http://www.centerega.com/our-blog/rss.html description http://www.centerega.com/our-blog/post/rekindle-your-mission-provide-hope-in-your-community.html Let’s face it, the Non-Profit Sector enjoys a unique role in our communities. And, there is no time like the present to offer the hope that a non-profit’s mission can bring to the people you serve. By definition, your organization has a unique mission to share – were it not so, the IRS would not have granted your charitable status! In a time where our communities are reeling from the effects of the economy, harsh rains, snow, wind, fire, floods, and the like, we would recommend you take a moment to rekindle your mission. What does your mission say? What does your organization do? Are there some community needs within your mission that can provide hope in your community? Is it time to reintroduce your organization to your community? You do remember that you have a mission statement, right? While it was likely conceived a good while ago, and while it is probably a little broad or maybe too vague or the words don’t say exactly what they should, we are living in a time when your organization is needed more than ever to bring new hope and ideas to your community. That’s why you exist! To ‘rekindle’ your mission, as we say, start with finding it and reading it. Actually, spend some quality time studying it. Does it give you hope? Does it empower you to instill hope and take action on issues of importance in your community? If the words are not clear, then ponder how you could tweak your mission statement and make them clearer – actually, really clear – so that your constituents readily understand why you exist and what your role can and should be. You have a truly wonderful opportunity in the midst of challenging times. Although the focus of this article is serving your community, through hope, within the unique mission you provide, we suggest that you not miss the opportunity to reinvigorate staff, volunteers, and board members as you rekindle your mission. We know that without dedicated workers and volunteers in your non-profit, you will fall short of your mission, so the act of providing hope and a renewed level of excitement within your organization is an important key ingredient to achieving your mission in the community. So, exactly how would you go about organizing a ‘rekindling activity’ inside your organization? We will only suggest an example that you can control entirely, that will cost nothing, and is guaranteed to work – if for no other reason than it has probably not been done before! After you, presumably as the board chair or the executive director, have studied your current mission statement and developed some initial thoughts about how to rekindle it, call a meeting of your key internal advisors – that may be key staff, all staff, a few board members, devoted volunteers, whatever is appropriate for your unique organization – and conduct the meeting in a way that is intentionally different from the norm in your non-profit. For example, if you have staff meetings on Wednesdays at 10 a.m., call your special meeting at some other time! If your board meetings are always at lunch, then call a special meeting for breakfast! You are trying rekindle excitement, dedication, and commitment, so make sure you do something that is very obviously different from the norm. Prior to your meeting, send out your mission statement, with your thoughts and notes on what jumps out at you that can provide hope to your community at this precise moment. We are not particularly suggesting that this exercise results in a revision of your mission (although it might) but, rather, we are suggesting that all missions provide room for creativity and excitement when intentionally interpreted in that manner. In your cover note, tell the participants that you are excited about some opportunities you have been thinking about and that you want to get their input. Remind them of the importance of your organization and your mission of community service. In short, prepare them for an exciting meeting that will have one or two specific outcomes – opportunities for hope – that will get done. What are those outcomes? Let them flow from the meeting participants! To be realistic, monkeying around with a sacred mission statement can be a tricky thing, so you really want to rise above all of that. Quite simply, you are looking for a much-needed, easy-to-implement idea, which fulfills your mission in the community in your own unique way. You know your organization can make a difference and you are about to provide the leadership to make it happen. So, while you may arrive to the meeting with a couple of ideas, or you may have some participants that have some other ideas, let the group flow toward consensus. If you facilitate properly, this will happen. The main ingredient in this meeting is excitement (an attitude) that leads to hope (by a specific doable thing). Who knows? You might get lucky and end up with several great ideas. But, the most important thing is that you come away from this special meeting with one solid idea. Our organization teaches through case studies, or examples, so we will provide an example. Let’s say your non-profit is a museum. Any museum. You have a mission to share your collection and your unique way of educating the public within your community. You already know that. Is there a constituency within your community that is underserved? How about an event that brings in a group from a local retirement home? Imagine the excitement and hope that such a visit could instill! What does it cost? Probably nothing. Most retirement homes have transportation for groups of residents. If not, call a bus company and ask for a one-time donation of services. It is pretty amazing how donors are willing to make a one-time gift of their services for an unusual idea that will bring hope to the community. There’s a certain good will component for the donor. Ah, and for your organization. After all, that’s why you exist. Your local media might even find your project of hope to be of interest! Your community needs your non-profit now more than ever. Good luck. Make it happen. And, please let us know how it goes. http://www.centerega.com/our-blog/post/the-study-of-ethics-doing-no-harm-vs-doing-whats-right.html I continue to urge the study of ethics as a proactive exercise for all non-profit organizations. In my previous articles, I have stated that I find ethics to be among the most important business issues of our time (and all time). The purpose of this article is to draw distinctions between the options for ethics introspection and to urge an active and thoughtful approach to the study of ethics and its resulting application to your organization. Simply stated, nobody can define ‘ethics’ for your organization. Sure, it’s a pretty easy thing to provide you with a list of things that are obviously wrong that you should avoid, but the power of a ‘study in ethics’ lies primarily in the active study of the issue, not in the passive reading of standardized prescriptions, books, or series of articles. In other words, to really study ethics, you must truly give it some thought and, most importantly, you must apply your thoughts to the particular circumstances of your own organization. If you take the time to do that, you can raise the issue of ethics from the level of ‘compliance’ to ‘excellence’ – and, your non-profit will have an opportunity to positively distinguish itself in a time of unprecedented funding competition among your contributors and grantors. Fairly common is the notion that ethical behavior may be defined as ‘doing no harm’ and, while I do not disagree with this premise, I do not believe it is appropriately proactive for the kind of study in ethics that I advocate. There is just something about the phrase ‘doing no harm’ that immediately leads me to wonder about going a step beyond. And, in any commitment to excellence, going the extra distance is always the determining factor. It just seems that the notion of ‘doing no harm’ only take us to a point of achieving some minimum standard, of erring on the side of caution, of not stepping across the line, of playing it safe. This interpretation of ethics falls short of its full potential. If your study in ethics leads you to adopt a mantra of ‘doing what’s right’ then it becomes considerably more proactive. While only you can define what ‘right’ means for your non-profit organization, it is entirely logical that discerning what is ‘right’ becomes a more aggressive and positive study than avoiding what is ‘wrong’ (i.e. the notion of ‘harm’). I was once consulting with a quasi-governmental housing agency and was in a meeting with a number of its top managers. The issue at hand was the development of a relocation policy for residents about to be effected by the renovation of a housing development. The management staff was struggling with the specifics of the development of the policy – which was a very appropriate subject for discussion, debate, and decision – after all, the policy would need to be fair, anticipate all manner of unforeseen contingencies, and be applied consistently among several hundred affected residents. In other words, although unspoken, the policy needed to be ethical (however that was to be defined). It needed to either ‘do no harm’ or at least minimize the amount of harm inherent to the naturally disruptive activity of relocating a household. The challenges of developing the policy were real and the angst surrounding the discussion was appropriate. After a healthy and open dialogue session, the enlightened executive director summed up staff’s various concerns, issues, and suggestions by simply stating that he wanted the organization to be firmly grounded in ‘doing what’s right’ in the application of the policy. To this day, I recall the positive and transformative shift that occurred in that meeting once the notion of ‘doing what’s right’ was introduced as the guiding principle. Now, of course, ‘right’ means something a little different to everybody, so how does ‘right’ really provide direction for staff when determining proper policy interpretation? Well, I can tell you this, without any reservation, I do not recall a single incident when ‘right’ did not result in exceeding expectations and tipping the scales in the appropriate direction whenever an interpretation of that policy arose. The person selected to head the activity had no experience in that area – nobody on the staff did – but she understood the concept of ‘right’ and she applied it fairly and consistently. She also completed her tasks on time and on budget, so the daily performance of her duties required difficult decisions; it was never intimated that ‘right’ would always be easy. The notion of ‘right’ turned her daily application of a much-dreaded relocation requirement into an award-winning, unprecedented fulfillment of a critical activity that was a very early step in the scope of work for a large multi-year project. Had the initial relocation part of the project gone poorly, the success of the overall renovation would have been potentially irreparably jeopardized. Quite simply, though, it worked. And, it worked very well. Through this case study, I now have a realistic understanding of ‘doing what’s right’ and knowing that it works. I would recommend that your own study of ethics include some research and some quiet time. Does your organization have an ethics policy? If so, get it out and review it; if not, find a couple of examples and study them. Then, spend some quiet time and ponder how you would craft your own ethics policy for a presentation to your board of directors. I believe that this approach will provide you with a successful study in ethics and will begin to shape a draft policy that can transform your organization – from ‘safe’ to ‘excellent’ – and, I believe the future of your non-profit depends on it. Endeavor to make it so. http://www.centerega.com/our-blog/post/cega-case-study-feed-the-children-where-are-the-policies.html It’s any non-profit’s worst nightmare: a February 18, 2010 CBS News 6 p.m. national story by Katie Couric that highlights a complaint of misused funds by a charity. Where are the policies that guide the governance, ethics, and accountability of the non-profit? This article will serve as a case study to highlight the importance of several very obvious issues that could have been easily prevented. It is not intended as a review of “Feed the Children” or an evaluation of the need or the effectiveness of its program. Rather, it is a reaction to the elements presented in the news story and an illustration of how proper policies can prevent and/or guide an organization during a time of accusation or investigation, neither of which should necessarily be bad for any non-profit. CEGA believes that all non-profits need ‘a seal of approval’ and the problems highlighted by the “Feed the Children” news story provide an excellent learning opportunity.By way of brief background, “Feed the Children” was reportedly the fifth largest charity, with annual contributions of over $1 billion. CBS reported on a very public dispute between its founder and his daughter, who is now employed by the charity. Allegations of misuse of funds have been made public in various lawsuits and countersuits. A watchdog organization reports that the charity has been questioned for over a decade about its operation. Among the very serious allegations are that only 15% of the funds raised directly support the need for which the charity was established. Recent allegations include disaster relief efforts in Haiti, whereby camps have been established to feed hungry children. The investigation by CBS into the operation of a Haiti relief camp indicates considerable confusion and misinformation surrounding performance of the charity and the role it was to play. The United Nations alleges falsehoods by the charity. It has been reported that no meals were served by the charity to any children after two weeks of camp operation. Amid the investigative reporting for the CBS story, the Haiti-based coordinator for “Feed the Children” resigned last week.Let’s start with what we believe is the single most important policy for any non-profit: its conflict of interest policy. Such a policy could be very brief – or very inclusive – or it could include specific subpolicies, but the conflict of interest policy should guide an organization whenever there is an issue, for example, between its founder and family member who is an employee of the charity. Such a policy may rightly prohibit the employment of a family member, and may describe the types of financial transactions that are and are not acceptable by the charity. For example, spending charitable funds on the lifestyle of any employee is not good policy for any non-profit. If such a policy is in place, the governing body, presumably its board of directors, has a working tool in place to measure compliance. And, if the policy has been adopted and is on record, it states, for all donors to see, the intentions of the organization.The absence of such a policy does not mean the intentions were not appropriate, but it sure makes it difficult to prove, to measure, and to govern. Having any policy in place before a problem occurs can only be considered wise and proactive. CEGA believes that such proactivity will become increasingly important as donor contributions become more and more discerning. While the conflict of interest policy should provide the cornerstone for any set of non-profit policies, many other policies can be customized to meet the specific needs of an organization. Examples include: investment policies, policies that guide administrative costs versus direct services (which are required reporting for non-profits in many states), employment policies that restrict the hiring of family members and, more specifically, establish an arms-length distance between the board of directors and the staff, so that family members cannot serve on the board that appoints other family members as staff. Other examples include strict guidelines on appropriate expenditures, particularly all that fall under the category of “entertainment and expense reimbursement” and policies that outline the compensation methodology adopted by the board. Absence of such policies leaves open the opportunity for allegations and does not provide the board with the tools for making clear determinations when circumstances arise. Let us hasten to add that the mere adoption of policy does not ensure the proper operation of the non-profit; the intent of the policy must become part of the fabric and culture of the organization, which accrues to its benefit over time.When a non-profit faces an accusation that would destroy the public trust placed in that organization, it is nothing short of tragic to learn that the operation was not guided by sound policy and guidelines. In the wake of Enron and Madoff, a wise non-profit would do well to anticipate increased regulation of the likes of Sarbanes-Oxley and to move boldly toward self-regulation as a competitive advantage over its peer organizations. Why? Because enlightened self-governance is always the right thing to do. And, compliance with the IRS regulations that enabled the establishment of the charitable organization is the law. http://www.centerega.com/our-blog/post/defining-your-executive-accountability.html In our study of ethics, governance, and accountability at CEGA, we find that certain principles are more readily comprehendible and applicable than others. For example, ethics and governance seem to be more definable than, say, the issue of accountability. Why is that so? We believe it may have to do with the fact that accountability is a bit more amorphous: is it something that you heap upon yourself, or is it something that is done unto you? We will explore the importance of defining executive accountability in this article because we suggest it can be an instructive leadership tool. To the extent that a non-profit organization clearly understands that the IRS is its regulatory agency – a very different function than the IRS serves for either individuals or for-profit organizations – then the issue of accountability connotes ‘penalties, recompense, and consequences’ for unacceptable behavior. A ‘punishment’ of sorts. At CEGA, our goal is to move issues such as accountability to the proactive level where it can become an attribute of the non-profit in its competition for funding dollars and program excellence. Let’s take a look at a couple of pertinent examples. We selected these examples to make you think and they may not immediately appear applicable to a discussion on accountability. But, they truly are. In a recent Newsweek magazine article, Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury, shares his thought that “Being human is learning how to ask critical questions of your own habits and compulsions, and it’s learning how to adjust them against a model of human behavior – an idealized truth about the purpose of our humanity.” He goes on to talk about “balancing acts” and “calculations of self-interest and security” and “resolution of buried tensions” and directs them toward an ultimate end: “as a means to finding our way to a life that manifests something, a life that doesn’t just solve problems of survival and profit.” (Newsweek, February 8, 2010, page 11) In her book, “How to Get Your Wiggle Back,” author Nan Hoy Shaw tells a story she says has been around for a long time. She calls it the “White Horse” story and it’s about an old man, the son he loves, the white horse he finds, the king that wants to buy his white horse, the white horse that leaves him and then returns with even more white horses, and so on. It’s a story about life and our outlook on life; a story that could go on and on, without end. And, as Shaw says, “The point is that the old man was able to focus and identify what he knew without judging the rightness or wrongness of the situation.” She goes on to say, “Many of us often have pieces of information that we judge as good or bad when we really don’t know very much of the story at all.” (“How to Get Your Wiggle Back” – Nan Hoy Shaw, Mattermatics Publishing, © 2009, page 49) Executive-level leaders need to solve an equation. An equation just for themselves. We suggest that it could look like this: Proactive Leadership Excellence + Asking Critical Questions + Gathering Buried Information + Avoiding Judgment = Executive Accountability. That's not THE equation, but that's AN equation. Simply a starting point. Some of the components in this ‘equation’ are subjective and some are objective, which adds to the challenge of coming up with your own personal solution. These challenges serve to strengthen an outcome that can best be derived through your own reflections and pursuits.  How does ‘executive’ accountability differ from what is expected of others? Simple. If you are in a position of authority – in particular, we would suggest, in a non-profit organization where your very existence is a regulatory privilege (your IRS exemption letter) and your primary mission (per your IRS excemption application) is community service – then you (as executive director) should bear an appropriately heavier burden on issues of accountability in keeping with the position of responsibility you hold. There simply must be no denying this fact. (If you harbor any doubt whatsoever, ask yourself if the governance structure of your non-profit is solid.) I was recently given a real example by a long-time board member of a local non-profit organization (who was also a former chair of that board, so he had good experience -- both in governance and with the mission of the specific organization). He shared with me that he recently attended an executive committee meeting whereupon the executive director was openly berating a staff member about whatever issue was being questioned by the board members. However you would choose to define ‘executive accountability’ for yourself  -- and within the context of your organization -- we would suggest this true example serves to epitomize a leadership behavior and an accountability style that you should not emulate! Please consider: if you were to ponder this example -- and demonstrate an accountability style that was the antithesis (absolute opposite) of the example shared above, then do you think the board member would have shared a different and more positive story? When you found this article, were you hoping for a prescription that would lead you to one of those ‘one-size-fits-all’ definitions of executive accountability? If so, then we were not likely successful as you reach the conclusion of this article. However, if you have found a few tid-bits in this article that you feel are thought-provoking and realistic, then hopefully these issues will better inform your own personal search for the solution to your very own and unique ‘equation.’ If so, then this article has accomplished its purpose. We would invite and encourage you to participate in an instructive dialogue with your peers by replying to this blog post and sharing your actual experiences as well as your thoughts. We believe that actual examples -- and real dialogue -- is of major benefit to everyone as we seek to move closer toward excellence. http://www.centerega.com/our-blog/post/living-ethically-among-the-unethical.html Ethics is among the most important business issues of our time. Many believe we have reached the tipping point. Given the similar – yet important differences - between non-profits and for-profits, an informed dialogue about the issues of non-profit ethics is of growing importance. This article will serve to frame the issue of ethics in the non-profit arena and, specifically, will illuminate challenges that the unethical status quo poses to even the best intentioned aspiring practitioners of ethical behavior.A word of caution before we begin: being a student and devotee to the principles of ethics should not be misinterpreted as any ‘holier than thou’ stance. Just because I believe ethics to be critical to success in our world today does not anoint me in any way, nor does it mean I have found the perfect style, nor does it mean I should be empowered to discern the choices made by others. Instead, what I intend to accomplish with this dialogue is a realistic assessment of the role ethics should play in our daily decision-making process, together with an honest admission that it is tough to ‘play by the rules’ when it often seems that others do not – this is particularly challenging when it appears that others have no apparent conscience about their decision to ignore the importance of ethics in their lives. These are real issues – true challenges – and it seems to me that the very best we can do is be willing to talk about the issues, learn from our experiences, and define our own personal commitment to ethical behavior.Readers of my articles know that I like to use actual examples – which I often call ‘case studies’ – to provide insights into the situations we are attempting to analyze. I believe very strongly that the use of actual examples takes us away from an ‘opinion-based’ approach and allows us to enter a ‘fact-based,’ carefully researched, informed approach. The differences between opinion and fact, I believe, are very important. Quite frankly, when it comes to learning about issues as important as ethics, I am not much interested in opinions – I want the facts and I want examples that help me make the tough decisions. So, that’s what this article is all about.Example 1: I was driving on a divided highway and a car approached me in the opposite direction, slowed down, abruptly made a U-turn onto my side of the highway, stayed in my lane, did not accelerate, and nearly killed us both. Guess what? There was not a car in sight behind me! That was a real situation. The fact that we both could have died was real as well. But, importantly, that was not an ethical situation! There was nothing unethical about a person making that particular stupid decision. It’s of no use to analyze why that driver did what they did. After I got my wits about me, I thought to myself that it was entirely likely that the driver did not even know what they had done. This example provides some guidance on what ethics is not. In the absolute, ethics is not about ‘shades of gray’ – it’s a clear-cut (right or wrong/yes or no) outcome – either it’s ethical or it’s not. However, to the extent that our society wants to create distinctions of gray, the challenge of ‘living ethically among the unethical’ is heightened. The societal penchant that yearns for ‘gray’ makes it all the more important that a personal process for determining ethical behavior be defined as precisely as possible in order that it may be practiced with clarity and purpose.The study of ethics must be founded upon a system, or a set, of moral values; or, you may prefer to consider them to be principles. We know from other bodies of research and many popular self-improvement programs that we are supposed to view ‘principles’ as fundamental laws – unchangeable – clearly understood – that provide us with certain rules of conduct that can serve to provide assurances about our behavior which enable us to transcend all shades of gray. To be guided by such principles, those very principles must be inherently interwoven into the very psyche of the individual. The knowledge, practice, and application of those principles must be initially a conscious decision (as we seek to learn) and then morph into an unconscious foundational component (as we seek to apply). No list of ethical behaviors exists; we are left to be guided by what we know (fundamentally) to be a disciplined approach to dealing with good or bad, right or wrong. It is not, thankfully, unethical for people to be in dispute, to have differences of opinions, and to fiercely defend their beliefs.Example 2: A current issue of great national confusion – the Wall Street Bailout and Bonuses – is a useful example. The day-to-day test of ethical behavior must be (emphasize: MUST be) distinguishable in the simple question that should always be in the back of our minds: ‘Am I doing the right thing?’ Without intending to assign any absolute meanings to any description of the Wall Street example, the majority of the American people likely understood that federal funds ‘bailed out’ Wall Street, may have believed that economic stability was at stake, and probably felt that a successful outcome necessitated action (even if the majority of us don’t really understand the science involved), but few Americans seem to accept the ongoing bonus payouts and high salaries that continue among those companies that were bailed out. Legal? Probably. The right thing to do? Doubtful. But, most importantly, was it ethical? No. Here’s why: to the extent that conscious decisions, strategic plans, CEO and board-driven actions were guided by the need to return stimulus money to the feds in order to restore the payment of bonuses, then those decisions step across the line of principle and indicate an ethical breach was consciously made. The likelihood that this is true is exacerbated by the fact that the programmatic public purpose of the stimulus funding plan has been a failure by any measure. Applying the simple question: ‘Am I doing the right thing?’ the Wall Street example is very instructive in any dialogue concerning ethics. And, let us not forget, what is ‘legal’ is not always what is ‘morally right’ (ethical), even though the opposite is not true (nothing can be illegal yet ethical). Suggestion: if you have to ask yourself if an action is ethical, chances are it is not. You should recheck your moral compass.But, how do you draw a distinction between legal/illegal and ethical/unethical? My third and final case study actually involves a non-profit situation that is directly related to the issues of ethics in the daily life of an executive director. The great thing about case studies is that they are real. You simply cannot invent anything nearly as good as a factual example.Example 3: A relatively new non-profit organization was on the verge of consummating its largest deal. The organization was to sell a non-performing real estate asset to a buyer/donor whereupon the proceeds would become the lead gift in what was the ‘quiet phase’ of a yet-to-be-publicly-announced capital campaign. The deal was years in the making. A letter of intent had been dated three years previously. The closing was set and, as things happen, a breakdown in communications resulted in the deal being called off. The breakdown was related to the terms of the funds that had been designated by the donor. A meeting was requested by the donor with the volunteer board chair. The executive director attended the meeting as well. During the meeting, the chair of the non-profit board explained that the non-profit was truly trying to be accommodating, but that the donor had caused the problem by changing the terms of the deal at the last minute. Confused, the donor looked at the executive director for clarification, but got none. Realizing that the chair was genuinely concerned, well-intentioned, yet uninformed, the donor sized up the situation properly, decided to acquiesce, and the deal went through. What happened? The executive director had never shared the donor’s letter of intent (which was three years old – and – spelled out the precise wishes) with the board. Realizing what had happened – and desiring to rise to the charitable cause that the deal was created to serve – the donor did not point out to the board chair that the executive director had withheld the written documentation that substantiated the very issue that the donor was trying to resolve. To this day, that piece of information remains known to only a very few people. So, was there a legal issue? Yes, there sure could have been – in other words, the donor would have had legal grounds not to close on the deal – the letter clearly identified the terms. But, beyond the legal issue, and desiring to do the ‘right thing’ the donor rose to the occasion, focused on the charitable issue, and decided not to point out the obvious ethical breach: namely, that the executive director never shared the information with the board. How does this happen? At any point over a three-year period, would not an occasion have arisen by which the facts/intentions of the donor would have been communicated by the executive director to the board? But, unfortunately, poor communications is not an ethical issue. When did this situation become an ethical one? I would suggest that the ethical breach took place on the part of the executive director at least by the time the donor questioned the confusion that surrounded the deal, called the executive director, and requested a meeting with the board chair. It was not ethical for the executive director to continue to withhold information from the board about the terms of the deal nor was it ethical for the executive director to allow the donor to believe the board had known the true facts. At that particular point in the meeting, the donor did not know what the board chair did not know. Nor did the donor have any reason to suspect that a three-year-old written document had not been shared with the non-profit board by its executive director. One must question why the executive director never told the board – not even when there was significant opportunity for embarrassing exposure in the meeting. The question ‘is it right?’ continues to resonate. And, it’s ‘not right’ to withhold pertinent information, watch a disagreement unfold, make no attempt to set the record straight, and continue to act as if there was never clarity on the matter. Currently, there stands a donor that will always wonder what else that same executive director has not revealed about other deals. That’s a fair concern for this donor to have – and, it undermines the entire charitable process for the non-profit organization. How does this donor go about ‘living ethically among the unethical’ executive director?It is my hope that continued dialogue on the importance of ethics can be stimulated by this article. The organization to which I belong, The Center for Ethics, Governance, and Accountability (CEGA) is committed to creating ongoing opportunities for non-profit leaders to share case studies on issues of ethics. Given the complexity of the subject matter – and the importance that ethics plays in the overall existence of any non-profit organization – it is my desire to see the level of consciousness and awareness raised to the point where ethics is on our minds every single day – especially, the simple yet powerful question: “is this the right thing to do?” http://www.centerega.com/our-blog/post/executive-directors-happy-new-year-happy-new-decade.html Happy New Year to all the executive directors of all the non-profit organizations across our country! Actually, it’s not just a new year, but it’s a New Decade. Endeavor to make the most of it. I am increasingly of the opinion that ‘ethics’ is the key issue that will set your organization apart from all the rest. Sadly, we are not having to look far to find examples – actually, case studies in-of-themselves – of serious ethical breaches all around us. Do you follow them? More importantly, do you analyze them and seek to apply them to your organization? Have you led a fact-based (i.e., actual example) discussion with your board of directors on an ethical issue that could be related to your own organization for the purpose of being instructional, defining leadership, and differentiating your organization from your peers? Is this something you could do in the New Year? If you did, do you agree it would serve your organization well in the New Decade? Let’s face it, as an executive director, you are in the most challenging situation that you have likely ever experienced. While you are definitely not alone, the fact that there are so many non-profit organizations – of extremely diverse mission and purpose – actually minimizes your opportunity to develop a meaningful support network. The non-profits in your community, while conveniently located around you, are your fierce competitors for precious (and dwindling) contribution funding. Finding non-profits of like kind across a broader geographic area takes time and still locks you into a competitive situation. But, connecting yourself with a diverse non-profit executive director network need not be such a challenge – use the power of the technology available to you – use the web and its powerful networking opportunities. Our organization, The Center for Ethics, Governance, and Accountability (CEGA), has but one focus: to provide a safe-haven opportunity for dialogue and reflection among non-profits using ethics (and governance and accountability) as the foundation for strengthening your skills and the reputation of your organization. We have no other priority. No seminars, no library of broad-based information, no national meetings, no field trips – just a full focus on the most challenging issue of our time: ethics. What examples of ethical breaches have you noted in the first three weeks of this New Year? What is the modern day equivalent of “sacred honor?” Virginia just inaugurated its new governor who quoted our Declaration of Independence: namely, that we pledge “our sacred honor” – what does that mean today? Let’s avoid the national (and especially the political) examples that everyone is likely to have already seen or heard; instead, let’s take a look at some real examples – on a smaller, personal, local scale – that all executive directors can incorporate into their thinking. The Harvard Business School has long utilized what it calls a ‘case study’ approach to teaching. CEGA is committed to case studies because they are real, highly instructive, and promote dialogue and thought. In this article, three different examples are offered for your consideration. One involves a non-profit, another is a department of a small local government, and the last is a membership association – but all can be instructional if you apply the situation to your own. A contractor signs an agreement that contains recitals (promises) that are consideration (an inducement to enter a legal contract) but then decides, without explanation, not to honor those promises – and tells you “to sue him” – which is always your right, but is not your desire. Your organization, which is typically the ‘little guy’ in such a disagreement, probably cannot afford to sue – you don’t have the time or the money – so what do you do? Are you in a legal dispute? Sure. But, I would argue the foundational element is ultimately an ethical one. How do you get somebody to behave ethically and honor their word if they have chosen not to do so? A local government entices a successful non-profit organization to relocate across jurisdictional boundaries with the promise that substantial local funding will be provided annually. The executive director works hard on the deal and the board carefully considers the move and approves it. Barely two years later, in what is termed a regretful cost-reduction decision due to the severity of the economic times, the local government eliminates its funding support of the non-profit. The executive director and the board struggles with the situation and is ultimately forced to make the hard decision to close its doors. But, it gets worse. The economic development folks of the same local government approach another non-profit about partnering to offer the same services as it had promised to the previous organization. Wow! How do you even start to understand the issues entangled with this example? Does it make a difference that the non-profit that was driven out is a nationally award winning performer – or – that the ‘new’ non-profit partner has no experience at all? Again, I would argue that the foundational element is an ethical one. An association ‘goes to bid’ on some required professional services. The ‘bid’ is received from a client and friend of the president of the association. When compared to the existing service provider, there is a substantial cost savings, which on the surface sounds like a good thing. Under closer scrutiny, especially since the professional services are regulated by state government, it turns out that the cost savings are the result of a reduced scope of services by the new provider. Worse, the association collects on a claim with the existing service provider even after it knows it will not be continuing its contract. The members of the association are not fully informed of the details; they are told there is a new service provider who is offering more service for less money. Everybody seems happy, right? Wrong! The now-previous service provider has been used and dumped. The savvy association members have asked questions but they cannot get answers. The silent majority does not even know to ask questions. In the end, the association president has done business with a buddy, contracted for inferior services, and left the membership at a disadvantage. Yet another ethical dilemma has occurred in a routine, day-to-day, organizational decision-making process. As executive directors, you have no doubt read about such examples – in fact, you may have even had the misfortune of being involved in such a mishap. There is a common theme that I find very disturbing as we analyze these case studies: the decision maker would argue vigorously that he or she was doing the right thing! Unbelievable. But, unfortunately, very true. And, from my experience, I believe that those committing these unethical acts have deluded themselves into believing that they are correct. Do you see the criticality of focusing on the issue of ethics as we move forward? In order to develop successful strategies for saving or growing your non-profit organization, I would suggest that you should be totally invested in the inward and outward demonstration of ethics. Only you can highlight the importance of ethics among your staff, board, customers, and contributors. Not only is it the right thing to do – and not only is it among the key problems facing our country today – but, a commitment and dedication to ethics can give you an honorable and well-deserved competitive advantage among your peers. Happy New Decade! http://www.centerega.com/our-blog/post/non-profit-strategies-leadership-vs-management-jolting-the-status-quo.html It has been said that the status quo cannot sustain itself.Let’s accept that to be true for the purposes of this article.It’s a timely topic for all non-profit organizations (NPOs). Can leadership influence status quo? How about management? If we were to refer to the Board of Directors and its Executive Director (ED) as ‘The Management Team’ (TMT) who would lead and who would follow? Let’s take a look at a reasonable way to distinguish ‘leadership’ from ‘management’ but let’s also start with the premise that both are needed for any organization (even if, at this point, we don’t even know what ‘both’ means) to be successful.Most people begin their professional lives as ‘doers’ of some activity. (i.e. doctor, lawyer, engineer, accountant, teacher, writer, artist, etc.) After demonstrating competency in a given set of tasks, a person typically begins to move up the ‘management ladder’ as a supervisor, manager, director, administrator, mentor, etc. Usually, a manager is expected to oversee a group of people who execute various specific tasks. He/she is expected to help the individuals render results that exceed what each could produce unguided and without a capable team. A common description of a supervisor or manager includes overseeing the work that has to be done today and planning for the work that has to be done tomorrow. It might even be said that you can only manage what you know, especially if we maintain a narrow definition that expects that a manager will direct the specific output of team members toward a specific goal that requires knowledge of the tasks to make course-corrections along the way.We’ve grown accustomed to accepting that ‘managers’ (as in the case of the highest organizational manager, usually known as the CEO – or, in the non-profit world, the Executive Director) can move about from one organization to another, taking with him/her the set of ‘management skills’ that can be universally applied to any given organization. Let’s take, for example, the ED of any particular non-profit organization: haven’t we witnessed the movement by EDs from one NPO to another in our very own communities? Sure we have. For this ‘movement’ to be successful, it assumes that an ED need not necessarily know about the issues of the new organization but, more importantly, must bring the management success from the old organization (and have good people at the new organization who know the details).Has the assumed ability to shift organizations served us well? Anecdotally, some would cite positive examples and others would be able to point to negative examples. But, what does the data say? I don’t know – I am not knowledgeable of any comprehensive research that would provide meaningful data, particularly for NPOs. Accordingly, everyone who reads this article is going to have to apply his/her own specific community experiences to the notion of ‘management portability’ as we further outline these concepts. So, how (exactly) does a ‘leader’ differ from a ‘manager’ and how do we agree to distinguish one from the other? Is one ‘better’ than the other? Is one born and another acquired? Is one inspired and another taught? Can a manager become a leader or can a leader never become a manager? Are the two mutually exclusive (which is what the ultimate ‘academic’ question is really about)? It seems we need some agreed-upon understanding of the difference between the two (assuming, of course, that you believe there really is a discernable difference between the two…).I believe we have already done a fair job of describing a manager in the paragraphs above. (Managers make things happen – on time, on budget, on schedule – within areas of specificity that are well known to them and their team members.) Now we need to focus on understanding what constitutes a ‘leader’ before we can move the discussion forward.A useful approach to defining leadership (vs. those who ‘follow’ or those who ‘manage’ as directed from higher above) may lie in an exercise that I participated in during a month-long ‘management development course’ (isn’t it curious that the course was not termed ‘leadership’ development but ‘management’ development?). Our group was divided into teams of about five or so. We were to be ‘survivalists’ and we were given a list of about a dozen items of which we could choose maybe three or four to sustain and guide us out of the wilderness. In our assignment, we were to discuss the issue, select the items, and report back to the larger group. I distinctly remember two things from the exercise: (1) this was a real survivalist experience and there were, indeed, a correct number of items that experienced survivors recommended; and (2) the ultimate distinction was not so much what the team picked (right or wrong) but how it came to agree on the items picked. Perhaps this was the ‘leadership’ lesson…As it turns out, we were in fact conducting a ‘leadership’ exercise – not a ‘management’ exercise. The point to be learned (at least for me – and I literally think about this point a couple of times most every week) was how the team came to agree upon the items picked. On the one hand, the very best scenario was the emergence of a ‘leader’ that guided the team toward the selection of the exactly right items; the very worst scenario was a ‘leader’ that successfully guided the team toward the wrong selection of items. In the proverbial end, the successful team was alive and the unsuccessful team was dead. Both had ‘leaders’ – but only one prevailed.To this day, I recall coming away from that exercise with the understanding that the most frightening outcome to any situation that I would experience in the future was to be the ‘leader’ who guided the team toward the ‘wrong’ outcome. Please ponder this situation and apply it in your own life. It was carefully pointed out that the appropriate combination (whatever that means) of ‘persuasion’ and ‘knowledge’ was resulted in the winning edge. Hence, the critical importance of maintained both at the same time.How does a group go about ‘choosing’ a leader? Actually, in my opinion, there are very few opportunities for us to do so during our lifetimes. Let’s think of a number of real-life examples where we (the common ‘we’) have no particularly meaningful input into our ‘leader’ selection. These include: (a) your place of worship – did YOU select the leader? (b) the large corporation where you are employed – did YOU select the leader(s)? (c) your government – actually run by professional, life-long bureaucrats – while YOU may have voted AND your candidate may have won – did YOU really select the actual day-by-day leaders?One of the true ‘leadership selection’ scenarios that fascinates me is the grouping of twelve individuals to serve as a jury – by default, the twelve are almost assuredly unknown to each other – and the manner in which the head juror is selected is fascinating. (Now, here would be an exciting piece of data collection that could yield interesting results...) But the point we are trying to make here is that there are relatively few opportunities for any of us to choose our leaders. But, I would suggest, we choose managers every day.For example, as I write this article, an ocean pier is under construction. Somebody designed it and somebody is now in charge of getting it built. Typically, we call that person a ‘project manager’ – there is a specific scope of work, timeline, and budget – and that ‘manager’ must make it happen. Decisions – by the score – are made daily and there is accountability.So, again, how do we distinguish between ‘managers’ and ‘leaders’ – that is to be the outcome of this article – so, how does this happen?In the survivalist exercise, the members of the group did not know each other any better than the members of a jury, so I think the analogy is reasonably pure. What emerged – inasmuch as I recall – was the exhibition of sheer passion, determination, commitment, persuasion, and the unrelentless drive toward action. Above all – absolutely above all – was the ability to inspire individuals to follow. I would suggest that this is the appropriate (short) definition of ‘leadership” – the ability to inspire others to follow. So, a ‘leader’ was chosen.Follow who to where? For what? And why?Given the above pier construction example, somebody chose a ‘project manager’ – who, in this type of exercise – is responsible, accountable, and very much in charge. Respect? Doesn’t matter. Agreement in the project and the approach? Doesn’t matter. A likeable leader (‘project manager’)? Doesn’t matter. You sign on for the job and the leadership/management structure is already set. You have no opportunity (and certainly no invitation) to question it.Question it? Are leaders allowed to be questioned?Ah, there-in may lay the applicability of non-profit boards to exercise proactive judgment between management and leadership as they strive to achieve superior outcomes.Back to our article title – what are the ‘status quo’ issues that your non-profit must overcome? Is it leadership-based or management-based. Is it an ‘either/or’ or a ‘both/and’ opportunity? These are issues worthy of your focus but not answerable by any one article. However, again, please make sure you offer TMT of your non-profit the opportunity to work through the options.Few dispute that any organization can/should ‘stand still’ (i.e. status quo). However, in this economy, most organizations – especially non-profits – would likely consider it a major success to maintain status quo, at least in the short term. But, leaders (and managers) know this is not acceptable. All organizations, including non-profits, must take the opportunity to move beyond the status quo and outpace all competition. It can be done.Arguably, this is what differentiates ‘leadership’ from ‘management’ – and is an appropriate closure to this article. Leaders must look beyond the status quo – and the admittedly important management skills of TMT – and chart a course that holds the likelihood for much success. Disagreements can – and, particularly on non-profit boards – should occur and be encouraged. Broad participation should be sought by the board chair. I know an ED that firmly believes that everyone is a leader – everyone has influence (good and bad) toward outcomes in every organization – so it is critical to point that leadership energy in a positive direction.From my point of view, I believe the messages that we are currently being sent by various experts indicate ‘leadership’ over ‘management’ (although I also believe you must have both to be successful) because it is recognized that all NPOs must find the ‘next’ way of achieving greatness – not just follow the current or former way. In that regard, in those terms, the argument for ‘leadership’ makes good sense to me. In order to jump-start such an important initiative (I am definitely NOT talking about strategic planning here), perhaps the Board Chair and the ED – or the Executive Committee and TMT – should spend a couple of hours discussing options for conducting a session devoted to future thinking and new ways of doing things. Yes, this is leadership – and – yes, it is needed right now. http://www.centerega.com/our-blog/post/non-profit-realities-exceed-expectations-with-your-fall-donor-request.html In a previous article (http://ezinearticles.com/?expert=Rob_Glenn) we outlined some suggestions for distinguishing your non-profit organization from the competition when you write your “Fall Donor Request” letter. This article will get VERY specific and provide a 3-part framework for your consideration. The entire letter should NEVER exceed one page, no matter how painstaking the editing process. Less is more. Focus on brevity. Your readers will be appreciative. And, you will reap the rewards.First, we know that the economy and the jaded performance of a number of prevalent organizations, including non-profits, have captured the attention of the public and have caused a public outrage that has not yet peaked. You need to consider the following: “We request your continued financial support in these challenging economic times and we have worked to secure our position as a worthy recipient of your donation...”“While our organization has faced all of the challenges you would expect, we seized the opportunity to refocus and we proactively strengthened ourselves by conducting an internal self-audit whereupon we put cutting-edge governance, policies and procedures in place. As you would expect, we are committed to our mission and we 90endeavor to be recognized as ‘best-of-the-best’ in our governance and operations.”Second, competition for contributions is tougher than we ever seen, so the middle portion of your letter must offer compelling reasons to contribute/invest in your organization. Please consider the following:“We are passionate about our mission. Our focus is clear and we are able to demonstrate accountability via our internal controls. We have reviewed and strengthened our tracking of program outcomes. During the past year, we have not only served a record number of clients, but we have tracked the progress of these clients and are pleased to report that our programs have resulted in a 75% success rate, of which we are proud to officially report to our regulatory agencies. We know from benchmarking with our peers that this level of success is unprecedented.”Third, from our experience, we know that short, but powerful, appeals capture the attention of your donor base. If you have followed our recommended format, you have provided the ‘macro’ organizational view in the first paragraph – and – have provided specific program/accountability details in the second paragraph – so, it’s time to close your letter in bold fashion. Please consider:“As you can see, we are passionately focused on our future and we are striving to exceed the accountability of our peers, both in adherence to our mission and reporting our actual performance. Our research shows our performance far exceeds that of our peers (most of whom do not track specific performance indicators) and our commitment to excellence places us in a group that few organizations ever achieve.”“We respectfully request your continued support. We invite you to call and visit us. We want you to see our organization at work. And, we invite you to a board meeting where you can see, first-hand, how we respect and appreciate you – the donor – in a manner that will make you proud.”So…We urge you to make your ‘Fall Letter” as urgent and specific as possible. If you need extra assistance, please contact us, give us your specific data, and we will help you achieve a final draft that will make you proud of your organization. This is your time to shine. Take it. We are here to help. http://www.centerega.com/our-blog/post/non-profit-realities-achieving-fundraising-excellence-by-listening-to-einstein.html Albert Einstein, the readily-recognized and noted intellectual, is oft-quoted. A recent Einstein attribution made me think of the untapped opportunities available to all Non-Profit Organizations (NPOs):             “In the middle of every difficulty lies an opportunity.”   Albert Einstein How timely. How true. But, how does an NPO take action? And, get results? How many NPOs are missing the opportunity of a lifetime? Concerned about the current economic conditions? Worried about the new IRS regulations for NPOs? As an Executive Director, are you looking for the right synergy on your Board? As a Board member, are you looking for the right Executive Director to energize the organization and move it forward? As a Donor, are you looking for the right NPO to make your contributions? Our articles generally cover 3 areas of emphasis for Non-Profits: “HELP” (a general discussion of issues at the macro/organizational level); “STRATEGIES” (direct guidance on issues at the micro/operational level); and “REALITIES” (specific suggestions at the action/application level). This article launches our first in the “REALITIES” series, so we will endeavor to make it brief but useful. Let’s dissect what Einstein says. First, if you are in the ‘middle’ then your NPO already exists? Second, if you have a ‘difficultly’ then you must have identified challenging issues? Third, if you seek an ‘opportunity’ then you must be committed to action? Remember: (1) negative presumptions bring about negative realities; (2) all assumptions guide your perceptions about outcomes. So, without being consciously aware, you can doom your best intentions for failure – right from your initial thoughts. IF you do not already believe this to be true – and, IF you have not already experienced it – then I would ask that you simply accept it as true because many/most of your peers already know it is true. As a starting point for any ‘realistic’ outcome for your NPO, your chosen action must be positively conceived and executed. If it begins in ANY other way (i.e. negative, unsure, wishy-washy and questionable by board or staff) it WILL deliver less than desirable results. Again, if you do not already know this to be true, do yourself a big favor and accept the painful experience being shared with you. Just thinking positive does not a successful project make, albeit a philosophical prerequisite. Although a good subject for another article, there is growing belief that ‘technology’ is impeding our ability to communicate and that the ‘art of strategizing’ is becoming extinct. While this is a frightening thought, your NPO does not have to succumb to this ‘negative’ prediction! Let’s get specific: Fundraising. We are in the Fall season of the calendar year – approaching the Thanksgiving and Christmas holiday seasons – and end-of-year funding decisions are on the minds of literally thousands of foundation boards of directors and millions of individual donors. How will your NPO emerge? Well, to be specific, let’s use the industry-termed “Fall Appeal Letter to Donors” – this is that ‘pre-end-of-year’ reminder that your NPO needs financial support from, supposedly, your ongoing fans and supporters. (i.e. a very different appeal from a first-time grant application to a foundation) What should you say in your letter? You know that your donors are receiving similar multiple requests – even downright pleas – from your competitor NPOs – so how do you do you set yourself apart? We suggest your NPO take simple, straight-forward steps to be distinguishable from peers/competitors. If you research the IRS regulations NPOs – and – the foundational principles of our Center for Ethics, Governance, and Accountability (CEGA), you will find the expectations of all NPOs are, understandably, very high. It is the lack thereof that is leading to the exposure of so many national-level NPOs that are in violation of these regulations/expectations. At the very least – and, this is SPECIFICALLY important – you should be able to tout that your NPO has met and/or exceeded all IRS regulations. We believe that donors are no less charitable than they have ever been, despite these arguably uniquely challenging economic times. However, we also believe that donors require assurance that the NPOs they support have either already achieved excellence or they are on a deliberate path toward excellence. If you follow IRS regs (and CEGA beliefs) then you cannot go astray as you differentiate your NPO from the competition. So, write that Fall letter – with confidence – to your strongest donor base. Don’t hesitate to point out that your organization is actively engaged in closely following the challenges of the NPO industry and that you have adopted a plan of action to achieve certification excellence as a fully compliant NPO. If you need assistance, we are here to help. But, the primary point is to distinguish your NPO from your peer/competitor organizations during this ‘end-of-the-year’ donor request blitz. Let’s be even more specific. Take a look at your ‘standard’ letter of request. What about it stands out as special? Probably nothing? If you are communicating with your tried-and-true donor base, how many times have they seen your letterhead with your handwritten notation requesting their support? Give some thought as to how to ‘shake that up’ just a bit. It could be as simple as an pre-mailing (post card?) ‘teaser’ that serves as a preview of coming attractions (i.e. your Letter). Jazz it up. Make it special. If you have a new initiative, by all means announce it. But, our strong recommendation is that you focus on your commitment to distinguish yourself by the pursuit of excellence in all things regulatory during this time where too many NPOs have lost their way.  Accentuate your positives. Being on the right side of compliance issues with the IRS is always a winner. We believe this approach demonstrates your NPO is fully committed to excellence. And, let’s face it, excellence is a national craving at this point in time! Share your feedback. Working in team, we believe the Non-Profit Sector holds great potential for identifying, pursuing, and solving the problems of our nation. Join the discussion. http://www.centerega.com/our-blog/post/non-profit-stategies-a-great-time-to-achieve-excellence.html A lot has been written lately about all manner of problems that have befallen the non-profit sector. I know; I have written my fair share. Not that the compliance issues are not important, but the non-profit sector needs to fully embrace the opportunities that are uniquely available to it. And the non-profit sector needs to seize this important opportunity to serve the community through its mission like never before. Simply stated, the non-profit sector needs to rise to its full level of achievement. Enough executive directors are depressed, stressed, and unsure of their future. Enough board members are unclear about the vision of their non-profit organization. Enough communities and donors have lost faith and abandoned commitment to the mission of the multitude of non-profits striving to make a difference in various specific ways. How does a non-profit organization go about turning a challenging situation into a true competitive advantage? This article attempts to answer that question. And, comments from readers are very much invited – and needed. The opportunity for on-line dialogue is readily available through this web site and is much needed in these tough times. We need to commence a fruitful dialogue that leads to solutions.. Let’s talk… One of the foundational elements of the organization I serve – and my true passion – The Center for Ethics, Governance, and Accountability (CEGA) – is that the Non-Profit Sector enjoys unique opportunities to solve problems and address issues in ways that the other two sectors (Government – i.e. public-sector – and Business – i.e. for-profit sector) cannot. That’s a pretty bold statement and holds high the expectations of non-profits! Question: How does a non-profit organization achieve excellence in such a challenging time? Answer:  Distinction from its peers + Demonstrated commitment to its mission. In the remainder of this article, we will focus our attention on 3 issues: 1. What does the Executive Director need to do? Almost without a doubt, if you are an Executive Director in today’s challenging atmosphere, you probably fear for the future of your organization. This is never a good feeling but, more importantly, it is also never a good strategy for achieving success. Today’s Executive Director needs to focus on leadership and measurable success and not become inundated or distracted by lesser needs. A strong focus on performing at peak ability provides a powerful force in leading the board and focusing the organization. Discussions about Time Management and core management skills are a bore; the truth is, either you are equipped with the necessary skills to manage your time and manage your organization or you are not. Managing yourself and your team is a Requisite Skill for the position of Executive Director. If you cannot manage yourself and others, you need to find a new career. Sound harsh? No. Not overly so: non-profits (and all organizations) are expected to do a lot with a little – now more than perhaps ever before – so, you are either confident in your ability to manage and lead or you are not. You must decide. Whichever way you decide, you will be dramatically happier once this decision is made. Let’s assume that your self-assessment determines that you are up to the challenge. You feel good about yourself, your skills, the mission of your non-profit, and the ability to work with your board. If so, you are ideally positioned to make one of the most dramatic steps forward in the history of your organization. Why? Most of your peers do not feel this way. They are either unsure of their mission, crossed up with their board, or confused as to how to best move forward, both professionally and organizationally. You have a decided advantage in a very confusing time. You are uniquely positioned to rally your staff (which is probably shrinking in numbers and adding predictable stress to every member), the board (which may be shrinking also), the members, donors, and stakeholders of your organization, and the overall community, to achieve greater accomplishments than ever before. My advice is 3-fold: (a)  Be nice, be cooperative, but be confident in your leadership role. You must enjoy what you do and be comfortable in doing it. (b)  Review the mission of your organization, make sure it is on target, be sure everyone in your organization understands it and can easily explain it, and pursue it with every bit of passion you possess. (c)  Commit yourself – and your organization – to the relentless pursuit of excellence in service to your constituency. Understand the difference between a stand-off, overly competitive and paranoid organization, and one that is confident in its mission, strong and calm, and able perform with confidence as a team member among other non-profits within the community. You must be able to fit your organization into your community structure. If you do not know the structure – or, where your organization is viewed – make it your top priority to find out. You are in charge of the day-to-day operation of your organization. You are the Executive Director. 2. What does the Board need to do? The importance of board membership cannot possibly be overstated – neither in this article nor any other. However, current reality must be acknowledged: too few board members have time to serve due to their professional and personal constraints, and fewer and fewer companies are willing to support community service by their employees. Let’s not try to ‘sugar-coat’ the realities of the challenge: as a board member, the likelihood that you are adequately knowledgeable on IRS-required non-profit governance issues is, unfortunately, pretty slim. Sad story; stark reality. So, what can you, as a board member, do about your current reality? How did you become a board member? Presumably, you are a good manager, an executive, a known community volunteer. But, almost always, you are perceived by your peers to be a leader in your community. Define that however you will, but that is overwhelmingly the primary reason you are on whatever board you are on: you have been selected by your peers to serve. Reflecting back on observations over time – both serving as a board member and observing other board members – it has been surprising how many board members seemingly lose their management guts when they walk into the non-profit board room. How can this be? One would expect the typical business manager to be a secure and thoughtful individual, yet dynamic professionals often melt into ‘wall flowers’ once the board meeting is called to order. Board members must resist shirking their responsibility; i.e. it is far easier to attend a board meeting, say nothing, contribute nothing, and leave. Why does this occur? Almost certainly, the board member is secure in his/her understanding of their business, but is not quite sure of the business of the non-profit. This is no excuse for not asking questions. If you are afraid to speak up in a board meeting, then you have no purpose for serving. My advice is 3-fold: (a)  Be yourself. Participate fully. Bring all that you are, all that you have to offer, to every board meeting and do not let your feelings of lack of knowledge prevent you from asking the tough questions. After all, you would do no less in your ‘day job’ duties! And, you already know how to ask the tough questions without causing a rift among your board peers and the staff, so don’t be afraid to exercise your skills. (b)  Do not get (unnecessarily) crossed up with the executive director, staff, or other board members – unless and until you have thoroughly done your homework. The most common ‘new-board-member’ example is the individual who is unfamiliar with the mission of the non-profit and its operating practices, who decides to ‘drill down’ on the financial statement. Almost always, this is a sign of discomfort on the part of the board member, not a problem within the organization. So, do your homework. Read the board material (arriving at the board meeting with an unopened board packet is a telling sign!). Talk to the board chair and the executive director and seek to learn and understand. Remember that you have only one vote on the board and that you are neither queen/king of the organization. (c)  Understand fully your fiduciary, legal, and community duties as a board member. The fact that you are reading this article is very likely the direct result in the increased regulations the IRS is placing upon non-profits. The relationship between fellow board members is often challenging. Likewise, the relationship between a board member and the executive director is regularly misunderstood. A very fine line exists between demanding performance by the executive director and staff and trying to run the organization from the board level. Learn those intricate distinctions and apply them. But, also, make sure that your board holds the organization in full regulatory compliance. If you have questions about this, do not hesitate to ask. 3. What can the Executive Director and the Board accomplish together that far surpasses what either could do alone? Ah, now we are talking about surpassing peer organizations and achieving excellence! It is sad to observe the number of non-profits that have all the requisite tools at their disposal, but fail to deliver excellence due to petty issues that arise between board members and/or staff members. While the Board is charged with directing the mission of the non-profit, and the Executive Director is charged with delivering measurable outcomes in keeping with the mission, the reality is that neither is a precise science and it is far too common for the Board-Executive Director bond to fail. Let us not shrink from the obvious: board members and executive directors are fully capable of selfishly putting forth their own agendas and causing tremendous confusion. When such an issue occurs, other board members must rise to the occasion and refocus their fellow board member. The board must also be able to rise to the occasion and refocus its executive director. There are many reasons why this can sound simple but be very difficult to achieve; but, to achieve competitive excellence, the board and the staff must be capable of working well together. Let me offer 3-fold advice: (a)  The board must be organized in a manner so as to enable it to do its work effectively. Do not hesitate to make use of specific committees (not too many; not too few) with carefully identified deliverables in areas of importance. These include Audit, Strategy, Compensation, and Governance. (b)  The role of chairperson is extremely misunderstood. Per most bylaws, the chair rarely has any authority beyond conducting the board meetings; however, in reality, the chair is almost always the ‘point person’ for the organization. From a practical point of view, it is truly important for the chair and the executive director to bond – not to the exclusion of other board or staff members – but to enable the support required of each to the other. It may be critical to establish an executive committee – or a non-board advisory committee – but, importantly, both the board and the executive director must recognize the mutual need for reinforcement, coaching, and overall support/counsel in order to address the daily and strategic challenges of the organization. (c)  Experience indicates that successful board/executive director relations is much more of an art than a science; and, unfortunately, too often a dream instead of a reality. Especially in today’s challenging climate, boards and executive directors must possess a workable dynamic that assures excellence within the organization. There are no rules or easy fixes by which to make these challenges easier. But, only the organization that can find the right mix between board and staff will achieve the excellence that we suggest is available. So, let’s have some dialogue on these issues. Every non-profit can benefit from these introspective studies. While there will always be mediocrity, there is also opportunities for fully exploiting strengths in an appropriate and competitive manner. The issues in this article are meant to help you determine whether your non-profit is ready, willing, and able to achieve the success needed by today’s society. Let’s begin the dialogue. The non-profit sector has much to contribute toward the future success of our communities. And, very different from the opportunities you may have in the private or public sectors, you can become fully involved – in a cause of your choosing – and truly make a difference.