Category: Organization Development

Recently, I wrote an article about how non-profits both must work together as partners, but must also compete for sustainability. I had a response from a fellow blogger from WhyDoParentsBlog http://whydoparents.blogspot.com/2011/01/social-returns-on-financial-investments.html

Jeremy Parrott blogs about non-profit as well. He has a theory that the economy should be like the life cycle of water. The cycle begins with for-profits then cycles to foundations and then to non-profits, where the cycle continues back onto for-profits. Jeremy believes that by having non-profits reinvest their money in for profit businesses that the life cycle of money will continue.

I’m not sure that I agree with Jeremy. While I agree with the cycle, I do not agree with the quantities. I believe that for profits make money, that foundations do thrive as a result of donations from usually individuals who earned their money though the for-profit sector. I also agree that Foundations then support non-profits. However, where I feel this theory falls apart is that, most non-profits spend about 80% of their incomes on salaries. It would not be unusual for them to spend say 5% or more on rent or mortgage and utilities. So a non-profit’s buying power is less than 10% of its overall budget.

My interpretation of what Jeremy had to say was that non-profits need to invest more of their budgets into for-profits to keep the cycle healthy. However, with the structure of funding from foundations presently, coupled with the limited amount of surplus in most non-profits budgets, it is unlikely that non-profits could spend anymore of their budgets on purchasing. Funders like to see as much money as possible going into programming. So too, do donors like to see concrete evidence of what their dollars are buying. By concrete evidence, I mean programs that are impacting people’s lives for the positive. With so much focus on program delivery, most funders prefer to see their money going into salaries rather than into goods. They recognize that goods are a needed part of programming, but for the most part, they still prefer that the amount of goods bought with their grants is still only a portion of the grant.

It is true, that some foundations prefer to fund capital costs, like buildings, or big ticket items, but I have found that while these things are a visible contribution, things don’t necessarily impact people’s lives unless it is combined with the caring, passionate people who work for non-profits. I don’t believe that non-profits can change the cycle of economy anymore than they already have. They have limited buying power and always will because they are in the people business.

——————

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

——————

By Ingrid Zacharias, Managing Director, Envisioning the Future International, Email: izacharias@envisioningthefutureintl.ca

Website: http://envisioningthefutureintl.ca/

[I very rarely cross-post, but I couldn’t resist putting this “press release” here as well as on Huffington Post today, where it was titled “Mom Always Wanted Me to Be a Lawyer.” Already, from HuffPost, I had one person think I was serious, which was kinda fun. I hope you enjoy it!]

Bernstein Crisis Management Launches Strategic Litigation Management Group

——————————————————————————–

LOS ANGELES–(SATIREWIRE)-Bernstein Crisis Management, Inc. announced today that it plans to establish a strategic litigation management group to assist national and international businesses and their managements and boards.

“With a number of law firms launching Crisis Management divisions, it made sense to me that we even the playing field a little by adding some quasi-legal clout to our activities,” said Jonathan Bernstein, president of Bernstein Crisis Management, Inc. “And I’m confident that we’ll be as good with legal matters as attorneys are at offering crisis management advice.”

Senior members of the group include former Transportation Security Administration officer Patricia “Pat” Down, bail bond tycoon Guido Ransome, former World Wrestling Federation Commissioner Crater Mess; and Tom Foolery, former senior staff advisor to the House Ethics Committee.

“This team brings decades of experience advising clients on managing high profile governmental, transactional and investigative matters,” said Bernstein. “More importantly for our clients, each of these five professionals has had considerable and sometimes painful experience with legal matters and has successfully helped those they served navigate through those issues.”

A former stock broker, 7-11 clerk and waste hauler, Ms. Down will provide high-level strategic counsel to corporate and government clients on a broad range of matters including risk identification and prevention, preparedness, response and recovery.

“With every pat-down I’ve conducted, I’ve been aware of how a crisis could erupt at any moment,” Down said. “I believe in transparency and full compliance with most laws.”

Ransome has established a national network of bail bond businesses in a career spanning more than three decades, following his early years on the other side of the bail bond counter. “Hey, if youse in trouble, I’m your man.”

After 17 years of serving as the commissioner of the WWF, Mr. Mess understands the importance and challenges of building and protecting a global brand.

“Your name is everything. In fact, your name may be the only thing real about you, so it has to be protected, legally and otherwise. Eventually, if you do that right, people won’t even realize what’s real and what’s not!”

Tom Foolery recently retired from his 25 years of service to the House Ethics Committee, and categorically denies that his own behavior was under review at the time of his retirement.

“If there’s a way to lie, cheat or steal, I know about it, and of course will do my utmost to protect our clients from such activity and from themselves.”

In response to concerns that his firm might be accused of practicing law without a license,” Bernstein commented, “I’d love to give you an appropriate crisis management response, but I have to say ‘no comment’ on the advice of my attorney.”

Bernstein Crisis Management, a 17-year-old international consultancy, has less than 500 employees providing the full range of crisis management services. For actual information on the firm, go to http://www.bernsteincrisismanagement.com.

——————————-
For more resources, see the Free Management Library topic: Crisis Management
——————————-

###

As the social enterprise movement grows, enters new markets, and works with new employees, it’s discovering new partners … and new adversaries. One of those adversaries, according to some practitioners, can be unions. Unions of course exist to balance the excesses of power of management, and seek to protect the jobs and increase the wages of their members. Sometimes that can put them into conflict with a social enterprise, whose purpose in launching a new venture might be to provide training and jobs to the unskilled or who are recovering from drug abuse, incarceration or homelessness.

For example, there have been situations where unions have initiated legal challenges to a successful, growing social enterprise, which has demonstrated impact in training and employing those individuals. And these individuals would not have been hired into a unionized workforce because of those employment barriers. Nevertheless, because of concerns of loss of jobs of their members due to this new competitor, unions have filed complaints with the National Labor Relations Board, costing the social enterprise huge legal fees and reducing its ability to create jobs for those at the bottom of the economic ladder.

So are unions a problem for the social enterprise movement?

The ~7500 subscriber global social enterprise listserv I manage, the npEnterprise Forum, recently discussed this topic. Some of the comments provide insight into this question. One person noted that, after a recent merger, their staff who provide training to transitional jobs participants work under a collective bargaining agreement. The manager reported that going from pre-union to union affiliation “hasn’t been too noticeable.”

But other commenters told a different story. One person wrote that: “After working in private sector employee relations for many years and now several years in business development for a social enterprise, I have seen a few cases where a union could be appropriate and helpful when management performs poorly. In the not for profit SE — with a mission — there should never be a need to pay for third party intervention. If there is such a need, then the mission is wrong or not being achieved and the SE should be dissolved.”

Strong words, but that comment was echoed by another practitioner with decades of experience operating a social enterprise.

“The union, by default and heritage, serves as a 3rd party whose purpose is to protect workers from the abuses and self-interest of management. It must first convince the worker that this tension exists, however, because it’s going to charge the worker monthly for the privilege of having his/her interests protected. The union’s business model is entirely dependent upon making the the threat of abuse and mistreatment very real. It’s the only way to get your foot in the door and thereafter to sustain cash flow. I’m not naïve about potential abuses even within a social enterprise, but when the ultimate success of your business depends on the careful balancing of profits and people, market and mission, there are inherent checks and balances that make 3rd party engagement both unnecessary and potentially problematic.”

What do you think?

• Copyright © 2011 Rolfe Larson Associates – 15th Anniversary!
• Author Venture Forth! Endorsed by Paul Newman of Newman’s Own
• Read my weekly blogs on Social Enterprise and Business Planning

I am so enthusiastic to be the new co-host of the Nonprofit Capacity Blog here at the Free Management Library. Greetings! One topic that hasn’t been mentioned much here, that is an interest of mine is technology for nonprofits and so I plan to write about that subject. Frequently when nonprofits talk about capacity building they forget to include technology as a critical and important piece of that puzzle.

Recently the Johns Hopkins University Center for Civil Studies in association with ten leadership nonprofit organizations completed a study of nonprofits and technology. I’d like to share some key findings.

Although virtually all nonprofits use technology and it is frequently well integrated into financial, administrative and fundraising functions it lags well behind into integration into program and services.

I was surprised to see the low level of importance was put on technology for advocacy/lobbying, staff training and recruiting/managing volunteers as I see technology playing a key role in these areas.

Small nonprofits sometimes have older computers that are not networked, have outdated virus and other important updates, literally no IT support, slow internet connections and no ability to access information and work from home. They didn’t ask but if they have these problems security is also a nightmare. Fortunately they are in the minority.

Here’s the good news – many nonprofits – large and small are making great use of technology and it is paying off.

Some innovative ways a diverse group of nonprofits were using technology in delivering programs and services:

– Putting client data and assessments into digital format to determine service needs;

– Enabling the public to access materials such as oral history recordings, archival photographs, and

genealogical information;

– Releasing public policy alerts to mobilize members and supporters;

– Screening benefits and eligibility online for elderly individuals;

– Providing opportunities for autistic adolescents to communicate using technology;

– Making exhibits available on-line so that teachers can use them in their classrooms;

– Employing YouTube videos for therapy with children.

Organizations reported that over the previous year alone, incorporating

IT into program and service delivery

• • Helped create a public presence for their organizations -89%
• • Increased their capacity to communicate with clients, customers, and patrons – 87%
• • Resulted in faster service delivery – 83%
• • Improved the quality of services delivered – 80%
• • Allowed them to be more client, customer, and patron-friendly in delivering services – 78%
• • Allowed them to serve more people – 71%
• • Satisfied funder and/or regulator requirements – 71%
• • Allowed them to make innovations in their programs – 67%
• • Resulted in cost savings in service delivery – 67%
• • Allowed them to expand into new program areas – 56%

Lack of funding is one of the leading reasons given for this lag by some nonprofits. In a future post, I’ll have some ideas for dealing with technology funding more effectively.

See the whole Johns Hopkins report here.

——————

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

——————

Just being on this list is a crisis.

Businesses are not expected to be perfect. In fact, the public is fairly forgiving of small mistakes if they are admitted to and corrected quickly, and even big problems can be countered over time. The problem arises, though, when an organization lets things go too far. This is the situation that landed many companies on 24/7 Wall St.’s list of “The Fifteen Most Hated American Companies of 2010.” Without further ado, here it is:

1. American Airlines

2. Nokia

3. Toyota

4. Best Buy

5. Charter Communications

6. Citigroup

7. AT&T

8. Bank of America

9. Dell

10. Dish Network

11. Johnson & Johnson

12. McDonald’s

13. United Airlines

14. British Petroleum

15. DirecTV

While many on the list were there for perpetuating a culture of poor customer service and unethical practices, several of the organizations are formerly respected companies (Toyota and J&J, to name two of the biggest) whose crisis management and communication skills were found lacking when things got hot, allowing their problems to expand into reputation damage.

——————————-
For more resources, see the Free Management Library topic: Crisis Management
——————————-

[Jonathan Bernstein is president of Bernstein Crisis Management, Inc. , an international crisis management consultancy, and author of Keeping the Wolves at Bay – Media Training.]

One bad quote can send you scrambling for crisis management

Boy, was last week a tough one for New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. With his city stung by a 20-inch blizzard, its sixth-worst on record, and massive delays in cleaning up the mess, “Mayor Mike” managed to put his foot in his mouth for what will likely not be the last time in his political career.

Saying Monday that #snowloko (Editor’s note: the Twitter shorthand for a huge snowstorm) was “inconvenient,” while urging New Yorkers to see a Broadway show (seemingly oblivious to the fact that millions of outer-borough residents were literally trapped in their homes — and would be for several days — because of his administration’s mismanagement and bungling of the cleanup effort) Bloomberg perfectly exemplified a new reality that is starting to emerge in crisis management in the digital age: words, much like images, can make or break you

This quote, taken from a PR Breakfast Club blog post by Keith Trivitt, is a fine example of the reality described – the amazing damage potential of a thoughtless comment. I would argue, though, that this new reality is not just starting to emerge, but has been blossoming for quite some time and is at an all-time high due to the rapid and easy mass communication opportunities provided by social media and mobile devices with unparalleled levels of Internet access.

With masses of E-reporters, both amateur and professional, constantly searching for the next attention-grabbing headline, a poor choice of words by your sleepy CEO on his way out the door could easily be broadcast and re-broadcast, circulated throughout the Web, and end up in eyeshot of a sizable number of your stakeholders before the next morning.

Doesn’t sound fun? The only way to prevent this type of incident is to make sure every member of your organization is aware of the impact that even seemingly insignificant statements can have, and take the time to set up regular media training sessions to hone the skills of your communicators and leadership.

——————————-
For more resources, see the Free Management Library topic: Crisis Management
——————————-

[Jonathan Bernstein is president of Bernstein Crisis Management, Inc. , an international crisis management consultancy, and author of Keeping the Wolves at Bay – Media Training.]

Over the past several weeks, I have been reading a lot about predictions and strategies for 2011. The predictions and strategies have a great deal of overlap and many focus on new legislation and an increased awareness of how the legal landscape and a new focus on enforcement of laws by the Department of Labor and the EEOC will impact your business. While this is very good advice and I would always encourage that you do a “legal check” from time to time, focusing solely on this in 2011 will continue to drive failures in your talent management. Please don’t misunderstand my message; I haven’t forgotten HR’s role in mitigating legal risk and the need to keep informed and updated on legislative changes. While this is critical in our role, focus on it shouldn’t be a tactic we employ because the government is stepping up its enforcement. Following the law should be everyday business.
Focusing on your talent management strategy should also be everyday business. For 2011, the one statistic I can’t get out of my head came from an article on CNN.com. The article cited a survey conducted by Manpower that found that 84% of employees will look for a new position in 2011. Take a moment. Let that sink in. Think of your talent. Your top talent is marketable. If 84% of them seek another position, it is likely at least 20% will find a position. So here’s how it might turn out for you. The talented folks find other employment and you are left with a staff of meets expectations. OR you do a great job with you talented folks, so your meets expectations folks leave because they are ignored. Either way, who stays? That’s right, the needs improvement crowd who you’ve ignored or have been too afraid or too busy to coach.

My advice for 2011, get busy with your talent and your legal issues if you have them. Don’t let anything go one more day without attention. Be the hero and get started.

—

For more resources, See the Human Resources library.

—

Sheri Mazurek is training and human resource professional with over 16 years of management experience, and is skilled in all areas of employee management and human resource functions, with a specialty in learning and development. She is available to help you with your Human Resources and Training needs on a contract basis. For more information send an email to smazurek0615@gmail.com or visit www.sherimazurek.com. Follow me on twitter @Sherimaz.

Good crisis management means being prepared for the worst

Being well prepared beforehand is probably the number one way to minimize the impact of crises on your organization. While this may seem obvious, most are at a loss as to what steps to take to ensure this preparedness. In a recent post on the Preparis.com blog, Cassie Harman gave a good list of steps that should get anyone started thinking on the right path, including this one:

Who does what?

Decide who is going to be your primary company spokesperson (usually the CEO in a major crisis) as well as two backups, and provide them with crisis media training to help them communicate effectively and deal with the kind of challenging questions that they would be asked in a real crisis situation. Clearly define the role of other key executives, such as the president of the company, in both external and internal communications. Identify subject matter experts within your organization that may need to be called upon to provide specialized information relating to a particular topic, and ensure that your legal and PR departments or agencies are on board with your plan and are prepared to support the spokespeople during a crisis situation.

Especially with the speed at which information is expected to move these days, there is no time to make these decisions mid-crisis. By having every role assigned, you can react smoothly and decisively to the twists and turns that are bound to arise.

——————————-
For more resources, see the Free Management Library topic: Crisis Management
——————————-

[Jonathan Bernstein is president of Bernstein Crisis Management, Inc. , an international crisis management consultancy, and author of Keeping the Wolves at Bay – Media Training.]

Just wanted to mention a listserv devoted exclusively to social enterprise. Its focus is learning more about how organizations can develop successful social enterprise strategies to generate earned income to pursue mission, build capacity and achieve greater sustainability.

If you’re interested, you’re invited to join the 7500-subscriber npEnterprise Forum listserv, the official listserv partner of the Social Enterprise Alliance.

This free, no-spam listserv offers friendly interactions among colleagues who seek to learn from each other about social enterprise strategies and best practices. Subscribers range from newcomers to experienced venture managers, and include nonprofit staff, funders, consultants, professors, students, and many others. The maximum is one email per day.

Recent discussion topics include social enterprise compensation issues, the ins and outs of LLCs and L3C legal structures, and managing partnerships with for profit organizations.

This listserv is consistently ranked as THE most valuable interactive resource about social enterprise.

We hope you will join the discussion! Subscriptions are free, and can be canceled at any time.

For more information, visit http://www.npenterprise.net

Or, to subscribe, just send a blank email to npEnterprise-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Engaging in reputation management is not a choice, but a necessity

The availability of easy online publishing tools has given everyone a voice and the power to reach an audience. This can be a very positive thing, what with fans, evangelists and brand ambassadors helping to spread the word. On the other hand it opens the door to greater risk and the need for constant vigilance, as inaccurate information and bad news can spread rapidly online.

Reputation Management has long been a core PR function and now, more than ever, we have to be aware of what is being said about the organization and be able to take effective action to correct any threat to the organization’s image. Listening to the online conversations and having a PR team that is trained to react effectively is no longer an option – it is a necessity. You can’t afford to be caught unawares or react incorrectly.

This quote, from a post by Sally Falkow on The ProActive Report, reinforces one of the primary topics of this blog. Most crises do damage the reputations of the involved parties, but if an organization’s reputation is in good enough standing before trouble strikes, then it can avoid going “into the negative” so to speak. At the same time, smart and responsible handling of a crisis can actually bolster reputations to a point beyond where they previously were. As our methods of communications change, reputation management efforts must adapt. By staying on top of the where your stakeholders meet to talk and, yes, complain, you can stay two steps ahead of coming trouble.

——————————-
For more resources, see the Free Management Library topic: Crisis Management
——————————-

[Jonathan Bernstein is president of Bernstein Crisis Management, Inc. , an international crisis management consultancy, and author of Keeping the Wolves at Bay – Media Training.]