Tag Archives: Associations

August 3, 2016 · 2:29 pm

Prepare Yourself Well #4: Access to Cutting Edge Content

th1What makes a university experience so valuable—and life-changing? I’ve identified four aspects of the university experience that serve as the basis for developing professionals: access to a meaningful network, a hotbed for emerging content, a laboratory to experiment, practice, and grow, and a platform from which to launch.

The challenge today is this: with rapidly changing knowledge, networks, and context, if you don’t build in a formal mechanism to continue to deepen and solidify your network, learn emerging content, have a laboratory to practice and develop, and a supporting foundation that will allow you to launch into greater impact, you fall behind. Way behind. “Prepare Yourself Well: There is Plenty of Room at the Top, It’s the Bottom that is Full” is something professionals need to remember—and do—every day if they are to survive, much less thrive, in today’s environment.

That’s where professional associations come in, and where they play an indispensable role today. There is no other entity that can effectively provide the four aspects that are so pivotal in becoming a professional. In fact, associations are uniquely built to carry out the lifetime learning and networking functions beyond a university setting.

By their very nature, universities provide great content. Faculty are doing cutting edge, innovative research, new science and practice is developed, discussed, disseminated, and evaluated. Emerging professionals learn not only content, but how to think and ask questions that will stimulate new innovation. After graduation, it can be a challenge to access, or feel connected to that hotbed of learning…unless you find and maintain your connection to the professional association for your field.

So, where are you going to go to have access to a vibrant network that exists to develop and disseminate emerging knowledge? And isn’t dues really the cheapest tuition to be able to have access? When you think of it, dues really isn’t that much more than students pay for “activities fees” in their tuition bundle. But you get so much more. How are you preparing yourself every day to be better than you were the day before?

Leave a comment

Filed under Associations, Personal Growth and Development, Recruitment and Retention, Sustaining Excellence

Tagged as , , , ,

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 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 , , , , , , , , ,

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 , , , , , , ,

July 2, 2013 · 3:43 pm

Improving Board Performance Through New Board Member Orientation

imagesWhen I first became an Executive Director, for the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy there was no formal process for orienting new members who had been elected to the Board of Directors.  That was in 1993.  Last year, in a presentation on financial orientation for new Board members sponsored by ASAE, it was stated that only 41% of associations conduct Board orientations.  In the long period between 1993 and 2012, there have been financial and other “scandals” involving prominent nonprofits, significant changes in law that impacts non-profits, and a sea change in technology that has created more demand for transparency in organizational governance.  Aside from the legal and fiduciary exposure, social media use by organizations brings governance into much clearer focus for members, stakeholders, and the public.  More than ever, Board members need to begin their terms of service with knowledge of the strategic vision and direction of the organization, as well as more knowledge of how the parts fit together.

Call it overkill, or caution, or simply the inherent interest of systems-oriented therapists in processes, but at AAMFT we created an orientation for all newly elected Board members that, in reality, begins at the nomination phase.   After individuals are elected, there is a mandatory one and a half-two day orientation period that is hosted in the Association’s headquarters.  The orientation is hosted by the President, President-Elect, and Executive Director of the Association. Of particular focus during that time:

  1. Having newly elected Board members speak to their personal aspirations for Board service, and how they would define success.  Common questions: “If you are successful in your Board service, what will the Association look like at the end of your term? What issues will have been addressed that you see as important in the next three years? What would you like to make sure is maintained, and what would you like to see changed, improved, or eliminated?
    Even though individuals address this in platform statements, etc., their views evolve and become more relevant to them after election.  This information also gives the leadership significant clues about how Board culture might evolve, and how Board dialogue might be carried forward.
  2. Reviewing the principles outlined in the American Bar Association’s book, Guidebook for Directors of Nonprofit Corporations.
  3. Reviewing the specific policies of the Association that are based on the Guidebook.  (AAMFT has a Governance Manual that includes, among other things, the Strategic Plan, the Board Calendar, the Code of Conduct, Conflict of Interest Policies, Board Member Role and Responsibility, Relationship with Staff, and more.)
  4. Reviewing the Finances and Corporate Structure.  There is a presentation (mentioned above) that offers great information on financial orientation on ASAE’s website if you are a member.
  5. Discussion of current landscape of the association.  This changes annually, but allows for some in-depth exploration (circling back to the beginning) about issues the Board is currently deliberating, the political climate internally and externally, etc.  It is in this section that there is discussion of the key questions outlined in the book, The Will to Govern Well.  These questions look at what is known about the current needs, wants, and preferences of members and stakeholders, the organization’s strategic capacity and position, the external trends that will impact the organization and the ethical implications of some of the issues before the organization.

Of all the tools, programs, training, etc., that can be provided to organizational leaders, this program of orientation has been vital in building collaboration, knowledge-based decision making by the Board, and better communications with members and the public about the governance and operations of the organization.   If your organization is one of the 59 percent that is not doing an orientation for incoming Board members, what are you waiting for?  Being a Board member is one thing.  Being a Good Board member is more challenging than ever, and even the most committed, well-meaning individuals who serve can use orientation, training, and “on-boarding” processes to help them toward success and meaningful contribution.

Leave a comment

Filed under Board Development, Executive Directors, Leadership

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

May 31, 2013 · 1:36 pm

What is Your Natural Leadership “Position?”

There-go-the-people-I-must-follow-them-for-I-am-their-leader-Alexandre-Ledru-Rollin-leadership-picture-quoteThere is no shortage of books, articles, and training materials on leadership.  One can learn about collaborative leadership, facilitative leadership, or in one article, 19 different styles of leadership.  While much of this can be helpful, all of it combined together can be confusing, and at times contradictory.  Is leadership innate, or learned?  Can one simply choose what kind of leader to be in any given circumstance, or do personal traits define what type of leader you will most likely be?

The answer to those questions may simply be “yes.”  In addition to learning about leadership styles, I’ve found it helpful to consider “positions” in leadership.  Considering “where you need to be” to lead effectively can help define your leadership tasks and enhance your odds of being successful in leadership.

Leading From the Front

This is the stereotypical leader—one who is charging ahead, giving direction, showing the way.  Certainly, it helps to be a visionary or to have charisma to lead from the front.  Those who can carry a crowd with a speech are sometimes referred to as “natural” leaders.  However, there are other times when leading from the front is seen as 1) distant, 2) autocratic, 3) out of touch, or 4) unrealistic.

When is leading from the front most effective?  When people are lacking a vision of success, unclear about direction or goals, or so fearful of failure that they will not risk action.

What should you do?  Focus yourself—and others to become clear on vision, direction, meaning, goal attainment, and the meaning of reaching for those goals.

Think for a moment—who are those you know, or know of, who have demonstrated clear and powerful “leadership from the front?”

Leading from the Middle

This position of leadership perhaps falls into facilitative leadership models.  However, the individual who leads from the middle isn’t focused narrowly.  Leading from the middle is more about ensuring that the resources are available (both human and financial) and more importantly that they are aligned toward the common vision of success.

When is leading from the middle not only effective but necessary?  When the organization and/or staff have a definition of success, and goals that have been established, but have not been effectively organized, aligned, or resourced to be most effective.  Another visionary speech won’t fix this issue.  The situation requires someone to lead by system building, someone who will create the processes and mechanisms for effectiveness, efficiency, and outcome.

Leading from Behind

Leading from Behind is the hidden work of leadership.  It is focused more on individuals, or small groups.  You might call it coaching, mentoring, advising, or encouraging risk by people you recognize have the skills, but perhaps not the confidence.

When to lead from behind?  When the vision is clear, and the basic systems and resources are in place, your role as a leader is in people development.  Individuals (and teams) need to know you have confidence in them to do a good job, and to succeed.  This isn’t simply cheerleading, it is creating the environment where staff—or volunteers feel comfortable stepping out, stretching, and achieving.  Think what you would have wanted from a supervisor at a challenging point in your career, and see if you can give it to those you work with, and who work for you.  If in doubt, ask them…

A quote is attributed to Dwight Eisenhower:  “Leadership is getting people to do what you want them to do and having them think it was their idea all the time.”

Recognizing not only your natural comfort position in leadership, but also what the context demands, will help you stretch your leadership skills and succeed.

Leave a comment

Filed under Executive Directors, Leadership

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

May 28, 2013 · 1:02 pm

Hiring Well: Three “C”s to Consider

blocksIt is no secret: personnel issues are a point of pain for association and nonprofit executives.  To date, Assessing Personnel Problems: Three Questions to Ask has generated many further questions and follow up.  One major key in avoiding, or minimizing personnel issues, is hiring well.

There is no shortage of information to be found about the hiring process.  You can read about how to grade applicants, which body part to use when interviewing, and a method for determining who to hire.  It is true that many fall into less than optimal practices at the hiring point that lead to challenges later.

For mission and value based organizations, I have found three categories on which to evaluate a potential hire that maximize the potential for success.  While different words might be used, these are the dimensions on which I evaluate potential hires:

Culture

What kind of culture do you wish to create or enhance in your workplace?  Can you articulate it in clear and measurable terms?  Different workplaces can have profoundly different aspirations about culture.  Think of the difference between an NFL team and an arts organization.

I’ve learned over the years that this component is easy to overlook in the hiring process, or at least to minimize.  Sometimes it gets confused with chemistry—which is whether you like someone or not.  This is a more direct evaluation of how someone will contribute intentionally to the work atmosphere and values, not whether you could be friends with someone.  After several mistakes in this area, I’ve come to believe that if there are red flags here, it is better to leave a position vacant than to bring someone into the work environment who reflects an outlook, values, and comfort with a culture different than the one you want reflected in your workplace.

Competence

Obviously you want the person with the best skills and knowledge to perform the work defined in the position description.  That should be assessed clearly and well.  But there is another dimension here:  what is the person’s native ability to connect their work to the larger whole?  In a more connected world, competence no longer is limited to the specific tasks and outputs of a single job description.  To maximize impact, competence now includes the ability to multiply value by connecting that work to the larger whole.

Character

What is the core of this individual?  What questions do I need to ask relative to this work environment that will help me assess the character of this person?  And yes, there are many questions that are legal to ask in the hiring process that will get at this component of the hiring evaluation.  While companies rely more on background checks to assess basic information, and references become more skittish to provide an in depth statement about individuals for fear of possible litigation, this dimension is worth exploring with several questions directly aimed at assessing character.

Culture, Competence, Character.  If you assess in these dimensions, and find a fit that works for your organization, the instances of future personnel problems will be diminished.  Give thought to what you want, and don’t hire something significantly outside those parameters.

1 Comment

Filed under Executive Directors, Staff Management

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

May 23, 2013 · 3:23 pm

The Problem is Never “Not Enough Good Ideas.” The Problem is Too Many

th

Glenn Tecker and colleages have written in The Will to Govern Well about four primary questions (and one “wrap around”) that help Boards govern with knowledge.  Those questions help provide a framework for data gathering and analysis to be used in planning.  In general, they are:

  • What do we know about the needs, wants, and preferences of our members and/or stakeholders that is relevant to this issue?
  • What do we know about the evolving external context that is relevant to this issue, and how that might impact planning?
  • What do we know about the strategic capacity (and position) of our organization that is relevant to this issue?
  • What are the ethical implications of our choices?
  • Then there is a fifth question:  What do we wish we knew, but don’t?

These questions are designed to move an organization from “information and data” to “knowledge.”  They are quite effective in moving Boards from operations to strategy as well.  The issue then becomes, what to do with what you know in terms of action?  And further, what do we do when there are 20 good ideas on the table, but we can really do only two or three of them?

One mechanism that can help is the use of strategic screens:  a set of questions through which to view your knowledge, the challenge/opportunity before you, and the values your organization holds. The Fieldstone Alliance has information about this concept.

A great example of the use of strategic screens is found in the work of the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI).   After clearly articulating values, business model, and strategic priorities, on pages 9-10 of their strategic planning document (see it under the About/Governance section), they discuss their two overarching screens:  the values screen, and the strategic management screen,and then expand them subsequently.  In the use of these screens, NAMI writes:

“NAMI’s screens are built upon NAMI’s mission and values.  They are grounded in NAMI Standards of Excellence, which describe the mutually agreed upon standards of operation for NAMI, NAMI chartered State Organizations, and NAMI Affiliates.  The screen assists us in making values informed strategic choices.  They help NAMI determine why we would undertake any given idea and how we would shape and refine the idea in order to hold or enhance NAMI’s competitive advantages and ensure strong management.

Simply put:  if we test an idea against this screen and cannot provide clear and satisfactory answers to the questions posed in the screen, then we ought not pursue that idea.  While the idea or program may have many merits and be appealing, if it does not support NAMI’s mission or values and enhance our competitive advantage, then, as leaders dedicated to advancing NAMI’s strategic well-being, we must refrain from those actions.”

As executives, our job is to ask the strategic questions, gather the best data/information available, churn that into knowledge, and act to the betterment of our organizations/issues.  NAMI provides a great example of how one organization has modeled its process. Take a look!

1 Comment

Filed under Board Development, Executive Directors, Strategic Planning

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