Posts Tagged ‘Strategic Planning’

Effective Board Meetings

Tuesday, March 2nd, 2010

How do you know if the board meetings are effective? The ultimate measure is the success of the parochial school. When the students are growing and changing, enrollment is increasing, donors are more generous, and the year-end report shows a modest surplus, it is easy to conclude that the board is effective. Is there a way to evaluate effectiveness between annual reports?

Review the votes by the board. After voting to approve the minutes, what else did they vote on? Did the other votes help the students grow, enrollment increase, donors become more generous, or advance the mission?

Sometimes boards feel that since “we are all friends” the formality of a vote is unnecessary. There are three important reasons to always vote. First, votes are recorded so it is easy to find and check on the decisions months or years later. In addition, the recording of the vote creates transparency. Second, the students’ lives and development will be affected. Voting helps encourage everyone to thinking carefully about the decision. Third, the success of the school involves a significant amount of other people’s money (donors, parents, and the church’s). Voting records the commitment. The last two reason are important enough to justify being careful, professional, and transparent.

Before the State of the Union Address, there was talk in the press about the gridlock. How do we know whether Congress accomplished anything? We look at the record to see how many times they voted and what they voted on.

How many times did your school board vote at its last meeting?

The four reasons that we have boards are to monitor activity, be self-managing, plan, and create policy. Monitoring activity is reading reports and ensuring that expectations are met. There is nothing to vote on in that process. Self-managing is ensuring board members come to meeting, recruiting new board members, running the board and committee meetings, electing officers, etc. It takes very few votes to do that.

The board leads through planning. Plans demonstrate the board is looking into the future. Plans set direction. They coordinate activity. They set expectations. They define the roles of individuals and groups.

Planning is an ongoing process. In most meetings, there will be a plan to discuss, amend, and approve. Sometimes it is changes to the strategic plan. Most of the time, it is an element of the strategic plan that is changing, a committee plan that needs approval or the staff has a plan for consideration.

The board uses policies to protect the donors, school, students, and  staff. Setting policy is the process of giving permission and establishing boundaries.

There are two times to set policy. One is when a plan changes or is established. The other is when a report about activity (internal or external) suggests that new boundaries would be helpful.

An obvious example is after a crisis. After the global financial meltdown, reviewing, rewriting, and creating policy was fashionable. After creating policy, the government wrote new laws. Did your board review your investments and create new policies to protect the school from the new risks?

Planning is the process of leading. Policy setting is the process of protecting. How well led and protected is your school?

Next Step:

Encourage the board to focus only on planning, monitoring, creating policy, and self-management and let the staff handle the rest of the work

Never read the reports during the board meeting (ask questions if clarification is necessary)

Ensure that there is always at least one plan and one policy being created, reviewed, or revised at each board meeting

Annually evaluate the effectiveness of the board based upon changes in the lives of the students, enrollment, donations, and the surplus

Will that guarantee success? No, nothing will. The unexpected always happens. However, if the board follows that simple formula, there will be fewer surprises and less drama when the unexpected happens.

As the board becomes more effective, the school will become more sustainable. The students will have a better experience. Creating an effective board produces benefits that more than justify the effort. If a consultant is needed the benefits (increased enrollment and donations) will justify the cost.

As always, contact us if you want help. We use a special process that offers a guarantee. For more information about our process and guarantee, you can click here.

Mission Enablers

Follow us on Twitter for periodic thoughts.

Strategic Thinking

Thursday, December 10th, 2009

Leaders must think strategically. However, we seldom train them to do what we demand. Many who serve on a nonprofit board are serving on a board for the first time. Their employment requires operational thinking. As a result, they think about details first, the big picture second, and strategy is a problem solving tool rather than a planning tool.

Compounding this problem is the experience of the executive director. While the he or she might want to and be capable of thinking strategically, if the board is unwilling or unable to support the executive’s thinking, eventually he or she stops trying.

The failure to think strategically has consequences. Eventually, there is a decline, costs escalate, and doubts develop about the viability of the agency. The viability of many agencies across the country is in doubt.

Mission Enablers works with nonprofits of all types. We help them increase their capacity to serve adapt to the changing market, and increase their sustainability. Thinking strategically is the best way to increase sustainability and avoid decline. We restore viability to struggling agencies and help protect strong agencies from decline.

Strategic planning defines a structural break. A structural break creates a long-term, meaningful change in the future. As an example, consider a plan to increase donations. While that may create a long-term change in giving, it fails the meaningful test. Money is necessary but never meaningful. In addition, the changes are part of a peripheral activity (fundraising) rather than a core element of the mission. Examples of core business or mission related items are clients, services, quality, outcomes, the self-sufficiency of the clients, the character development of the clients, etc.

A structural break would be something like adding programming that results in a higher graduation rate. The higher graduation rate creates a change in the core business and it provides a benefit for the community, families, and the students. Another example is identifying at risk youth and providing programming that prevents their loss to society as well as providing them with a superior education.

The first step in the evolution to strategic thinking is to change the topics for discussion. When non-strategic topics dominate the conversation, strategic thinking is suppressed.

What steps can you take to change the discussion?

As always, if you want help contact us.

Mission Enablers

Follow us on Twitter

Nonprofit Board — Building Donor Passion

Thursday, February 19th, 2009

Last time it was about the key elements of a strategic plan and the benefits. The second benefit is a passionate nonprofit donor.

Donor passion comes from within the donor. It is impossible to create from the outside. However, one can connect the passion of the donor to the mission. The strategic plan is the connection.

The strategic plan must be concrete, creditable, and have an emotional element. One of the ways to ensure concreteness is to have firm goals. Measurable and meaningful goals are concrete.

Let us assume that we are attempting to eliminate hunger. Progress toward that goal would be a reduction in the number of sacks of food needed next year. That would suggest that the community’s problem is smaller even though the population is growing. The goal is measurable and meaningful.

Is it creditable? No. However, it can become creditable if the plan is logical and practical. If the reader can immediately see how it is possible to achieve the goals, it has credibility. If it depends on elements beyond ones control (improvement in the stock market, low fuel costs, and increased manufacturing activity), it may still work, but everyone will wait and see. Credibility will be after the fact. Can you afford to have the donors wait or is it important to have support now?

One way to destroy credibility is to have a strategic plan covering the near term. Some problems take years to solve. Offering a cure for cancer in the next 12 months, lack credibility. Offering a cure for the ten most common forms of cancer in 20 years seems believable.

The final element is emotional engagement. The plan to this point is sterile. It appeals to the intellect. That is good because the intellect is often the gatekeeper that allows the engagement of the heart.

The plan needs to talk about the changes one sees in the clients. “The clients will have greater self-confidence, new skills, and less stress as a result of completing the first class. The second class will give them …” How many donor hearts can say no to that? In other words, the supporting narrative needs to humanize the facts and planning.

Now the donor can justify the gift. The gift solves an important problem (last article), the plan is creditable and measurable, and there is a direct personal connection. The donor can say, “I am helping people …” That is very different from saying, “I give to the X&Z agency.” People are passionate about helping people. (People are passionate about their new car. It is rare for someone to be passionate about the manufacturer.)

The passion in the nonprofit employees, volunteers, and the board will also be obvious. A passionate nonprofit board is more effective. It is important to remember that referral source is a nonprofit volunteer with a different purpose. Having a creditable, concrete, and emotionally engaging strategic plan increases the effectiveness of the referral sources.

One of the most important referral sources are the clients. If they are receiving the promises of the mission, referring others is easy and natural.

With all of that support, it is easy to see how a good strategic plan creates sustainability.

Nonprofit Boards – The benefits of strategic planning

Monday, January 26th, 2009

The benefits are what every organization dreams about. A strategic plan will produce sustainability. The symptoms or key elements of sustainability are strong community support, donor passion, motivated employees and volunteers, an effective board, active and committed referral sources, and clients referring others.

Is it reasonable to expect that from a strategic plan?

What does it take to have strong community support? One must have a goal that inspires the community. Eliminating hunger is one example. However, there must be a plan behind that.

Passing out sacks of food is unlikely to inspire support. Passing out food feeds people but it fails to eliminate hunger.

It is important to truly solve a problem if one wants dependable support from the community.  This is especially true during tough economic times.

People feel they have limited resources to give to charity. They need to know that their gift is going to eliminate a problem.

The current economic environment has created skepticism. The banks received money from the government. People expected the money to solve a problem. The number of bank loans is below the expected level. People feel the government failed to ensure the effective use of the money.

The consumer is carrying that disappointment into other aspects of their lives. Charitable giving is one of the areas. They are starting to ask, “Who is solving the problem?” The question in 2008 was, “Who is working on the problem?”

In 2008, it was okay to be working on the problem. It was okay to be passing out sacks of food so that people could look for a job if they wanted to. However, like the government money it fails to ensure that the recipient will look for a job.

Trusting the banks to make loans seems to be the same mistake as trusting the unemployed to look for a job. It is the donor’s privilege to decide if the two problems are identical. Do you have time this year to argue with your donors and community?

The strategic plan must be robust enough to deliver on the mission. There are two options. One is to change the mission. It still needs to solve an important problem but maybe a smaller more manageable one. The other option is to create a robust strategic plan that delivers on the promise of the mission.

Many nonprofits are laying off workers. Some are closing their door. Both are suffering from a lack of support. If you want to avoid that fate, create a strategic plan that actually solves a problem important to your community.

Does your strategic plan promise a solution or just support a need? What changes do you need to make to become a problem solver?

Nonprofit Boards – Why not create a strategic plan?

Wednesday, January 21st, 2009

Last week the article was about the challenges of strategic planning. While it might have been a compelling argument for strategic planning, most nonprofits will find it hard to do. Is there an easy way to do strategic planning?

The most significant hurdle to creating a strategic plan is having the time and skills. It takes time to plan and there always seems to be something urgent that delays the planning process.

The skills need to come from the board members. Most board members lack experience with strategic planning. Some have been responsible for executing parts of a strategic plan. In frequently a few have helped create a strategic plan. Rarely has anyone lead the planning process. As a result, boards place minimal emphasis on strategic planning, so most nonprofit executives lack experience.

The limited demand for strategic planning means most consultants lack experience. They primarily provide help with operational (one to two-year budget development) planning because that is what the majority of their clients want.

The net is that strategic planning is a lot like introducing new technology to the over 60 crowd 20 years ago. They talked about it. Very few did anything. Those who did had trouble. No one was committed learning how. It was rare anyone asked for help.

So what is the solution?

The solution is to create a three to five year plan to evolve the board into being strategic. An easy first step is to create a three-year operating budget. This helps stretch the thinking. It helps the board and staff look at donations and donor recruitment with an eye to the future.

The second step is to start recruiting board members who are strategic thinkers. Running a restaurant in town for the past 15 years, qualifies the person as an operational manager. Starting a restaurant 15 years ago and having 25 in 3 states qualifies one as a strategic thinker. That person is good at visioning, planning, and execution.

Which one do you want on the board? It will be easier to recruit operations manager because he or she has more time to give. In most cases, the executive director is a good operational manager also. Why do you need another one?

The third step is to do a community and client assessment next year. Put the funds in the second year’s budget. That will allow time to find the funding. It will also allow you time to develop the list of questions for use during the assessment.

The fourth step is to begin the strategic planning process in the third year. When the plan is complete, you will have evolved the board and the staff. The funding process will be more forward looking. The budgeting process will be more visionary. There will be sufficient time to gather community support. The culture within the agency will have changed.

That is a workable do it yourself process. With the help of a good consultant, planning will take about three months instead of three years. However, it is cheaper to do it yourself. Do you and the board have the commitment to manage a three evolution? Doing it quickly and paying someone to help makes it easier to sustain the commitment.

Sometimes we work with a failing nonprofit. None of them failed because they have a flawed strategic plan. In fact, none of them has a strategic plan. They fail because they put off planning or they continued to operate from a 12 month plan (annual budget). They were so busy taking care of the immediate that the future never received sufficient attention. So, part of the initial recovery process is to create a strategic plan. We are very good at strategic planning. It is the only way we are able to lead our clients out of crisis. We are so good at strategic planning, we guarantee success.

Avoid their trap. Get your board committed to having a strategic plan. No delays. Avoid postponing until the current budget need is met or the economic crisis passes or … A good strategic plan is necessary for long-term survival.

Mission Enablers

Nonprofit Boards – Strategic Planning is a Challenge

Tuesday, January 13th, 2009

At its best, strategic planning results in the solution to a significant mission centered problem.

Many nonprofits of all sizes struggle with strategic planning. Many individuals argue that strategic planning is a waste of effort. Technology changes often and rapidly. How can you develop a strategy in a rapidly changing environment?

A better question might be, “How can you prosper in a rapidly changing environment without a long-term vision and plan?” If everything is changing, it becomes important to know where you are going and what you want to accomplish along the way.

Most board members have limited experience with strategic planning. Most of those who do have experience were actually recruited because of some other skill. As a result, most boards place very little emphasis on strategic planning.

Most boards are focused on this year’s budget. There are two ways to address that problem. The first possible solution is to develop a process for increasing donations. Most boards are uncomfortable with this since it means doing something that makes them uncomfortable – soliciting donations. The second possible solution is to cut costs. The board is comfortable with that It has lots of experience cutting costs at home and work, it takes less time, and produces immediate results.

Cutting costs is good if one is finding efficiencies. However, most of the time cost cutting results in the reduction of services. While it protects the agency from failure, it also reduces the scale of the mission and impact on the community. As a result, the immediate need is met but future support is reduced. Who wants to give money to an agency that is intentionally doing less for the community when the need for services is growing?

The polar opposite is focusing on a significant mission centered problem. The first step is to identify the problem. The best way to discover the problem is to ask the community and the clients about unmet needs, under met needs, and emerging needs. Once you know the problem, it is easy to establish a date for having a solution. The follow-on step is to roll out the solution to the public. The final step is to achieve success in the form of eliminating the problem.

Think about polio. Someone had to develop a vaccine. Then it was necessary to test the vaccine. Then it was necessary to mass-produce and distribute the vaccine. Today, polio is found only in a limited geographic area in Africa.

The elimination of polio is now an achievable goal. It has taken about 50 years for the polio team to reach this point. How old is your nonprofit? How close are you to eliminating the need that defines your mission? How much closer will you be in 10 years? Do you see the value of a strategic plan?

It is usually hard for nonprofits to take this visionary approach. The lack of strategic planning experience on the board is one constraint. The urgent needs of money, the declining economy, and the competition for donors occupy a significant portion of the board’s time. The time required to talk with clients and the community is significant. It is difficult to envision the solution to the problem once it is identified. It can also be overwhelming to think about actually solving a significant problem. So why bother?

The benefits are significant. It is easier to raise money for a vision than the current budget. Everyone wants to be part of something significant. It is easier to find volunteers and community support because the community understands the benefits of your success. It is easier to sustain the effort because everyone wants you to succeed. It costs less than you think because people are willing to help. It increases the sense of purpose for the staff and board. It creates sustainability.

For me the pros out weigh the cons. How do you feel?

Mission Enablers

Nonprofit Boards and Strategic Planning

Wednesday, January 7th, 2009

At its best strategic planning solves an important problem.

What is a counter example? Let us consider the board’s strategic planning retreat to create this year’s budget.

What is the problem they are trying to solve? They want to ensure that the agency has sufficient funds to operate. Is that a big problem? No, it may be a difficult problem given past practices and a weak economy. In addition, it is only a problem for the agency. Is it the right type of problem for the board to discuss? No, they hired an executive director to handle the operational needs. Funding the daily operations is part of the job of the executive (this is true of government managers, business managers, and nonprofit managers).

What is a good example?

How should our agency grow?

Should we grow in the number of people we serve, the size of the territory we serve, or the number of services we offer?

How fast should we grow?

What goals should we set?

Picking the strategic issue and answering the critical questions is appropriate for the board.

Growth is one example of a strategic issue. It then prompts the discussion of tactical issues. For example:

How do we fund the growth?

Should we rely on foundations?

Should we have a capital campaign to fund the growth?

Should we merge with other agencies?

Should we partner with other agencies?

Are there for-profits who would be willing to help us?

Handling the tactical issues is the work of the board committees. It is where one blends the practical experience of the staff with the vision of the board.

Having addressed the strategic and the tactical, it is possible to turn the project over to the executive and staff. The staff can handle the operational issues. Some of the operational issues the staff must consider are:

How do we make our systems scalable?

What infrastructure do we need and by when?

What skills do we need?

Will we hire the skills or build them internally?

What quality measures should we use?

How do we increase our accountability?

What should we say in our funding appeal?

When will we need money and how much?

So what if your board is unprepared for this challenge? No problem. Meet with the board chair and develop a three plan to get the board ready.

Mission Enablers