Archive for May, 2012

Meetings: Painless and Productive

Monday, May 28th, 2012

Robin Noah

How many meetings did you attend this week? This month? This year? Did you attend a meeting today? Do you have more meetings scheduled for the next few workdays? I’m tired just looking at my calendar. 

Meetings are the heart of any organization. We get together in meetings for many reasons: to discuss issues, make decisions, set priorities and respond to crises. In meetings, we learn who our colleagues are and decide whom we can trust. We may laugh, cry, rage, love and comfort one another as well as dealing with the business at hand. With all our ability to converse over the Internet, to text, Skype and send Facebook messages galore, organizations still need face to face meetings to function well.  

We can’t rid the world of meetings. After all, the benefits of meeting does sometime outweigh the costs. But we can meet more wisely. 

Running an effective meeting is more than sending out a notice that participants are to meet at a particular time and place. Effective meetings need structure and order. Without these elements they can go on forever and not accomplish a thing. 

There are good meetings and there are bad meetings. Effective ones leave you energized and feeling that you’ve really accomplished something. So what makes a meeting effective?  

Effective meetings are about: 

  • Achieving the meeting’s objective. 
  • Taking up a minimum amount of time.  
  • Leaving participants feeling that a sensible process has been followed.
  • Having a sense of accomplishment. 

 If you structure your meeting planning, preparation, execution, and follow up around these basic criteria, the result will be an effective meeting.

Author: Robin Noah,  Executive Coaches of Orange County,  www.ECofOC.org

  • Share/Bookmark

Nonprofit Salaries

Monday, May 21st, 2012
Bob Cryer

Bob Cryer

I have heard nonprofit managers say that salaries in the nonprofit sector are about a third less than the private sector because nonprofit employees are willing to work for less in order to have the satisfaction of working for some altruistic cause. Nonprofit employees might also get more flexible work hours and better benefits.

On the other hand, nonprofits may pay more because they don’t benefit from wage cost savings (donations don’t increase as a result of lower wages and government grants are typically cost-plus contracts) the way for-profits benefit from lower wages. In addition, nonprofits may choose to hire better people at a higher salary in order to get higher quality outcomes.

What is the truth? Here are the facts according to a 2009 report by Amy Butler at the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The average earnings of everyone in the nonprofit sector is 6% higher than those in the private sector. State employees are 16% higher than the private sector, and local employees are 23% higher.

However, the average salary of nonprofit managers is only 82% of their for-profit counterparts. This pattern repeats itself in other “managerial” professions. In business and financial management, nonprofits pay 87% of private sector employers; in computer and math applications it is 89% and in legal occupations it is 82%.

But for office and administrative support occupations, nonprofit compensation is the same as the private sector. For community and social services workers, nonprofit salaries are 99% of the private sector, and for healthcare support and personal care services they are 97% of the private sector.

What is the bottom line? The compensation of nonprofit employees in support services functions is similar to the private sector’s compensation. But nonprofit managers and their financial, legal and computer professionals, their compensation is about 85% of their private sector counterparts.

Author:  Bob Cryer,  Executive Coaches of Orange County,  www.ECofOC.org

 

 

  • Share/Bookmark

Performance reviews: Yuck!

Monday, May 14th, 2012

Larry Tucker

A client said to me the other day that her board had not formally reviewed her performance in a few years and she had not formally reviewed her direct reports in about the same amount of time. To quote Texas Governor Rick Perry, “Oops!”  

Admittedly, the best coaching takes place daily in ongoing conversations. But, once a year, you still must step back and consider overall performance. 

The discussions and coaching that takes place day to day, if even those are occurring, tend to focus on immediate problems, not on the organization’s mission and vision and certainly not on the employee’s goals and career.  

In addition, good performance reviews link everything together:  

  • Organization mission, vision and annual goals 
  • Executive Director goals  
  • Staff goals  

This assures that the vision and culture of the organization start at the board and Executive Director level, and then flow through to all employees, giving the organization consistency and a common purpose.

 I also tend to be a supporter of 360 reviews, where bosses, peers and direct reports (and sometimes clients) all provide input into the process. With the advent of free and inexpensive electronic survey resources like SurveyMonkey and Zoomerang, obtaining multiple perspectives in a confidential process is now quite simple. 

As usual, Jan Masaoka of Blue Avacado offers some great tips on performance reviews and provides a template for the evaluation of an executive director.

Author:  Larry Tucker,  Executive Coaches of Orange County,  www.ECofOC.org

  • Share/Bookmark

The New Leadership

Tuesday, May 8th, 2012

Adrianne DuMond

Leadership is a custodial role; people participate because they want to; leaders do stuff that no one else wants to do. In 2001, Jim Collins wrote ‘ Good to Great; Why Some Companies Make the Leap and Others Don’t’. It was a book for business and the corporate world. In 2005 he added a monograph for the ‘Social Sectors’ and I recommend it for the nonprofit world – especially the sections that define what good leadership is in today’s fast changing environment. 

Collins states that ‘leaders are ambitious first and foremost for the cause, the movement, the work – not themselves – and they have the will to do whatever it takes to make good on that ambition’. It is a combination of ‘personal humility’ and ‘professional will’ – a paradoxical blend.

 The reason I find this applicable to the nonprofit world is because leadership is used in a very complex governance structure and often with a diffuse power base. That is, there is the Board of Directors that requires clear direction, a staff that requires direction and motivation, donors who require proof of performance, clients who seek guidance and support, foundations and government agencies that monitor the use of monies, and the public that demands proof of effectiveness. The nonprofit world is an environment where power from the top doesn’t work. Yes, there is need for clear direction (mission and goals) and enthusiasm to make it happen. But power comes from the connections made among people, and building relationships and keeping them – a never-ending challenge requiring commitment and determination. It takes ‘custodial management’ and not the traditional nature of power, then, to inspire the fulfillment of the mission. 

Collins’ monograph is interesting in the observation of how to staff an organization. He states that the great businesses focused on recruiting and keeping the right people in the right jobs – those who are self-motivated and self-disciplined, and ‘wake up every day, compulsively driven to do the best they can because it is simply a part of their DNA’. I have found that people who have this dedication and commitment to a cause own the nonprofit world. But it takes a custodial style of management to guide and support these people. 

I highly recommend Jim Collins’ monograph for some inspiring reading.

 Author:  Adrianne DuMond,  Executive Coaches of Orange County,  www.ECofOC.org

  • Share/Bookmark