NP needs to "reinvent" itself
Warden
has seen better days from a mission focus. As our donor database ages and
expires, we see difficulty ahead without making potentially radical changes.
We still make a contribution in the community, but we are seen as
old-fashioned. Our name is both a strength and a weakness.
Has anyone experience with this type of change? What books / materials will
help the board plan for this kind of change? Consultants?
Some of the questions we have started asking ourselves:
1. How do we become more focused on a mission that excites a "twenty or
thirty-something" constituency, from which we can raise funds sufficient to
fuel our operation?
2. How can we change our public image to be more "in vogue" with causes that
excite this generation of volunteers and donors?
3. How do we accomplish this while at the same time keep our "core values"
related to our current mission and provide service to the community we
serve?
4. How do we identify the change agent steps, the costs, and how we can
finance this change?
5. What things are we doing now that perpetuate the perception that we are a
stogy organization not worthy of donors and contributions?
6. What new programs and services can we initiate that changes our image in
this new period?
7. What new partnerships can we engage to help us change our image?
8. What communication tools are required/essential in this endeavor?
9. How long should this transformation take?
10. What will/should it cost?
11. What will be the relationship with the national office?
Looking forward to responses from those who may have experienced something
similar, and recommendations for books and materials that can help. Are
there questions I have not asked here?
Thanks.
Ward
Mike1...@aol.com
war...@teleport.com writes:
<< I am associated with an established national non-profit health agency that
has seen better days from a mission focus. As our donor database ages and
expires, we see difficulty ahead without making potentially radical changes.
We still make a contribution in the community, but we are seen as
old-fashioned. Our name is both a strength and a weakness.
Ward,
You are suffering from the curse of success. Many large, traditionally
successful nonprofits find themselves stuck in ways that relate to the
generation of leaders who built them, not the ways of the generations that
will keep their momentum going. I am most familiar with Jewish Federations
in this regard, but the principle applies to many others.
You might look at the success of some Jewish Federations at building young
leadership programs that engage many of the next generation and allow them to
serve as a large, higly invested sort of focus group for determining where
and how the organization can go forward into the future.
Michael Levy
Nonprofit Management Specialist
815 E. Bethany Home Rd. B217
Phoenix, Arizona 85014
Phone 602-285-9068
Fax 1-877-379-5174
e-mail mike1...@aol.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
To remove yourself from this mailing list, send a message with the subject
of "unsubscribe nonprofit" to lis...@rain.org For more information about
this list and about nonprofit issues, including answers to the most
frequently asked questions, visit the NONPROFIT/soc.org.nonprofit FAQs at
http://www.nonprofits.org/
To obtain additional information regarding this list, send a message with
the subject of "help" to lis...@rain.org
H. C. Covington - I CAN! America
To be able to address your questions appropriately, we need to know at least the City/State/Country of your
organizations location. Although you state you are a "National" organization, you are known best in the place(s)
where you have a physical presence. Of course your name and contact information would be even more helpful, and
with that, we could address each of your questions and help you focus on a new Visioning process.
Perhaps this could be done through an Empowerment Evaluation of the current operations that will internally drive a
bottom up process of strategic thinking and Outcome Based Management from the employees, staff and volunteers in
the community.
Tell us more and we will point you to some resources.
Sonny
H. C. C O V I N G T O N
I C A N! America, LLC
Nonprofit Resource Consultants
P.O. Drawer 3444, Lafayette, LA 70502
1.800.678.5774 FAX 775-213-6070
icana...@email.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Working together, there is no
problem that can not be solved!"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Creative Thinking,
Strategic Visioning,
Program Evaluation,
Applied Research,
Capability Building,
Capacity Enhancement
Grant & Proposal Writing,
Continuum of Care Planning.
============================
----- Original Message -----
From: "Warden" <war...@teleport.com>
To: <soc.org....@news.rain.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 1:27 AM
Subject: NP needs to "reinvent" itself
I am associated with an established national non-profit health agency that
has seen better days from a mission focus. As our donor database ages and
expires, we see difficulty ahead without making potentially radical changes.
We still make a contribution in the community, but we are seen as
old-fashioned. Our name is both a strength and a weakness.
Has anyone experience with this type of change? What books / materials will
Thanks.
Ward
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Cravens
Warden wrote, in part:
> We still make a contribution in the community, but
> we are seen as old-fashioned.
SNIP
> Some of the questions we have started asking ourselves:
>
> 1. How do we become more focused on a mission that
> excites a "twenty or thirty-something" constituency,
> from which we can raise funds sufficient to fuel our
> operation?
You shouldn't change your mission, if it still, indeed, is one
that fulfills a need of the community. Rather, think about ways to
communicate that mission that will appeal to a "twenty or
thirty-something" constituency. Why should these folks care about
what you do?
To make a sweeping generalization, these folks want to see results
and impact. They volunteer for programs where they feel like they
make a real difference, not just to "feel good." You have to
present your work in a way that speaks to this, and that probably
doesn't mean changing your mission; it means communicating it in a
different way.
Change causes conflict. I just addressed a group of senior-focused
organizations that are very angry that the "new" seniors -- the
baby boomers -- are not like traditional seniors, and they do NOT
want to change the way they do business. That's fine, but it also
means that, basically, all of their donors and volunteers are,
eventually, going to be dead.
Make sure the staff and leadership of your organization is ready
to embrace the reasons for this shift in the way you communicate,
and understand that you aren't changing your organization's
mission; you are evolving the way you present yourself.
> 7. What new partnerships can we engage to help us
> change our image?
What organizations around you appeal to a "twenty or
thirty-something" constituency? I know that, here in Austin, it
seems like there's some kind of high-tech happy hour every week,
and these events are great ways to network with "new blood."
> 8. What communication tools are required/essential
> in this endeavor?
If your organization is not Internet savvy, now is the time to get
there. It's much, much more than just a web site -- do all staff
have e-mail access, and are they using it to communicate with
their constituencies? Are you creating online communities in
support of your organization? Do you even ask for the e-mail
addresses of current donors/volunteers/other supporters?
> 9. How long should this transformation take?
It never ends.
The rest of your questions are too difficult to answer without
knowing what your organization is and what you do. Plus, your
needs really are more than this list can answer for you. We can
give you some great ideas, but for what you are undertaking, you
should look into hiring a professional consultant.
--
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Jayne Cravens
<vv "at" serviceleader "dot" org>
Virtual Volunteering Project
http://www.serviceleader.org/vv/
Volunteerism and Community Engagement
for K-12 Schools
http://www.tenet.edu/volunteer/
Tech Tips for Not-for-Profit Orgs
http://www.coyotecom.com/
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
The views expressed via online discussion
groups do not necessarily reflect
organizations represented by this poster.
BEFORE YOU REPLY...
My address has been altered to protect it
from junk mailer's automated "bots." To
reply to me offlist, type in the e-mail
address manually.
Tony Poderis
> I am associated with an established national non-profit health agency that
> has seen better days from a mission focus. As our donor database ages and
> expires, we see difficulty ahead without making potentially radical changes.
> We still make a contribution in the community, but we are seen as
> old-fashioned. Our name is both a strength and a weakness.
>
> Has anyone experience with this type of change? What books / materials will
> help the board plan for this kind of change? Consultants?
>
> Some of the questions we have started asking ourselves ......
Hello, Ward --- I suggest that you are in the best possible position to provide
answers to those important questions --- and others --- with in-person meetings
and through mail and telephone surveys of a number of your key constituents,
and those you believe you would want to be your advocates and constituents.
You can learn from them to help your organization address the challenges and
barriers you cited so graphically.
Among other things from such a survey, you will will be in position to develop
a clearly defined, fully understood, and completely accepted mission statement
which will help you to better articulate your case for support. That leads to
the identify and recruitment of potential leadership and gives you greater
opportunities to secure gifts from prospective donors.
In revisiting and revising your mission statement, all constituencies must be
kept in mind. Changes come about because either the environment changes or the
needs of one or more of the constituents change. How do you consider such
change and assess the degree of need?
I think you need opinions and impressions about your organization to come from
persons of influence and affluence --- those individuals who could make major
and positive (governance, money, endorsement, credibility) differences for your
organization.
I believe the best ways for you to get your constituents (and non-constituents)
to respond to such a proposed “market - philanthropic” study would be to employ
any or all of the following methods:
(a) Focus groups
(b) Personal interviews with individuals of affluence or influence
(c) Mail surveys
(d) Telephone surveys
Utilizing one method, or a mix of the methods, is dependent upon (1) size of
the constituency to be surveyed; (2) complexity of the study subject matter;
(3) time-line; (4) your organization’s resources required to adequately service
the study; (4) budgetary considerations
Clearly explaining why the survey is important greatly helps to increase the
response rate. People must readily understand why they are being to asked to
participate in the survey.
Your organization will want to survey a number of its constituents to learn as
much as possible from them to help you better address opportunities, challenges
and barriers --- be they related to programs and services, governance and
management issues, a proposed major fund-raising effort --- or a combination.
The substance of the questionnaire would be tailored to what you want to learn
from the study. Basic questions to be asked for any purpose of a study would
probably be included in the presentation to interviewees as follows ---
naturally including the questions you presented to this group:
1. How would you describe our mission?
2. On a scale of 1 to 10 (10 highest) how effectively do you believe we are
fulfilling our mission?
3. What do you see as our greatest strengths?
4. What areas, if any, do you see potential for improvement?
5. How would you describe our image in the community?
6. On a scale of 1 to 10 (10 highest) how familiar are you with the following?
(Here you would list several of the main programs and services your
organization operates so the study respondent will be able to cite his or her
degree of recognition).
7. Which of the above programs do you favor the most?
7a. What might motivate you to support - endorse (or provide more support or
greater endorsement) to the program you favor most?
8. What are your impressions of our financial condition?
9. (If donor) What makes you feel good about your financial support of us)?
At this point you would direct your questions to the specific intent of the
study --- be it for proposed programmatic issues --- such as a shift in
mission, a possible collaboration with another organization, the elimination or
installation of new major programs and services, etc. Or, you might be seeking
opinions and impressions regarding your plan (feasibility) for a major
fund-raising campaign.
My experience is that study interviewees will more likely respond and will
respond more candidly --- and with greater substance --- when they are
questioned by individuals outside of an organization’s “family,” and when they
know their responses will be anonymous. And most important, they must be
assured that the interview in no way seeks any form of personal monetary or
volunteer commitment from them. They must have complete confidence that the
interview seeks only their opinions, impressions, and suggestions.
Ward, if you do conduct a study of this sort, your organization must see to it
that all persons who were interviewed will receive at the least a summary of
the final report of the study’s findings, conclusions, recommendations, and its
action plan.
Perhaps you will agree that your good and vital questions can be best answered
by people you serve, think you would like to serve, your leaders, funders and
potential funders, and others of possible influence and affluence.
Cheers,
--
Tony Poderis
______________________________________
FREE: Non-Profit Fund-Raising Articles & Exhibits
http://www.raise-funds.com
Plans, Tips & Techniques That Will Work For You
(Permission to reproduce material is not required)
Channing Hillway, Ph.D.
I invite you to contact me off list. I will be happy to provide you with
in-depth responses to all of your questions.
Best wishes,
Channing
--
Channing Hillway, Ph.D.
ARISTARCUS COMMUNICATION
Applying communication science to real world problems
• Organizational & Educational Systems & Policy
• Organizational & Interpersonal Communication
• Conflict Resolution
• Business Communication
• Grant Proposal & Program Development for NPOs/NGOs
• ARISTARCUS: Digitronic Learning Environment
Post Office Box 1563, Ventura CA 93002-1563 USA
chan...@rain.org
Warden wrote:
> I am associated with an established national non-profit health agency that
> has seen better days from a mission focus. As our donor database ages and
> expires, we see difficulty ahead without making potentially radical changes.
> We still make a contribution in the community, but we are seen as
> old-fashioned. Our name is both a strength and a weakness.
>
> Has anyone experience with this type of change? What books / materials will
> help the board plan for this kind of change? Consultants?
>
> Some of the questions we have started asking ourselves:
>
> 1. How do we become more focused on a mission that excites a "twenty or
> thirty-something" constituency, from which we can raise funds sufficient to
> fuel our operation?
> 2. How can we change our public image to be more "in vogue" with causes that
> excite this generation of volunteers and donors?
> 3. How do we accomplish this while at the same time keep our "core values"
> related to our current mission and provide service to the community we
> serve?
> 4. How do we identify the change agent steps, the costs, and how we can
> finance this change?
> 5. What things are we doing now that perpetuate the perception that we are a
> stogy organization not worthy of donors and contributions?
> 6. What new programs and services can we initiate that changes our image in
> this new period?
> 7. What new partnerships can we engage to help us change our image?
> 8. What communication tools are required/essential in this endeavor?
> 9. How long should this transformation take?
Timothy Jaques
want spread around, Channing, I for one would like it if you responded here.
I am involved in organizations which have similiar although not identical
problems with an increasingly frustrated "younger guard" (GenX and younger
Boomers) and an "older guard" (older Boomers and War Generation) resistant
to change. (It even comes down to a dispute as to what bands to book for
the weekends, the younger crowd liking newer original music and the older
crowd demanding classic rock covers or jazz.)
Timothy Jaques tja...@attcanada.ca
Windsor, Ontario, Canada
519.254.6433 T
519.254.7990 F
13092767653 IF
"In the great conflict of life, conducting yourself with honour and
integrity may cost
you many battles, but will never lose you the war."
----- Original Message -----
From: Channing Hillway, Ph.D. <chan...@rain.org>
To: <nonp...@rain.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 2:20 PM
Subject: Re: NP needs to "reinvent" itself
> Ward:
>
> I invite you to contact me off list. I will be happy to provide you
with
> in-depth responses to all of your questions.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Channing
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Channing Hillway, Ph.D.
The situation you describe is, of course, classic.
Timothy Jaques wrote:
> I am involved in organizations which have similiar although not identical
> problems with an increasingly frustrated "younger guard" (GenX and younger
> Boomers) and an "older guard" (older Boomers and War Generation) resistant
> to change. (It even comes down to a dispute as to what bands to book for
> the weekends, the younger crowd liking newer original music and the older
> crowd demanding classic rock covers or jazz.)
The solution is not difficult if someone is able to the initiative. People
tend to continue in their established patterns until some sort of minor or major
crisis intervenes.
I view everything in terms of communication. The problem you describe is
where the Older Guard (OG) and the Younger Guard (YG) have each brought their
expectations to the table with little regard for the expectations of the other
group.
It's like planning the annual picnic in the spot where it is always held.
The spot has always been available, off in a little out of the way park with
only a few people around. Except that when your party arrives at the park, in
the 8 cars needed to carry everyone, a huge banner proclaims Fegerneger Family
Reunion. A small carnival has been set up, there are lots of balloons
everywhere, and the space is overflowing with Fegernegers. The emotions are
disbelief, disappointment and, finally, anger that, first, the Fegernegers are
here in what was thought to be a relatively private spot and (b) that one could
be so silly as to just assume the space would be available with no advance
planning. It's the annual family picnic culture in direct conflict with the
Fegerneger culture. But, of course, instead of confronting the Fegernegers, the
annual picnic folks quietly get together and try to think of an alternate site.
The OGs and the YGs not saying it, but what they are thinking is, "Why is
this other group here in my organization?" They know why, of course, and they
try to be nice about. Except that they want to have things follow according to
their preconceived notion of how things are supposed to be in the organization,
and they tend to cling to that idea as an emotional value. So the two competing,
preconceived notions of how things are supposed to be in the organization
continue to be a source of conflict. The choice of music is just one of the
symbols that come into play that represents the conflict. "Well, it's okay for
them to be here and to participate with us. It's their right, I guess. Just so
long as they don't try to dictate what kind of music we have this weekend!"
Solutions to the problem, except for the first one (below), are more simply
described than implemented.
First Solution: Do nothing. Eventually a crisis will occur. The crisis will
either lead to the implementation of one of the solutions described below, or
one group will come do dominate, at least for awhile, and the other group will
either conform or leave.
Second Solution: A few people who care about the organization, some from the
OG and some from the YG, begin talking about the problem and resolve to
collaboratively seek a solution. They may attend a conference or confer with a
consultant to develop a plan of action for pulling the folks together. They may
be able to make it work if (a) they are truly committed and (b) they are the
right folks for the job, depending on personality style and leadership ability.
Third Solution: The same few people take a leadership role in seeking an
outside consultant to conduct a retreat for up to 50 people. The retreat will
focus on team building and seeking to focus on bringing the organization to a
new level of excellence. The retreat will be held in a nice place away from the
organization's facilities. It will be carefully designed to engage participants
in interpersonal communication activities completely divorced from the issues
that have led to friction and divisiveness. The participants will accept the
directions of the consultant/faclitator because he/she is the designated leader
in a context completely divorced from the social structure where the
participants normally interact. The participants will engage in problem solving
tasks, interviewing each other to discover information generally not discussed
in the organization (but not too personal) and which provides insights into the
character and values of the person, and they will focus on where they want their
organization to go in the future.
My preference is, of course, for the third solution. It is less likely that
the committed leaders using the second solution will be successful. The reason
is that they are the regular people who are there. They have come to symbolize
certain expectations and behaviors, and they represent either the OG or the YG.
A seriously committed and enlightened group can do it. The outside consultant
has the experience, the expertise and the skills necessary to make it work.
Once participants begin sharing with each other in a completely new context,
a new set of reasons to collaborate and enjoy the others' participation come
into play. One typical outcome is that the OG and the YG each find things to
value in the other group. A greater sense of mutual respect emerges and
solutions to small problems are easier to find. Weekend music, for example, may
be chosen based on a series of themes, including (a) Early 20th Century, (b)
Depression Era, (c) Tin Pan Alley, (d) WW II and the Big Bands, (e) Standards,
(f) Early Rock'n'Roll, (g) Classic Rock'n'Roll, and so on. Some people won't
show up for some the weekends, but some new people may join just to be there.
Each weekend will be a celebration of a particular point of view and taste, and
each subgroup will know that they will have a weekend reserved for their
preferences.
It's not possible to just explain all of the this to people and have them
make the change. The experiences in a retreat are emotional. The transformation
cannot be accomplished on a rational, cognitive level. They must take place on
the visceral level. An OG participant explaining the meaning of jazz as the
music that helped everyone to maintain sanity in a M.A.S.H. unit in the Korean
War brings a new meaning to someone's preference for jazz. A YG participant's
explanation of the untimely death of a friend may add another dimension. This
sort of sharing binds people together and opens up new possibilities for the
organization.
The consultant must, of course, tailor the plan for the retreat to meet the
needs of the organization.
Best wishes,
Channing
--
Channing Hillway, Ph.D.
ARISTARCUS COMMUNICATION
Applying communication science to real world problems
• Organizational & Educational Systems & Policy
• Organizational & Interpersonal Communication
• Conflict Resolution
• Business Communication
• Grant Proposal & Program Development for NPOs/NGOs
• ARISTARCUS: Digitronic Learning Environment
Post Office Box 1563, Ventura CA 93002-1563 USA
chan...@rain.org
>
>
A Cravens
"Channing Hillway, Ph.D." wrote:
>and the space is overflowing with Fegernegers.
Darn those Fegernegers!! They drive me absolutely batty!
This was a GREAT response, Channing. Thank you so much for posting it.
The anger that can come up among people of different generations
both working at the same organization, or the anger that's
generated when an organization is asked to diversify its volunteer
base, is just amazing. I experienced it most recently in Orlando
while addressing a group of directors of senior volunteering
groups. It was a presentation about how to outreach to the
"emerging seniors" -- Baby Boomers. It was a very benign
presentation, really -- nothing radical. Or so I thought. These
folks were downright hostile about having to think about new ways
of recruiting and recognizing volunteers. If some of their
statements had substituted an ethnic group for "Baby Boomer" or
"Gen Xer", they would have been racists, clear and simple.
An amazing, "learning" experience it was.
But at least there were no Fegernegers. Or were there?