it in the process of learning how to do it.

These questions have been central in Organization Development for the last few years and certainly will be thought about for a long time to come.

What do you think?

—————————

For more resources, see the Library topics Consulting and Organizational Development.

———————————————————–
Jim Smith has over 40 years of organization development experience in a wide range of organizations.

Posted on

How Much Should Your Board Be Involved in Management?

Group of business professionals in a business meeting room

Experts often have very strong beliefs and feelings about what should be the extent of involvement of Board members in making top-level policies versus in implementing those policies in the day-to-day affairs of the organization. Those experts usually assert that Board members should attend primarily to the top-level policies.

However, various factors influence how involved Board members are in policy-making versus in “management,” that is, in implementing the policies.

  • New and small organizations might have rather hands-on Board members because those organizations usually have very little in resources, particularly in expertise and funding.
  • Larger, established organizations usually have members who attend primarily to top-level planning and policies because those organizations have adequate resources to effectively implement the plans and policies.
  • If Board members have little confidence in the CEO, there have been frequent operational problems, or the CEO is leaving the organization, then Board members often are more involved in management affairs — at least temporarily.
  • Very autocratic cultures usually place strong value on respecting the role of top-level leaders, in which case Board members (perceived as being very top-level leaders) would probably not be involved in the more subordinate management affairs.
  • Very egalitarian cultures that highly value equal treatment and participation of all people might perceive Board members and employees as having somewhat equal influence in the affairs of the organization, in which case the members might be more involved in management than typically expected.
  • If an organization has been struggling to work toward its mission and top-level priorities, then Board members should probably focus much more on policy making. That helps to ensure that the priorities are indeed relevant and realistic, and are effectively being addressed.

Regardless of the level of involvement of Board members in the affairs of management, the members have to attend to top-level policy at various times — members can’t delegate those top-level responsibilities to anyone else in the organization.

What do you think?

———————————————————————————
Carter McNamara, MBA, PhD – Authenticity Consulting, LLC – 800-971-2250
Read my weekly blogs: Boards, Consulting and OD, Nonprofits and Strategic Planning.

Posted on

Setting Intentions then Stepping Back

A coach wearing a black shirt

I’ve been a coach for several years now, working with clients who want to focus on either professional or personal goals. One approach to coaching is to help people see the gap of where they are vs. where they want to be. The role of the coach is to help people take steps to close the gap and achieve their goals. I’ve been a bit uneasy lately about having people focus on the gaps in their life. I’ve also felt that in our ‘achivement driven, strive for success’ world, we don’t allow for the unfolding to happen as it needs to, perhaps along a different rhythm than we are used to following or in a different way than we expect.

So here are a few tips to get you started with creating and allowing – Set your Intentions then Step Back. Set your intentions on what you desire, be very clear on what you wish to bring into your life. Then ask that the Right Highest Good be done for everyone. Surrender and humility are needed here. It takes a fair bit of humility to recognize that we don’t always know what’s in the Right Highest Good for all parties involved.

Do you find either of these challenging- Setting a clear intention of what you want to create? Stepping back and seeing what unfolds next?

If you have experiences with Setting Intentions then Stepping Back, please share them here.

*****************

For more resources, see our Library topic Spirituality in the Workplace.

——————

Posted on

Free Management Library and iBrand Masters Tweets 2010-05-16

Smiling lady collecting a document
Posted on

Coaching Tip – Block Time to Maximize Your Efficiency

Two coaches discussing about coaching tips

Many of my coaching clients come to me because they are overwhelmed. They have too much to do and not enough time to accomplish it all. They tell me they are busy all day and fail to complete important tasks.

One tip that successful people use is the concept of block time – scheduling chunks of time to work on a specific task or project. This approach is simple and effective.

Here are 3 tips to block time:

1. Schedule the time – if it is not on your calendar it won’t happen. Calculate how much time is needed to complete the task and schedule it. If you can’t do it all in one time period, use several shorter time blocks. When scheduling, be specific what you will do during each time block.

2. No interruptions – it has been said that the typical manager gets interrupted every 9 minutes. As a result, it takes them 3.5 times longer to complete the task. If possible work offsite or close your door as well as turn off the phone and email.

3. Maximize your ”sharp time”– identify your periods of highest mental and physical energy and structure your block time during those periods.

“Time is the scarcest resource, and unless it is managed, nothing else can be managed.” Peter Drucker

What additional block time tips do you have?

For more resources, see the Library topic Personal and Professional Coaching.

Posted on

Feasibility Testing: Top 10 Tips

Number 10 written on a red background

So you have piles of venture ideas and don’t know where to start. Or perhaps there’s just one idea that you think looks pretty good. Either way, you need to some feasibility testing.

To narrow a long list to a manageable number, try the Quick Feasibility Screen (at www.RolfeLarson.com click on Free Resources). It’s a list of ten multiple-choice questions that has been used by hundreds of organizations to winnow down a long list into the best one or two ideas. In most cases, you can do this just using what you already know or can find out quickly.

Once you have it down to one or two ideas, take a look at the Quick Feasibility Test, which takes more time. Here are our top 10 tips for efficiently gathering the information you need to answer those questions:

1. Start with your goals. What do you want to accomplish? How will you define success?

2. Write a one page “first cut” summary of your venture, describing its products or services (benefits not just features), customers, operations, marketing strategies, and likely competitors.

3. Decide whether you want to do the feasibility research yourself, bring on a team, or hire a consultant to help.

4. Go online to find similar ventures and interview them. You’ll be surprised how open they are.

5. Your online research should also guide you to some “experts” in this field: could be retired managers, consultants, state employees, even academics.

6. If this is a venture idea you already know something about, you probably already know some other folks who can offer some insights. Talk to them.

7. If there’s an industry association that covers that area, contact them.

8. “Secret shop” potential competitors to learn how they do things.

9. Identify your target customers and then find ways to interview some of them. A dozen interviews can yield great results. Evaluate their willingness to pay; what do they currently purchase that’s more or less similar?

10. Write down everything you’ve learned. You can use the Quick Feasibility Test structure above to organize your work. Crank out some projections based on your research, and run the whole thing (5 -10 pages max) past a half dozen people with business experience. Revise and do more research if needed.

Good luck!

————————————————————-

Copyright © 2010 Rolfe Larson Associates – Fifteenth Anniversary, 1995 – 2010

Author of Venture Forth! Endorsed by the late Paul Newman of Newman’s Own

Read my weekly blogs on Social Enterprise and Business Planning

Posted on

What Do We Need: Strategic or Business Plan?

A planner on a desk

Depends. All too often, these two terms have become blurred. But they are different concepts. Here’s a good way to distinguish them, quoting from the Free Management Library’s strategic plan blogger, Carter McNamara:

Strategic Planning Should Be Organization-Wide

Strategic planning is best viewed as clarifying the overall purpose and priorities of the organization. There are many different ways to do strategic planning, and the contents of the plan vary, depending on the purpose of the planning. However, the focus of the planning should primarily be organization-wide.

Business Planning Should Be Product- or Service-Specific

Business planning is best viewed as planning for a specific product or service. The customers and clients for a particular product or service might be very different than for another product or service. You wouldn’t advertise or sell race cars the same way you’d advertise or sell minivans. Each needs a different business plan.

I would add several things to Carter’s description. First, while some strategic plans include financial projections and others do not, financials are an essential component of every credible business plan. Secondly, strategic plans often take a longer term perspective of 3-5 years or more as they envision an organization’s future; in most cases, business plans look out at most three years, as they focus on the more immediate changing realities of the marketplace. Finally, while it is possible to imagine that the strategic plan could be implemented by someone other than the current management team, a business plan is meaningless without identifying who will do it and why they will be successful.

Carter’s weekly strategic planning blog provides useful information on how to do strategic planning. We’ll provide the same service here in the business planning blog.

——————

For more resources, see our Library topic Business Planning.

Copyright © 2010 Rolfe Larson Associates – Fifteenth Anniversary, 1995 – 2010
Author of Venture Forth! Endorsed by the late Paul Newman of Newman’s Own
Read my weekly blogs on Social Enterprise and Business Planning

Posted on

GRANTS: FREE MONEY – NOT QUITE !! (Part One)

non-profit-organization-going-through-grant-and-donor-lists.

Every day, thousands of non-profit organizations, believing that their financial problems are soon to be over, generate/send proposals that receive, at best, a brief reading.

Contrary to popular belief and unlike the grants Mr. Question-Mark touts in the TV ads, grants to non-profit organizations are not free-money. Grants come with a variety of obligations. Corporations, foundations and government agencies don’t just give it away. It takes more than mailing applications and waiting for the checks to arrive.

To Get Funded, you must know how to tell your story. You need a well-written narrative that tells:
• How and why and by whom your organization was created;
• The community needs you have been serving and/or intend to serve;
• Why there is a need to create/expand your program, and how you will do that;
• How successful you’ve been; and,
• Specific funding needs for all aspects of your operation.

The vast majority of grantors want to see your audited financial reports and your budgets. They want to know where the rest of your funding is from, and you will need to prove that you are fiscally responsible, can be trusted and that you operate in a business-like manner.

Funders want to know who your leaders are — trustees, volunteers and staff. And, they want to see if/how those people are financially supporting the organization.

You must also be able to tell the funders:
• How your mission/project(s) meets their guidelines;
• How your mission/project(s) will make a significant difference to the community;
• How their funding will help create a project/program that will become self-sustaining; (Remember, most funders don’t’ want to adopt you. Funding is designed to help you create something. You’ll then have to learn how to generate the ongoing funding by yourselves.) and,
• In the case of corporate funding, how the relationship will benefit the corporation — how it will impact their bottom line.

=====================
Have a question about starting or expanding your fundraising program? Email me at AskDCA@Major-Capital-Giving.com. With over 30 years of counseling in major gifts, capital campaigns, bequest programs and the planning studies to precede these three, we’ll work to answer your question.