Summer Retreat: Joint or Solo?

It’s summer…time for the ½ day board retreat.

Or, in some cases, the all-day staff retreat.

And (least usually), the joint board-staff extended session.

We facilitate a bunch of these each year. As a result we’ve become reflective about how this partnership works best.

It’s tricky. On the one hand the board needs to bond – to gel as a group and not depend on staff to prop them up. Looking at each other in the room without staff present can open up the space for board members to ask questions they feel inhibited about voicing with staff present – but which may, in fact, be inhibiting not just their curiosity but also their whole-hearted participation in being an advocate for the organization (with all that means).

And staff, for their part, need a space to get into extended implementation mapping – i.e. developing a marketing strategy for a new initiative and drafting outcomes, brainstorming partners, assigning tasks. A space in which board member input is needed for selected segments, but not to dwell in the weeds that are necessary to get the job done with accountability.

Yet there’s also an extraordinary synergy when board and staff members come together to bring their varied perspectives to bear on an institutional challenge/opportunity.

We worked on a retreat last week in which they managed to combine all three.

The first half was board (with the ED in the room). The focus was general, on looking at the overall board responsibilities, what this board was doing well, what it’d put in progress over the past year, and what they knew was yet to come. And, of course, what that meant for the individual board members and for new board member recruitment.

Then the group had lunch – and kicked out the staff. There’s nothing like eating to bring a group together socially, but the meal conversation veered naturally from kids and vacations into more substantial questions that some of the newer board members had – which actually opened up space for some of the more long-serving folks to also voice their concerns. There was definitely a different tone in the room, with only the board members (and me as facilitator) there – not one of criticism, but one of “we” – as in “we” as a group need to make sure “we” are exercising our responsibility since “we” are entrusted with holding this gem of a mission in “our” hands.

Simultaneously, the senior staff was upstairs getting briefed on the earlier session’s results and talking about their own concerns.

The day ended with a board staff partnership – in committees. Each committee chair was paired with a staff member in that area, and an additional board member or two, to create a map. On the table: what the committee’s general mandate was, what the coming year’s most urgent areas of focus were, and naming the next three action steps that the committee needed to undertake after walking out of this room. (We also asked them to brainstorm on who they might also need at the table, to the end of recruiting additional committee members to help get the job they’d just defined done.)

It was a nice mixture of all three forms of leadership – and a productive use of a lovely summer day...

The power of numbers

I was reminded again this week of the power of numbers to speak…loud and clear.

I’m talking about the gift range chart – that “it-doesn’t-add-up-if-it-doesn’t-add-up” tool that makes the equation between prospects and total raised, pretty darned clear.

In a gift range chart, you list how many gifts at $10,000 you expect, and put names next to them. Then you look at how many gifts at $5,000 you expect, and put names next to them. And so on and so on, down to the small gifts, where the actual names aren’t listed but the vehicles (such as the annual appeal) are, and the expected totals make rational sense with what you really expect to raise.

What we’ve seen happen again and again, is that once you put names next to the numbers…there’s a real sobering moment. In other words, the group of co-conspirators has put together a list that doesn’t, once it’s broken down, add up to the goal.

But the chart, and the numbers, tell that tale. You, as executive director, development director, board fundraising chair, whatever, don’t have to be the naysayer, cause the numbers do it for you.

With the right board members, once they see the numbers don’t add up to the total hoped for, they add some more prospects to the list – and you’re off to the races.

With board members who don’t rise to the challenge – well, at least you know you’re not going to raise it, cause you’re not going to raise it anyway…by wishful thinking. So you can adjust expenses, or do whatever you need to do – instead of getting to the end of a campaign and discovering “Oops, we’re $60,000 short of our goal!”

Numbers don’t lie. Well, sometimes they do, but a gift range chart speaks the truth.

Meeting Them ½ - Way

Well, let’s say, ¾ - way….

I’m talking about the idea that once board members get activated, it makes more work – for us, as staff.

We have to give them lists! We have to research options! We have to do the legwork! Yipes! We already have full-time-plus-plus-plus jobs…

It’s often true that once a board “catches fire” – the staff literally has to sprint to keep up with their enthusiasm. Board members get serious about asking other board members to bring personal friends to the benefit, and they start asking for info on how other organizations have transitioned a vendor-oriented event into one that feels appropriate for personal friends. They decide to run a family-oriented fundraiser, and ask for materials to be created. They brainstorm a Spring fundraising campaign, and ask for a wall-display to be created in the lobby.

All of these have direct returns for the dollars invested, so it’s easy to see the reward. But sometimes board members ask for info that isn’t so transparently remunerative. Like requesting data on economic trends in the neighborhood. Or 3-year projections of earned-to-contributed revenue. Or even past history of program graduates and “where they are now.”

But I was reminded of the necessity of all this – fundraising or not – when I was meeting recently with a group I’ve known for awhile, that’s really in trouble. A long-time funder suffered some extensive losses and pulled out, unexpectedly, contributing to a perfect storm that may leave them going under.

We’re helping them with scenarios, but the big question remains: Where’s the Board? Who’s the group sitting around the table, worrying this out? It’s just the founder, his devoted second-in-command, and one friend – and us. And that’s just not enough.

But the die was cast long ago, when the staff did it all, and the board – every once in a while – advised.

The moral? Be happy for a board that asks for work – and is ready to roll up their sleeves to deliver.

But we all knew that, right?

Will I Be Noticed?

Remembering back to my college days, I was thinking about one semester when I made the mistake of signing up for an art history class at 8 am. Dark room, big lecture hall, slides, early morning…you get the picture. I just couldn’t stay awake.

I’m sure I was not alone.

And I’m equally sure that no one noticed.

At the last possible moment I had a fit of conscience and dropped the class. Nowadays I might have kept going and learned the material from the Web.

But the question at hand is: who paid attention? Who knew I was there in body but (truly) not in mind?

I’ve come across a few boards lately with that anonymity issue – or perceived anonymity. One board is pretty large, and another is actually quite small – but I can sense in all of them a feeling, on board members’ parts, that nobody will really notice if they’re not coming up to the plate.

So they come to meetings late because they don’t feel essential to the first half (or any) of the meeting. They don’t respond to group emails because they’re just one of the names on the distribution list. They don’t read the materials and they don’t ask the questions, because they know you (or someone, at any rate), has it in hand.

Anything familiar about this?

We’ve all been in situations where we’re happy to have someone else carry the ball. It’s rational – who wouldn’t be?

So what makes people step up to the plate?

In a nutshell – the attention (and praise) of their peers.

Does that happen on autopilot?

No.

It needs to be built, brick-by-brick. In day-by-day groundwork that gets volunteers, especially, to know in their gut that they’re a critical link in the chain.

That if they don’t show up, with full presence, that they’re breaking that promise.

That they’re letting other people down.

And that by their actions – or lack thereof – your clients, your organization, your mission, will lose.

End Game Thinking

The task of a new board chair is to think about their legacy – and then to work backwards...

We’ve been doing a lot of board-chair-coaching recently. My personal opinion is that there’s been a lot of board leadership transitions going on nowadays – most groups have had a really tough year, and most board members have hung in there, but now it’s time for new blood.

We see that happening all over New York City, and maybe it’s even happening all over the country. But in any case, we’re watching a lot of younger board members step up, knowing that this is their time to take the reins.

So what’s the first item on their agenda? Not cleaning house, because a lot of the boards we’ve been counseling, while not decimated, are definitely down to a “last man standing” kind of composition.

To wit: Organizations have had to make hard, hard decisions this past year, and board members who were used to simply going along applauding a dynamic executive director, had to stand up and wrestle their way through some pretty difficult decisions. They used some muscles they hadn’t used before, and the dead wood has definitely left the house as a result. (Not to mention the strain on people’s personal and professional lives that’s contributed to board member exodus).

SO – our conversations with new chairs tend to focus more on “who can we get on” than “who can we get off.”

But I’m going to suggest another place to start.

And that’s in 2013.

Where do you want your board to be, in 2013?

Take a moment, to play out that vision. What kind of communities are represented?... What kind of discussions are taking place?...What kind of actions are happening before, during and after board meetings? …What kind of structures are in place to enhance board member motivation and accountability?

If you can picture your legacy, you can develop a route to get there.

The final moment is often a start.

Board Chair – Not Just A Pretty Title Anymore…

Under the “no good deed goes unpunished” department, the PTA at my children’s school noticed how adept I was at directing their annual fund drive, and asked me to consider running for PTA President next year.

My immediate response was not just “Are you kidding, I have two kids and a full-time+ job!!” – which is the case for many parents – but also “I’m already a Board Chair, and one cause for sleepless nights is enough.”

And then I started thinking about the relative strains of running a nonprofit vs. running a nonprofit board.

By agreeing to take on the top voluntary position in another nonprofit, clearly I’m a sucker for the social good…but somebody’s got to do it. So which one is more nerve-racking? It’s been a constantly shifting toss-up over the past year.

There’s something about being responsible for a domain you can’t quite control – your team (fellow board members) are all volunteers, and the staff doesn’t really work for you – that makes chairing a nonprofit board a very delicate balancing act. And in this day and age when nonprofits across the country are struggling with very difficult decisions based on scarcity, especially stress producing.

Wistfully, I thought back to the days when staff seemed totally capable of running the joint and as board chair it felt like all I had to do was provide a patina of respectability (show up at meetings, testify at hearings to bring the weight of the board into the room, etc.). Now I’m integrally involved in judgment calls on cash flow, fund development strategy, and shifting political relationships.

And to add to the burden, not only do I run a nonprofit, but it’s a nonprofit that coaches other nonprofits on governance and fundraising concerns. So it’s a particularly fraught position for me – but I’m not alone.

For all of us who steer our own nonprofits, this is an especially tricky pathway to navigate – because we know how we run our own castles, and this isn’t ours. We might be the chair, but we’re not the boss. And because we’re steeped in board-staff best practices, we do in fact hesitate to wade into the day-to-day, even if we know how to do it “better.”

It makes me respect my own board chair, who is also a nonprofit leader, even more for keeping her hands off when she could clearly wade in and improve the product – and cut off my authority in the process. Gee that’s a difficult line to walk.

Having a leadership commitment in the nonprofit sector in a dual capacity leaves me feeling guilty a lot of the time – I wish I could pour my creative resources into my board service as much as I do my nonprofit, but there’s only one of me. And then of course there’s those pesky family obligations. Which brings me back to the PTA.

I respectfully declined the top leadership post but offered to head up the nominating committee – because I know what it means, and what it takes, to lead. And I’ll help to find the right folks to do so.

Nostalgically yours for the old days (or what I remember of them with rose-colored glasses)…