Which comes first?

I just read an excerpt from an interview with Charles Bronfman, a noted Jewish philanthropist. He makes the point that while the Jewish community in the U.S. has created a wonderful program to build new leadership (Birthright Israel) by sending young people on an educational mission to Israel, when they return they tend to stay away from the Jewish Federations that are trying to create the new leadership.

Why are they staying away from the Federations? He says its because, "when Birthright participants seek to become active with the federations, “they are usually given a list of names and told to solicit, because that’s what the federations focus on - getting money.”"

I've always believed (and when I was involved with the Federation it's what they preached) that involvement comes before giving which comes before asking. If the first thing you ask someone to do when they return from an exciting mission is to solicit gifts, my guess is they'll run for the hills. But, if you provide them with a level of involvement in the activities of the federation first - serve on a committee or task force, or attend several lectures of interest - they'll be much more likely to make their own gift commitment. Once they've invested their own funds, they'll be much more interested in asking others to join them.

Someone once told me, "If you ask someone for money, you'll get advice. But if you ask them for advice, the money will follow." I have always found this to be true. If you need help figuring out how to get someone involved - to develop prospect strategies - give me a call.

How big a board?

I had a conversation yesterday with a colleague who asked me how big I thought the board of a non-profit organization should be, and how I would suggest managing diversity on the board. These are two important questions that all non-profits deal with from time to time.

First, how big should the board be? Well, I'm reminded of the old joke that asks, "How long should a person's legs be?" The answer is, "Long enough to reach the ground!" The related answer to, "How big should the board be?" is, "Big enough to get the job done." Then you might ask, "What job?" It seems to me the answer to that is that the board must make sure the organization is working to fulfill its mission. That means managing the executive director (or president in some cases), being sure the professional leadership is focused on the mission, and assuring that the organization has the resources (money, staff, supplies, etc.) it needs to fulfill that mission. When we talk about the board's "fiduciary duties" we're usually talking about resources.

I met with the development committee chair of a client organization last year to discuss the development plan we had been working on. In the course of our planning process we had discovered that the organization's budget for the coming year was going to be out of balance by over $100,000. One of the tasks in the development plan was the hiring of a development director, a new position. The board chair asked whether we thought the new development director would be able to raise that amount of new money in the first year. I said, "no, you'd be setting the person up for failure if you start them out that way." My suggestion was that the board should commit to close the budget gap for the next two years (either by giving it themselves or raising it) in order to give the new development director a chance at success. The development committee chair agreed with me, and said it was her understanding that that's what boards do; they give the money to fill a temporary budget gap! I think she was right on target. If the board won't fill the budget gap, how can anyone else be expected to give?

So, one of the answers to the "how big a board" question must be, "Big enough to close an emergency budget gap." This leads to at least part of the answer to the question about managing diversity on a non-profit board.

There is no question that diversity of a non-profit board is crucial, especially if the organization's mission involves working with or supporting diverse communities. The board should look like its community. But diversity can (and should) also mean diverse skills and backgrounds. And in every case, fundraising ability (both giving and getting) must be a primary consideration for board membership. If the board doesn't have the ability to get the organization through a financial crisis, then the organization has a very high risk of not surviving. If the board believes in the mission, they should be both willing and able to support it! If they don't believe in the mission enough to support it financially, maybe they shouldn't be on the board.

This isn't to say that there should never be anyone on a non-profit board who can't make a major gift. However, if you aren't paying attention to fundraising as you populate your board, you run the risk of the organization failing. The most wonderfully diverse board in the world - however you define that diversity - will fail the organization and the mission if it can't give or raise the money to fund the mission.

So, how do you manage diversity on a non-profit board? Use a matrix to figure out what skills, education, ethnic groups, geography, and other diversities you need, and always remember the importance of fundraising to the success of the organization.

How big should the board be? How diverse should the board be? Big enough and diverse enough to succeed.

If you'd like to talk about ways to build and/or diversify your board, give me a call.