If you take a look at the most recent census projections, the United States is becoming a more ethnically diverse population.  As we look at these projections, reaching out to these ethnically diverse populations is not only the right thing for a non-profit, but it is going to become a necessity in order for non-profits to engage these populations in their missions, programs, boards and yes, their development efforts.

The reason this […]]]> by Errika Flood-Moultrie

If you take a look at the most recent census projections, the United States is becoming a more ethnically diverse population.  As we look at these projections, reaching out to these ethnically diverse populations is not only the right thing for a non-profit, but it is going to become a necessity in order for non-profits to engage these populations in their missions, programs, boards and yes, their development efforts.

The reason this conversation is ongoing is because in no way is there the ability to provide the solution in one editorial commentary from a consultant at a non-profit management company, but it is a place to start a dialogue that needs to happen with boards, staff and volunteers across the nation.  Non-profits should start taking a good look at their organization and begin to analyze the true diversity from the volunteer/donor perspective.

For far too long, diverse communities have been looked upon as recipients rather than donors and/or supporters.  Here’s where I share the some jaw dropping information for some and perhaps for others just a reminder:

• African Americans give 25% more of their discretionary income to charity than do others.
• According to research funded in part by the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, a growing percentage of Americans who each year give $175 billion to charity are minorities.
• African Americans and whites at the same income levels appear to have similar levels of giving.
• The U.S. census identifies Latinos as a young population indicating the majority has not reached their primary giving years.

The commentary can go on, but here’s the point – it’s time to start asking the questions, what are we doing to engage, nurture and develop those ethnically diverse members of our communities into our mission and what will our organization do to sustain that engagement?  SUSTAIN that’s key.  Here’s where I throw up the yellow flag and speak as clearly as possible to communicate that if your organization is not going to make community engagement a part of your organizational strategic plan, just don’t do anything at all.  The last thing any of these communities want to see or experience is the “cause of the month” phenomenon that some non-profits tend to do when they take a look and realize that something needs to be done.  Your organizations need to hunker down, develop strategy on all levels to engage these diverse audiences and then put the time and resources into turning this strategy into reality.  Strategize. Plan. Implement. Sustain.

Here’s where I close and hope you’ll continue the conversation.  Engaging these diverse audiences should become a part of the norm for your organization. Mission-based messaging and strong stewardship will be vital. Start now – get in touch with the community, stay in touch, let them know how their support impacts the work they are passionate about, and be receptive to the support they can and will provide and may eventually increase as they are able. These communities want to make a difference. You just have to be there to show them how they can.

Let’s talk again soon.

In his blog post on Harvard Business Review’s website, author Anthony Tjan asks readers to reflect on five questions in the context of how we think about our time at work. As we head into 2012, I challenge everyone to think of how Anthony’s questions apply to you and your workday habits.

1. Are you working towards a purpose?

This question centers on our ability to articulate the “ “why” as opposed […]]]> by Katie Sirakos

In his blog post on Harvard Business Review’s website, author Anthony Tjan asks readers to reflect on five questions in the context of how we think about our time at work. As we head into 2012, I challenge everyone to think of how Anthony’s questions apply to you and your workday habits.

1. Are you working towards a purpose?

This question centers on our ability to articulate the “ “why” as opposed to [the] “what” and “how”.” In other words, connecting to the reason why our work exists (our ultimate purpose) forms the foundation for making wiser time allocation choices. Tjan quotes author Clay Christensen who states, “Your decisions about allocating your personal time, energy, and talent ultimately shape your life’s strategy.”

2. Are you running hard, but not getting ahead?

Tjan writes that while hard work is undeniably linked to progressing forward on our goals, we may not always be running in the right direction. This is because while it’s easy to identify our big goals, “we often default to short-term tasks.” Checking off items on the never-ending list of small tasks allows us to feel a sense of accomplishment, but if we do not take time to be mindful of longer-term goals we may easily find ourselves lost in the proverbial forest.

3. Have you done a calendar audit lately?

To that end, Tjan suggests doing regular audits of how we actually spend our time, as opposed to how we believe we spend our time. Whether this looks like reflecting on activities scheduled in Outlook or engaging the use of tools like timesheets, taking the time to periodically “map” our use of time to our top priorities allows for reflection on progress with those priorities.

4. Are you booking sufficient think time?

We’ve all been there: you arrive at a meeting, only to think “Now, what is the agenda again?” Tjan states we should make it a practice to religiously block out time in advance of meetings to think of what we hope to achieve in those meetings. He uses a standard ratio of at least 1:2 of prep time to meeting time. He writes, “If a meeting is an hour you probably need 30 minutes to prepare. […] Know the type of meeting you are having and block sufficient prep time.”

5. Are you multi-tasking your way to lower productivity?

Simply blocking out the time to prepare (“thinking time”) is not akin to actually creating the mental space to think. Tjan writes we should also improve our discipline with regards to shutting off/ignoring our “second screens” while using our blocked off time. “Focus on the task at hand when you have scheduled the time to do so.” It is a simple admonishment, yet easy to forget when we are constantly monitoring multiple “smart” gadgets.

Tjan eloquently sums up his main points, stating, “It is too easy to just say yes to meetings. It is too easy to confuse working hard with progress. It is too easy to feel the need fill the white space on a calendar. Or, worse, to not know what to do during unscheduled time because you have not had the chance to think, or are too busy multi-tasking. For 2012, consider a change and work towards the goal of better time allocation. It is possible. Focus on the goal versus just using up time. Indeed, embrace the gift of unscheduled time. It’s time to make time for time.”

For the full article and more from Anthony Tjan , visit this link: http://blogs.hbr.org/tjan/2011/12/make-time-for-time.html.

A recent article in Philanthropy Today, titled “Nonprofits Are Expected to Use Social Media During Disasters,” touched on the idea of keeping a close watch on social media outlets in the time of disaster. The article reports that today’s American appears to expect nonprofit organizations that provide disaster aid to consistently check and respond to requests for help and information that are submitted to those organizations via Facebook, Twitter and other social network […]]]> by Stepheni Jordan

A recent article in Philanthropy Today, titled “Nonprofits Are Expected to Use Social Media During Disasters,” touched on the idea of keeping a close watch on social media outlets in the time of disaster. The article reports that today’s American appears to expect nonprofit organizations that provide disaster aid to consistently check and respond to requests for help and information that are submitted to those organizations via Facebook, Twitter and other social network pages

“According to a new survey by the American Red Cross, eighty percent of Americans sais they expect national relief groups to monitor their own social media feeds as well as the Web sites where disaster victims might make urgent requests for         help. And they expect those groups to act quickly. About 35 percent of those surveyed said that it is reasonable to expect assistance to arrive within an hour after a request for help is posted online.”  – Philanthropy Today, August 2011

For organizations such as American Red Cross Red Cross, which has a social-media following of more than 366,000 Facebook fans and 500,000 Twitter followers and The Salvation Army, which has more than 59,000 Facebook fans and almost 9,900 Twitter followers, the thought of aiding every last request would be daunting. “Meeting that expectation of one hour is a hard number to me right now,” says Trevor Riggen, senior director of disaster services at the American Red Cross.

Fortunately, these nonprofit disaster-response organizations have a committed network of volunteers and staff who are ready and willing to assemble when needed. However meeting a demand forecast by the survey results will require a large increase in volunteer reserves and recruitment efforts.

In Dallas, the Mass Care Task Force anticipates this increase. In 2006, as a result of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, the Mass Care Task Force was formed by American Red Cross – North Texas Region, North Texas Food Bank, The Salvation Army and the Volunteer Center of North Texas. This collaboration is has worked over the past five years to “beat-the-clock” and acquire the resources needed to shelter and provide humanitarian need up to 37,500 before the next major disaster hits North Texas. A significant task associated with this effort is recruiting volunteers who will assist in the time of disaster. The need to identify thousands of volunteers before the next disaster is reinforced by the responses to the American Red Cross survey mentioned above.

According to the Philanthropy Today article, while survey respondents believed that nonprofits should come to their aid when in need, nearly half of Americans who responded to the survey thought it was likely that their requests would go “unnoticed” by national organizations, and almost that many believed the same about local groups as well.

So, where do disaster response organizations go from here? Should they add social media staff? Or do they receive this information with a belief that the expectation is unreasonable?

I am not sure of the answer, but if you are, Tweet That!

When was the last time you heard someone say something positive about life in a cubicle?

In a September 2011 article, “Vision Statement: High-Performance Office Space,” Harvard Business Review authors write of the transition one large organization, pharmaceutical company Lilly, made from a traditional “cube farm” (a.k.a. cubicle-laden) office layout to an open plan design. The authors state traditional cubicle office plans have “significant drawbacks, according to the workplace-strategy consultancy Lilly hired, […]]]> by Katie Sirakos

When was the last time you heard someone say something positive about life in a cubicle?

In a September 2011 article, “Vision Statement: High-Performance Office Space,” Harvard Business Review authors write of the transition one large organization, pharmaceutical company Lilly, made from a traditional “cube farm” (a.k.a. cubicle-laden) office layout to an open plan design. The authors state traditional cubicle office plans have “significant drawbacks, according to the workplace-strategy consultancy Lilly hired, DEGW. Research it has conducted- 44 surveys involving 7,312 knowledge workers at 18 organizations- reveals that in traditional offices, it takes knowledge workers, on average, 4.7 hours to get a response from colleagues and 8.8 hours to get one from managers.” They conclude this kind of office layout leads to greater inefficiencies, hassles, and distractions, and that workers “spend only 35% of their time at their desks.”

Recognizing these drawbacks, Lilly did away with the cubes and drastically increased the amount of shared and temporary, unassigned space. The authors write of how the new spaces has areas “designated for different kinds of work,” meaning there are spaces for talking one-on-one and in groups and spaces for when only silence will do. The results are encouraging. According to the article, company employees find the new space encourages communication, creativity, and creates a stimulating atmosphere.

Employees here at Clarkson Davis agree that an open plan office format creates a positive, productive environment. In April, Clarkson Davis moved into an open concept space, designed with the help of local designer Gina Ortegon.

“Our work is about energy, collaboration, and building ideas with our clients that help transport them to new levels of impact.  We hope that the workspace we created with Gina reflects and contributes to this creative process,” says Janet Davis

Despite the open floor plan, Clarkson Davis team members can have quiet time when needed by using an "I am concentrating" sign.

Book the Pad:

The space is warm and inviting, and well suited for a variety of different gatherings. If you are interested in hosting a meeting or event at the Clarkson Davis offices, please contact Madeline Dunklin, Clarkson Davis Practice Manager, at madeline@clarksondavis.com.

The Development Committee from Dallas Area Habitat conducts a meeting at the Clarkson Davis offices, also known as The Launch Pad.

New view: our nonprofit/social benefit company continuously requires capital investment to:  a) strengthen our ability to produce, analyze, and consume outcome data, b) research […]]]> Old view: every (_____) years, our nonprofit organization runs a capital campaign to a) build a new building, b) fix the building we built during the last capital campaign, c) try to persuade donors to “invest” their money in our endowment fund. In between campaigns, we manage as best we can…

New view: our nonprofit/social benefit company continuously requires capital investment to:  a) strengthen our ability to produce, analyze, and consume outcome data, b) research and develop new models for social impact, c) fund transformational changes in the scale and impact of our programs that are impossible to achieve from operating cash flow alone, d) replace and extend the physical and technical infrastructure we use to deliver and improve services. Without continuous investment, we can’t effectively pursue our mission and compete with other organizations in the field.

Both views exist among nonprofit leaders, but the “new view” is becoming the organizing construct among many of those considering the future of nonprofit organizations and the nonprofit sector. Robert Kaplan and Allen Grossman lay out their case for a new capital market framework for individuals and organizations seeking to create social change in The Emerging Capital Markets for Nonprofits (October 2010 Harvard Business Review).

More than a reiteration of the need for nonprofits to demonstrate clear social outcomes in their pursuit of funding, the new model includes the widespread emergence of new breeds of market intermediaries focused on identifying and qualifying social investment opportunities on behalf of those who seek to create sustained social change. In this view, such actors serve functions similar to those of their counterparts in private capital markets:  independent audit firms, venture capital firms, investment banks, mutual funds. And, in this model, the velocity and volume of capital investment will be increased, with capital flowing efficiently and much more directly to those nonprofit organizations/social benefit companies that are innovative, nimble, future-focused, and able to deliver on investors’ expectations.

Whether you embrace all, some, or none of the new view, it is worth serious consideration. Access The Emerging Capital Markets for Nonprofits here and let us know what you think.

Click here to access What is Strategy and let us know what you think!

Click here to access Building Your Company’s Vision and […]]]> Before Good to Great, before Built to Last, Jim Collins and Jerry Porras gave the world the Big, Hairy, Audacious Goal — the BHAG — in the Harvard Business Review article Building Your Company’s Vision. This is one of the most clarifying models we have encountered for building a powerful, shared vision for an organization’s future — an absolute must-read for nonprofit leaders!

Click here to access Building Your Company’s Vision and let us know what you think!

Click here […]]]> Measuring outcomes and social impact is one of the most important and difficult challenges facing nonprofit leaders. In this article, the roles of a nonprofit organization’s “Theory of Change” and strategy are discussed in the context of the cost/benefit. Measuring impact is complex, and it isn’t free. Here is some thinking on where and how to focus your organization’s efforts to measure social impact.

Click here to read the article and let us know what you think!