Tag Archives: ASAE

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 , , , , , , ,

May 7, 2013 · 11:44 pm

Two Reasons Associations Are Not, and Should Never Be, Like For Profit Corporations

     MR900432538

      We are told almost continuously that associations and nonprofits must be more like businesses to thrive, and perhaps even to survive. Associations Now ran an article just yesterday talking about how difficult it is to get nonprofits to be more like for profits.   Early on in that article, there was a link to a Google search that showed how prevalent this theme is.  I believe there are two compelling and inherent ways that associations and nonprofits are not, and should never be, like their for profit counterparts.

Associations and Nonprofits Keep Score Differently than For Profit Counterparts

For Profit Corporations exist to create wealth, whether for owners, partners, or shareholders.  By definition, that is why they exist.  If they don’t do that, they don’t stay in business very long.  While associations and nonprofits should strive to use best practice business methods, metrics, and management, and always aim for a healthy balance sheet, they are mission and values based organizations.

No one (not stockholders, owners, partners, donors, or even members) owns associations or nonprofits.  They are “owned” by their mission, and by the values embedded that define the means and methods they will use to achieve that mission.  There is something about the DNA of associations and nonprofits that makes them “look like” for profit counterparts, but genetically, they are different because of this fact.  To forget that, or worse, simply ignore it, in the interest of being “businesslike” is to abandon a unique and specific identity and purpose.

 Associations and Nonprofits Have Volunteer Human Capital as a Major Asset

The article in Associations Now referenced above basically bemoans the fact that Boards get in the way of nonprofits being more businesslike, extending the decision cycle, etc., and perhaps making things a bit messier while doing it.  I’m all for Boards being well equipped, oriented, understanding their role, and allowing qualified staff to do their jobs, etc., but again, there is something in the DNA of associations and nonprofits that is different than for profits.

For profits simply do not have volunteers, who are consistently willing to give their time, energy, and money, on behalf of the purpose of the organization, with no expectation of direct monetary/wealth return.  For associations and nonprofits, volunteer time, energy, commitment, and funds are again, in the DNA.  Something unique happens in organizations when volunteers participate.

Those who are willing to give time, energy, and money to a cause, to make something different, to be change agents, end up being changed themselves.  The changers also become the changed.  That is about identity, purpose, values, commitments, etc., that make the world more human, and I haven’t yet bought into the notion that corporations are human, my friend.  I’ve never yet met a corporation that I wanted as a true friend and intimate.  To reduce volunteerism to a point that it becomes little more than a FaceBook “like” is to cheapen what it means to support and give yourself to something greater than you are.

Say what you will about associations and nonprofits being efficient, effective, and using all appropriate business tools to be the best they can be in service to their mission, and in having the resources to do it, and knowing when they have achieved success.  Associations and nonprofits should do all of those things.  But let’s not change their DNA.  We lose way too much.

Leave a comment

Filed under Executive Directors, General, Success Metrics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , ,

April 18, 2013 · 4:30 pm

The Life Cycle of the Executive Director

map and compass

“Somebody once told me that it’s time to leave when you’ve gotten enough, when  you’ve given enough, and when you’ve had enough.”   So said Edward Bernstein, President of the Industrial Research Institute, on ASAE’s Collaborate Network, quoted in the March, 2013 issue of Associations Now.

How different that is from the advice I got from my mentors when I became an Executive Director in 1993!  At that time, many execs spent a career at one association, so my mentors coached me on how to grow in my job and keep it over a longer period of time—which I did.  I remained as the Executive Director of the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy (AAMFT) for 20 Years, and I could have remained longer had I chosen to do so.  Many of  my peers, especially in the mental health field, also are having or have had long tenures, from 39, to 25, to 20 years, etc.

Now we hear from executive recruiters that the average tenure is significantly shorter in associations—somewhere on the average of 7 years.  Granted, the cycle of change is much more dynamic, and the demands and skills needed for one association may shift much more dramatically in 7 years now than they did in the past.  It is also true that as the field of association management has matured, there is more “churn” in jobs as for many execs, the only way to grow dramatically in a career is to move from one association to another.

It would be helpful to have a career map—and a compass—in order to navigate a career as an association executive, both for those who are currently executive directors and those who aspire to be.  This is especially true for those who have hit a period of uncertainty about their current context or their future.  Executive recruiter Paul Belford, in a soon to be published book, The Association CEO Handbook, refers to this period as the “zone of great complexity” and defines it as “that special corner in association Hades where the CEO’s performance in a position is affected adversely by his/her inability (or refusal) to maintain the balance of professional fulfillment and Board enfranchisement.”

The question, of course, is what to do when one hits that period?  Renew, or resign?  And how important is the notion of “professional fulfillment” or “personal fulfillment” in building what one will look back on and say, “that was a career I can be proud of?”  This notion—how to do a better job, and build a better person for the job, is something we will be exploring more.  Sometimes it may be a 5 point list of ideas.  At other times, it will be more narrative and thought provoking.  Careers (and life) can’t be condensed into a short blog post—and certainly not a twitter post.  It’s a long plot play, with nodal points of transition throughout.  We intend to draw a map, and give the tools to use your own compass.  But remember—the map is not the territory, and there will always be surprises…

1 Comment

Filed under Executive Directors

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

April 12, 2013 · 4:07 pm

The Path Ahead? Executive Directors in a Maze

maze (2)

The American Society of Association Executives (ASAE), in a booklet written to explain careers in association management, refers to a maze.  In my experience, that is certainly true.  Growing up, through college and into graduate school, I never heard anyone say that their career aspiration was to be an association executive.  In many ways, it is an accidental career.  Yet, it is a noble one, and can be incredibly meaningful for those who find their way to it.

The same is basically true for other nonprofit organizations, although cause based organizations do have a somewhat different pull and career path.  However, the challenges faced once one arrives in nonprofit world are at least parallel, and in many cases overlap with those of leaders in associations.

What is needed to navigate this maze?  A map and a compass would be helpful, along with the necessary supplies (or means to acquire them) that will allow someone to make the journey successfully.  But here is the secret for any association/nonprofit executive director: there is no final destination.  And in this environment, even to stay stable, one must continually be learning, adding tools and resources, and checking the map and the compass.  The terrain and climate is changing rapidly.

This blog has one mission: to provide executive directors (and others who aspire to be) a resource and home for finding, sharing, building the tools necessary to continue through the maze successfully.  We will want to build a community here and in related media, that can scrape through the clutter and noise and deal with the direct issues executive directors face.  We will focus on the whole person—from the professional aspects, to the personal issues about what it all means, and how to continue to find meaning and fulfillment in a career as an executive director.  Perhaps just as important, what does one do when the fulfillment and meaning is lacking.  Our goal will be to find resource for replenishment as well.

Join us!  It will be a worthwhile journey.

PS:  You can find us on twitter at @exdirtoolkit.

Leave a comment

Filed under General

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,