What's going on here is that our founder, now called the Executive Director (he/she is actually in charge of something now, and that feels good) is going to go right for the jugular of the perceived problem or lack in the social order and begin work with the target population. That's where the payoff is going to be: feeling all that warmth and goodness when we've served the hungry their meal, educated the mentally disabled children, trained the dogs, taught the kids to read, or whatever it is that we're doing.
I've heard this from so many: "This is what I'm really good at; this is what I enjoy; all the rest of it [fundraising, governance, marketing, planning] is stuff I don't like to do; let's get on with giving the service. That's where the rubber meets the road."
But this is just the beginning of a path that develops and has the potential of taking the founder ever further from public accountability. Here are the seven steps I see on that path to fundraising dysfunctionality:
1. In the start-up phase these individuals who are founders of nonprofits are in a hurry to start service, and are very much not in a hurry to find or demonstrate significant public support for what they are doing.
2. They gather a group of like-minded (or even just supportive) people around them as a board of directors. No job description; no governance direction; no performance standards, no public accountability. We only need to satisfy the IRS regulations. Not important, right?
3. Then the next step is to be "all things to all people" – a broader and deeper reach into the problem. This results because "nobody can do it as good as I can" and the new founder is at pains to make sure all volunteers and the few staff that are needed to help with the work are fully indoctrinated with the "founder is right" mentality.
4. Next comes the turf-building "We're the best; people should support us" mentality. This is helped along by the fact that the founder sits alone late at night or early in the morning writing grant proposals to foundations – not out in the hustings meeting and greeting and talking with lots of donors and prospects. So the viewpoint can become a bit jaded.
5. And as we descend further into dysfunctionality, we see that a plethora of daily tasks cannot be delegated because "nobody thinks like I think on this issue." So the executive/founder does more and more, getting busier and busier. This occasions lots of "fires" and minor/major crises that need to be put out and resolved.
6. This leads to a perfectly valid excuse, "I don't have the time" when it comes to contacting and personally cultivating donors and prospects. Fundraising is limited to what the founder can handle: events and grants; maybe a mailing once a year to friends. But doing point-of-entry events for multiple prospects, marshalling volunteers in support of a serious fundraising program, and personally cultivating prospects is now almost completely out of the question.
7. And as we slide even further, "I don't need a team on this; I know what I'm doing. And if we must have a team, then let it be a board I can control. I'll nominate my friends; but I definitely don't want to have someone 'governing' me." This is one of the strongest signals of dysfunctionality in the organization. When the founder/executive gets to the point where it is of critical importance that the board NOT bring good governance principles to bear, then we really have another dysfunctional nonprofit on our hands.
So, speaking of governance, let's move from the "doing good" arena into the Board room and see what's happening there. Here's another area where a different strategy in the start-up phase could make a big difference in keeping nonprofits from becoming dysfunctional in their fundraising.
See you tomorrow!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

No comments:
Post a Comment