Category Archives: Executive Directors

June 16, 2016 · 3:25 pm

Executives and the Four Directions

UnknownNative Americans have the concept of a medicine wheel, based on four directions:  North, East, South, and West.  While I am simplifying the concept, they believe that health is achieved through balance in these four directions.

Association and nonprofit executives have four directions they can face as well.  For association executives, you can be member facing, staff facing, advocacy facing, or industry facing.  When you look at how associations hire, you can tell what they want in an exec in terms of what constitutes an optimal balance for their organization.  If an association is looking for a former congressperson, for example, there is a strong indication that their “balance” will be weighted more toward the advocacy facing individual.  If they hire within their profession or interest group, it may well indicate that a member facing executive is important to them.

Nonprofit executives have a similar set of “directions” they can face as well.  A nonprofit executive can be staff facing, beneficiary facing, donor/funder facing, or community facing.  Depending on the nature and needs of the nonprofit, any of these directions can be primary at a given point in time.

A key for executive success is understanding the organization’s needs and context, the Board’s expectations, and the executive’s skill set and interest, and how these three dynamics define a healthy balance in the four directions.  It is also important to know that the needs of an organization can change—either over time, or quickly, depending on context and events.

As executives, knowing both our natural comfort, skill, knowledge, and ability regarding each of these directions is imperative.  Examining ourselves, and seeking professional development opportunities to help round out and balance our knowledge is critical.  It is also important to review these “directions” with the Board, to make sure that how the executive is orienting her/himself is consistent with the Board’s understanding of the needs and priorities of the organization.

One good tool that provides assessment of career cycle, strengths, skills, and balance is The Association CEO Handbook, by Paul Belford.  In disclosure, while I wrote the foreword to the book I have no financial interest in it.  The content can help improve an individual’s awareness of strengths and development needs.  Whatever tools you use, though, make an assessment—in what direction has the majority of your time actually been spent in the last year?  Is that the most critical to the needs and priorities of the organization, or the most comfortable because it is your wheelhouse?  What needs to be re-calibrated for you to have optimal balance?

 

Michael Bowers provides consultation to organizations addressing strategic, programmatic, and operational challenges and coaching to association and nonprofit executives.

Leave a comment

Filed under Associations, Executive Directors, Leadership, Personal Growth and Development, Sustaining Excellence

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

May 31, 2016 · 12:36 pm

Checkup: 4 Key Accountabilities an Executive has to Her/His Team

Unknown

There are baseline responsibilities all leaders have to their teams. Do an assessment—or better yet, ask your team.  How are you doing with these key accountabilities?

  • Establish a clear, commonly understood, and attainable definition of success.

To be engaged, teams have to know where they are headed, what success looks like, and they must believe they can achieve it.  Can your staff clearly and easily articulate what success is for them?  For your organization overall?

  • Create and maintain structures and processes that facilitate moving toward success.

Too many times, our systems, structures, and processes are not aligned with the goals we have established for success.  How do you monitor and adjust your management systems and processes so they help align and engage your team toward that clear definition of success you have established?  Perhaps more importantly—does your staff team believe that you focus on aligning systems and processes to help facilitate their success?  How do you know?

  • Provide opportunities for development and growth for your team.

To build and maintain excellence, you must offer your staff opportunities to learn and grow.  This can build your bench strength and cross train your staff.  For many smaller associations and nonprofits without a significant career growth ladder, you may be training folks to leave for more advanced work in some instances.  However, the price of not investing in growth and development is a non-engaged workforce and entropy.  What formal and informal mechanisms do you have—that your staff can identify—that gives them a sense that you care about their growth and careers?

  • Create and Maintain a culture of trust and safety.

A search of contents on Harvard Business Review shows 213 offerings on “employee trust.” Add articles on “leadership,” and “employee engagement,” or just “trust”, and the numbers go up exponentially.  The fact is, if your team doesn’t have confidence in you and a sense of trust and safety, it may not matter if you have met the other accountabilities listed above.  In fact, it may not be possible to successfully achieve the three prior accountabilities if there is not a bedrock of trust.  Again, it is your team that can best answer whether trust and safety is present in the workplace, not you as the leader.  How long has it been since you’ve asked?

Put these accountabilities to the test!  Create and consistently implement a plan to consistently ensure that you are meeting them.  These are keys to success.

Leave a comment

Filed under Associations, Executive Directors, Leadership, Staff Management, Sustaining Excellence

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

May 26, 2016 · 4:06 pm

Assessing the Effectiveness of Your Annual Report

 

140315_Boekhouden

 

Annual reports are ubiquitous and essentially required for nonprofit organizations and associations.  Every organization wants to document its activities, successes, and impact.  It is a challenge, however, to know how to evaluate the success of the annual report in meeting its intended goals.

There is not one size that fits all organizations.  In reviewing a variety of reports, one can see they range in content and style from over 100 pages that report on every committee’s activity and outcomes to 7-10 page glossy mailers that are graphic heavy. However, there are three screens that can be used to determine whether your annual report is accurately reflecting what you want to reflect in presenting your organization’s annual statement of activity and impact.

Examine The Top Line

Marshall Mcluhan famously said, “The medium is the message.”  This is definitely true for your annual report.  It is vital to determine whether the design and packaging reflects the culture and messaging of your organization fairly and in the way you want to be presented.  There needs to be congruence between the format, design, graphics, and “glossiness” of your annual report and the “soul” of your organization.  A text heavy, detailed, and relatively “unadorned” annual report may fit the culture of a technical, scientific organization in a way that a glossy, tri-fold or “doormat” size of publication (assuming you still do hard copy annual reports) may not.

On the other hand, too detailed an annual report may never read fully, lessening its impact.   The meta-message may be “don’t even open this until you have an hour to see if you can find out what is really significant to you.”  Take time before gathering content to think through the medium you will use to present the material.  Now, more than ever, just pulling the template from last year’s report and plugging in new content will not signal vibrancy.  How far you go is up to you.  Also, though, find out how any content might be viewed on various platforms and browsers—especially (and hopefully) with a website that has responsive design.

Define The Bottom Line

What is the one thing that is most important for you to convey that happened in your organization this year?  How does it relate to your mission and priorities?  How does everything else you do align in helping to achieve those priorities?  And very importantly, how is your organization achieving impacts in a sustainable way?

You will do better to front-load your key impact statement.  That may not be a standard format, which typically would lead with a letter from the Chief-Elected or Chief-Staff officer.  Even if your culture or precedent requires the “letter” format as a lead in to the rest of the content, make sure you front load the most important messages in digestible form early in the report.  Think of your leading material as a newspaper article that will report the most why, what, when, where, and how messages quickly and memorably.  Do not backload this material!

Sustain The Through Line

What is the theme that holds your report (and your work) together?  A theme can be a primary value, a focus on your mission, or a reflection of your most critical priorities.  How is that primary theme, however you have defined it for the year, reflected through the different sections of your annual report?  Does the report have coherence?  Does it build the case of your impact through the various components in a way that amplifies the messages you want to make sure are received by those who look at your annual report?

Focus on your top line, bottom line, and through line.  Let some readers (not the most engaged volunteers, but closer to the “person on the street” level of knowledge) read your report.  See what they take away from it—and if it isn’t what you wanted someone to remember, change it.  Annual reports aren’t just your statement of a year of work.  They become your organization’s archival story.   Make sure it is a good one!

If you’d like to take a look at two different organizations’ annual reports, with vastly different budget/staff sizes, missions, and focus, take a look at the Arlington Free Clinic (AFC), and the American Chemical Society (ACS) annual reports.  The AFC is a community based non-profit providing health care.  The ACS is very large membership organization.  Both present their story well, within their allowable budget and scope–consistent with the brand they have.  ACS is able to produce an interactive, online annual report that jumps to more detail, while the AFC report is more .pdf/document like in presentation.  Both, however, focus on presenting impact of work in a meaningful way.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Associations, Executive Directors, Identity and Branding, Sustaining Excellence

Tagged as , , , ,

May 13, 2016 · 9:19 am

Recruiting, Retaining, and Engaging Millennials (and Everyone Else) in Associations

UnknownYou are reading it everywhere:  millennials have different expectations for a member experience than other demographic groups.   Their history of social experience, being “digital natives” having come of age with social media, and the resultant values and norms create challenges for many associations who have built structures and features of membership primarily for boomers.

Ironically, while millennials will be driving change, as they will be 75% of the workforce by 2025, we are now in a period where the expectations of all demographic segments are changing as technology and social becomes embedded in the culture.   Almost all demographic groups have adopted social interaction on the web, from reviews on Amazon, Yelp, etc., to social platforms.  While millennials are the demographic that associations need to attract and retain to create lifetime value and members, the principles necessary for success matter to every age group at this point.

So how do we assess relevance and create a better context for success as leaders?  Boil down the research and literature, and what millennials (and others) are saying they want from associations can be summed up like this:

  • Connect me to people and give me relationships I can’t find easily elsewhere—including with you as an organization.  Organizations that primarily emphasize features or benefits of membership seem to have no personality—or transparency.  The impression is that the association is conducting transactions with customers, not having dialogue with a connected network of members.  Connect me with others, talk to me about why you are doing what you are, why it matters, and what should happen if we, together, are successful.  Most importantly:  listen to what I think is important, and show me that I have been heard.
  • Personalize my experience and value. In a nutshell, don’t try to sell me 800 cable channels for $200 a month.  Show that you know what matters to me, and deliver it without me having to wade through a multi-page channel guide to see if there might be something that’s interesting or important to me.
  • Tell me things I don’t know, that I need to know to grow and advance.  Deliver curated and relevant knowledge and information that is reliable.  Push it to me, so that I have access to the information early, and in a digestible manner.  Think of what I can read on my phone while waiting in the Starbucks line.
  • Relate what you—we—are doing and and what we stand for to a higher social value and meaning.  What difference is the organization trying to make, and how it is connected to my values about greater good?  Show me that, and you will win my loyalty and commitment.

You can run a test of these characteristics through everything you do as an association.  You can look at your communications (do you have a listening strategy, btw?), your programming, your membership recruitment/retention appeals, the messages your leaders give when they go to speak, and more.  On these measures, how do you scale?

1 Comment

Filed under Associations, Executive Directors, Identity and Branding, Leadership, Recruitment and Retention, Success Metrics, Sustaining Excellence

Tagged as , , , , , ,

May 11, 2016 · 10:22 am

Sustaining the Capacity for Leadership

 

adams-quote-2

During a question and answer period at a recent professional meeting, I was asked how I sustained the capacity for leadership over time. It was a great question—one that I had thought about previously and a lot more since that event.

First, for me, leadership is behavior, not position. We’ve all known or seen individuals who have positions of leadership that we wouldn’t choose to follow. And we’ve also seen others, who didn’t have official positions of leadership who, nevertheless, commanded respect of others who would follow them almost anywhere. Some characteristics that have been well written about that determine leadership include such things as commitment to clear principles and values, the ability to articulate a compelling “why” for the direction that is chosen, and an ability to help others identify and maximize their unique contributions to the cause and direction of the leader. But the question still remains: in a world of so much noise and distraction, and with competing priorities all of which may have validity and meaning, how does someone maintain focus and consistency over time? What disciplines provide the best soil for leadership to grow?

I strive to be consistent in four disciplines (albeit imperfectly) that center my life and prepare me for service, whether as a leader or a follower. They are:

1. Spiritual Discipline. By this I do not necessarily mean a religious discipline, although certainly that can be a central component. But to be centered as a person and as a designated leader, I have found it essential to take time, preferably daily, to focus myself in a spiritual sense. The disciplines include journaling, reflection, meditation/prayer, and other activities aimed at keeping me focused on the greater part of who I am—my greater angels.
2. Mental Discipline. I try to make it a point to keep at least three non-fiction books going at any given time—usually a biography that provides some human/historical learning, a business book that gives insight/skills, and a “free choice” that may include anything from a book on guitars to the bucket list scuba dives that I want to do. One aspect of sustaining leadership is to foster intellectual curiosity, and while that may come naturally for some, I find that I can get so busy doing the tasks of the day that if I don’t name it as a specific discipline it can be one of those important things I don’t do consistently.
3. Creative Discipline. Aside from the mental discipline of trying to learn and be intellectually curious, I find it critical to also engage creatively as a conscious exercise in life. I have been a musician at some level of proficiency for many years, both as a writer and performer. The wonderful thing about undertaking a creative discipline is that one is almost required to approach creativity with a “beginner’s mind.” Whether writing, playing an instrument, painting, or any other creative endeavor, one enters creativity with a sense of wonder, and (for me, at least, some degree of feeling of incompetence!). Of course, Picasso didn’t start out as Picasso, either. But the creative process forces me to a place of learning and wonder (and sometimes frustration), that provides not only focus that is different from my daily tasks, but that also teaches me anew what it is like to be a learner. I believe this is a vital bit of knowledge and empathy for any leader.
4. Physical Discipline. Part of sustaining the capacity to serve or lead is to make sure that one has the physical stamina, capability, and health to do so. Study after study indicates that we are too sedentary, and “under-dose” ourselves with physical exertion and exercise. It’s important to work the heart and the body, and to sweat regularly! It is also important to pay attention to diet and sleep. Leaders–particularly those whose work is mostly cerebral or relational, need the endorphin kick of exercise to renew themselves, and sufficient rest to rejuvenate.

These disciplines don’t guarantee that anyone will be appointed to a position of leadership. But engaged in consciously and consistently provides the best context for a life of meaning, depth, and service, out of which the best leadership can flow.

Leave a comment

Filed under Executive Directors, Leadership, Personal Growth and Development, Success Metrics, Sustaining Excellence

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

March 31, 2014 · 7:19 am

Three Dimensions For Building and Sustaining a Meaningful Culture

UnknownOne question that I am asked—and ask myself routinely—is how to build and sustain a meaningful culture in an organization. While leaders may aspire to somewhat different traits in a culture (trust, productivity, engagement, a service orientation, etc.), all who are serious about the quest look for resources, tools, etc., to be successful.

There is good news and bad news in this search. The good news is that it is possible to build and sustain a positive culture that embodies the traits a leader seeks, through hiring well, building systems and processes, and defining a vision that connects what people do with why they do it.  The recent book by Simon Sinek, Start with Why, gives a basis for the “why” as a foundation to get to the “how.”

The “bad news” is that any leader who believes s/he can build and sustain a meaningful culture with a set of tools, processes, techniques, or even compelling vision, without embodying the aspired culture is mistaken.  Such a leader may have a shell of a culture, but without the leader infusing the desired traits and qualities into her/his own life, it will never become part of the DNA of the leader’s organization.

The bottom line is that like an artist regardless of medium (paint, performance, music), the primary instrument any leader has to define and instill a culture is the person of the leader him/herself. There is no way to avoid that reality, and leaders who try to avoid it never achieve the culture building success to which they aspire.   Given that fact, here are three critical aspects a leader must continually cultivate:

  1. Clarity of intention.  Leaders are pulled in many directions, and sometimes values clash in desired outcomes or culture.  The leader’s first task in building and sustaining culture is to be very clear about the qualities one is trying to build and sustain, and to examine every initiative, action, etc., in light of those qualities.  When qualities or dimensions of culture seem to conflict, the leader must determine which dimensions are bedrock, and build actions that reflect, in relative importance, the dimensions of culture that matter most.
  2. Personal character that is congruent with the desired culture. Put simply, leaders “get back” what they “are.”  If you want a culture of trust, reflect trust in your team.  If you want a culture of engagement—engage!  And so on.  The key for this aspect is to be unsparing (although kind) of yourself in continually examining how you can better reflect the culture you are trying to build and sustain. Creating 360 mechanisms to discover if what you are intending to communicate is what is being received is critical.
  3. Consistency of application over time.  If a culture is to be changed, built, and sustained, above all else, the leader must be committed to the aspects of culture consistently—actually, constantly—over time.  It is perhaps here that most culture change efforts fail.  People get busy, other priorities intervene (culture can seem nebulous in the midst of a crunch of quantifiable measures and deadlines), and culture grows like a garden untended.  No matter how well manicured it may have been at one time, without attention, weeds and pests arise. Leaders must commit to culture building and sustaining as a focused process that is “someone’s job to worry about at night.”  And yes, that job ultimately belongs to the leader, as the primary culture builder and culture bearer. 

If you want to change, build, or sustain a culture in an organization, not only must you start with the why—you must start with yourself.  Find honest mentors/advisors, and begin the quest.  Everyone in the organization will benefit—and you as a leader will the most.

Leave a comment

Filed under Executive Directors, Leadership

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

January 1, 2014 · 2:38 pm

Defining Direction and Mission—New Year Reflections

imagesHow do you want to be different at the end of 2014 than you are now?  How do you want to make the world different?  In defining the goals you will pursue, are they more focused on success, or significance?  Do you recognize the difference in those two things?

As I’ve reflected on my mission for the year, it has boiled down to a simple statement.  Simple to say, that is, but not so simple to do, because there are thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of little decisions, actions, words, and aspirations underneath them.  But in that, the statement challenges me, to connect the grand with the small, the moment with the long-term, and to reach for something larger than merely the personal.  As I think about 2014, and how I will look back at the end, here is what I want to accomplish:

My mission is to align talent and resources to achieve outcomes with purpose.

Obviously, this mission will require a focus on making my knowledge deeper and my skills better.  But it will also require focused attention to others, and how I can help them maximize their talent and resources to achieve outcomes that have purpose to them.  By building relationships with intention, being open and curious in learning, I believe that mission can build toward a life of significance.

Sure, I want to be in a little better shape, eat healthier, etc. etc., and make all of the commitments that we do at New Years in resolutions.  But somehow, even those little things take on a different significance when framed in that larger mission.  And significance, for those in the association and non-profit world, certainly should be a major focus of our work and lives.

So, Happy New Year!  May it bring you deeper meaning, clearer purpose, and satisfaction and contentment with a life well lived in the next year.

Leave a comment

Filed under Executive Directors, Identity and Branding, Leadership

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

October 30, 2013 · 1:43 pm

Expanding Your Leadership Presence: Managing Meaning

imagesIt is not uncommon when coaching newly-minted or aspiring CEOs in associations to hear them express the desire to expand their leadership presence.  While being promoted from within vs. coming onboard from outside an organization pose different challenges, establishing and expanding leadership presence early is critical.

One trap newly hatched CEOs can easily fall into is believing that they were hired because of what they were doing well previously.  They assume they need to do more of that same thing, perhaps better and with more diligence to have success.  Unfortunately, in many cases this is not true.  While the skill set and persona that created the opportunity to lead is vital, the reality is that moving to a new level of responsibility—at the enterprise level—requires different skills and perspective than those that brought success previously.

One CEO I worked with was having a difficult time making the transition, and couldn’t really grasp the concept of stepping beyond his previously successful management focus and perspective.  Outside work, he was a car buff, and after some unfruitful discussion, I drew the following analogy that made sense for him and helped him shift.  It went like this:

Previously you were successful because you knew how to do things.  Now, your role is to define and manage why you do things.  Look at cars as an example:

There are some who have expertise and complete competence in transmissions.  They can take them apart and rebuild them in their sleep.

As they gain more experience and perspective, they may become experts in the drive train, looking not only at the transmission, but the system and interaction between transmission and motor/propulsion system.  The learn torque, power, etc., and how to maximize what is needed.  Others may focus on safety features, electrical systems, etc. as well.

Moving beyond the various systems is the designer, who has to make sure the systems all work together and that the sum is maximized to achieve the primary intent of the designer. 

Beyond the designer is the company/enterprise level.  What kind of vehicle are we building?  Is it intended for speed, durability, safety, style, transport of passengers/cargo, economy, luxury, etc?  Are we building for the racetrack or the Australian outback?  What is the market for this type of vehicle?  How does it fit into the company image, brand, etc.?  How does it fit into the market as it exists or is envisioned?  What will building this vehicle, at this time, do to position the company/enterprise as a whole, and where does it imply we are headed?  Is that where we want to go? 

This analogy gave this new CEO a way to understand the shift he needed to make.  In a real way, he needed to “step up” in his focus and vision.  It didn’t matter how good he had previously been in his more specific role, the goal now was much more to know WHY the organization was doing what it was doing (overall), rather than the how of an individual system or component.  Then, his job was to ALIGN the different components toward that WHY and definition of success, and to manage the culture and processes so that they were in sync with that WHY. Too much attention on one system or component of the organization, and he would fail—no matter how good that one system worked.  While a car must have a working transmission to move, it is much more than just the transmission.

When a CEO can help create and manage meaning, s/he has taken a very critical and primary step toward expanding leadership presence and long-term success.  How much energy and time do you devote to making sure the why of everything you do is aligned, and that it is commonly understood?  What mechanisms and processes do you use to ensure that you are managing meaning throughout your organization?

Here are two resources, both published this year, that may assist new CEOs in their development:

The Association CEO Handbook is filled with assessment questions, a particular beginning place for this kind of analysis is found on pp. 59-64.  (Disclosure:  I wrote the foreword for this book but have no financial interest.)

The First 90 Days (updated and expanded):  Proven Strategies for Getting Up to Speed Faster and Smarter, Harvard University Press.

Leave a comment

Filed under Executive Directors, Leadership

Tagged as , , , , , ,

October 23, 2013 · 4:49 pm

Expanding Your Leadership Presence: Positioning

images

Changing levels of leadership requires new skills, and a new way of thinking about leadership. In particular, in speaking with new executive directors (either first time execs or those who have recently changed position), or those who aspire to become CEOs, it is not uncommon to find them struggling with how to assume a new role of leadership.  Should they position themselves to be more peer-like, a “one of the crowd” type of leader, or position themselves at the top of the hierarchy with clear delineations of role whose authority and position is unequivocal?

Both of these positions have fundamental flaws.  No matter how hard one tries, by definition a CEO has no peers in the enterprise he or she leads.  And merely staking a position of “authority” does not create respect, buy in, or “followship” that will build a successful cultural enterprise over the long term.

However, there is a different kind of positioning that can be quite effective in expanding leadership presence.  In 2011, Cuddy, Glick, and Beninger published an article in Research in Organizational Behavior that looked at the traits of competence and warmth, and how they impacted organizations.  Recently Cuddy, Kohut and Neffinger followed up with a Harvard Business Review blog that presented research and recommendations in an actionable way.  It’s worth registering with the site if you haven’t to read the entire article.  Cuddy has also given a TedTalk on some of her research findings.

What is one key to expanding your leadership through positioning?  Giving others a sense of your trustworthiness—a combination of warmth and competence/strength.  And what is the key to conveying trustworthiness?  It may be in how you position yourself physically.   The blog and the TedTalk show how to do that in a way you can begin today.

Granted, overreliance on body positioning or movement will not create a sense of warmth, trustworthiness, strength, or competence.  Rather, it will make you seen incongruent.  However, it has been scientifically demonstrated as one component of expanding leadership presence.  Practice positioning yourself differently.  See what happens.

Leave a comment

Filed under Executive Directors, Leadership, Staff Management

Tagged as , , , , , ,

July 25, 2013 · 1:02 pm

Creating Collaborative Relationships Between Components and a Central Organization

images

Components of nonprofits and associations come in all shapes and sizes.  Some component structures are organized along geographic lines, some along specialty or interest.  Organizations like the American Medical Association or the American Psychological Association have components of both types.

Unfortunately, tensions develop between components and a central organization at times.  These tensions arise around resources, priorities, membership issues, policies or programs, organizational political issues, or even personality conflicts between staff or elected leaders.  When boiled down to their essence, though, the underlying concerns in conflicts are:  1) who gets to decide what (autonomy vs. control) 2) who has the resources to act on issues of perceived importance (and how and under what conditions those resources will be shared), and 3) who is accountable for what outcomes.

When these tensions are mixed into social media where the “hub and spoke” model of components are easily replaced by network models of interaction, the context can become more challenging, both for components and for a central organization.  While social engagement creates many opportunities that empower components (and individual members—another topic to be addressed later) like never before, it can also make tensions that previously were more “closely held” very visible, whether to members or the general public.

Clearly, the key to moderating or eliminating these tensions is through continual relationship building and communication.  However, frequent turnover of volunteer leaders, and the fact many components of organizations may be more volunteer than staff driven makes this difficult.  And it is surprising in survey results and in conversation that a significant number of organizations do not have specific written agreements with their components that provide specifics about the three thematic issues identified above.

Some of these questions may be answered by structure.  The more autonomous the component, the more likely it is that the component has more autonomy in programming, resources, and accountability for outcomes.  The more “closely held” the component (where membership is required at both the central and component level, like the National Association of Social Workers, the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy, or the American Dental Association (which has a tripartite membership structure), the more important it is that these themes be addressed in charters, contract, memoranda of understanding, etc. between components and the central.  Organizations that are structured on a federated model have many similar issues, although more power, etc., may belong to the components than the central organization.

Do you have a formal agreement that specifies power sharing/decision making authority between components and central?  Resource distribution and sharing?  Who has accountability for which outcomes, and implications of not meeting mutually agreed upon obligations?  Is there a clear understanding about what conditions would cause a breach in the relationship, and what the implications of that breach might be?

The goal, always, is to have positive, synergistic, and collaborative relationships between components and a central organization.  Baseline, those relationships begin with a clear understanding about the nature, structure, and expectations of the relationship.  Do you have that with your counterparts?  How long has it been since you had a relationship checkup?

Leave a comment

Filed under Executive Directors, Leadership, Resource Development, Success Metrics

Tagged as , , , , , , ,