Not-For-Profit Management

New management blog details

2011-01-05T16:51:00.002-05:00

Hello to readers. Please be advised this blog is no longer being serviced. A new blog on management title Managers That Care has been estabished and is being hosted at http://managersthatcare.wordpress.com I hope you will join us there.
John Coxon

The Listening Project

2010-09-30T04:43:00.005-05:00

Connecting Up Australia recently released the Listening Report, prepared after twelve months of active research throughout Australia into issues faced by the not-for-profit sector. http://bit.ly/cPocMe

It's a great report. Well, it's a great read, it is very pretty, well laid out, full of case studies, professionally researched and presented. Fantastic. I have just one little, tiny, almost insignificant concern. The report is very short on ideas about how nonprofit organisations should adapt to face the future. There you are, I told you it wasn't a really important thing!

So what does the report tell us? In short, much the same as we have known for a considerable time. What is the main conclusion? It's this. What the sector is doing at present isn't sustainable. So it needs to do something different. That makes sense. What it doesn't do is explain what doing something different will be in a sector dominated by parochial and territorial Boards and Committees more intent of being trustees than leading into the future. What about those over stretched, burned out corps of management and staff involved in service delivery. Have they the energy, time or desire to look up from their tasks and plan for the future?

The report identifies four key issues. (1) Government Funding. (2) Alternative revenue sources. (3) Human resources. (4) Research, capacity building and evaluation. The author's three paragraph conclusion (at the end of 365 days of research, a period of reflective writing and a 36 page report) is this. This project has been useful in that it gathers rich data, highlights common themes and suggests that if the sector was to unite for its common causes, the value proposition would be strengthened and the doors unlocked to a paradigm shift within the sector. Yep. Okay. I get it, not. The way forward is now clear!

It's not that the project was worthless or bad in any way. I just feel the sector, all the Boards and Committees, management teams and those involved in service delivery deserve something better. They deserve some sort of roadmap into the future.

So here it is, well my roadmap at least -

Government Funding - is an oxymoron. If you choose to operate your nonprofit solely on Government funding then you have to accept the restrictions that will be placed upon you. Despite all our dreams, Government funding will never be sufficient. Therefore those management teams that continue to rely upon Government funding as their sole source of revenue or the dominant source of revenue may be doing a disservice to their staff and their clients. The choice of whether staff sit on apple crates and type on outdated computers is made by the governance and management team, not the Government. It is no good blaming beaurocrats for being short-sighted, they live and work to their masters (or mistresses) election time frame. The proliferation of non profits and community organisations mean they have to distribute a finite pool of money to an ever growing number of organisations. I believe the Government should take heed of Carol Mead's suggestions for simplifying the funding process. I also believe that while the nfp sector continues to engage in activities on behalf of Government that are poorly funded, then Government will continue to underfund. Maybe its time to say no to some of the projects available! Any thoughts about the Government providing money without some form of checks and balances into how that money is spent is an idea long past its use by date and should be taken into retirement along with those Baby Boomers unable to adapt to a new and uncertain future. The Board and Management team in any funded non profit need to develop and implement an integrated funding plan that identifies a variety of sources of revenue and develops a range of strategies for accessing additional revenue that then enables more creative solutions to be applied to a wider range of community needs.

Alternative funding - It's time everyone, Government, those in the sector, stakeholders and most importantly Boards and Committees and the general public arrive at an understanding that 'not for profit' does not mean we should not make a profit, it means profits should not be distributed to stakeholders and must be used for service delivery. Yes I accept there are theoretical limitations to the amount of funds held in reserve (try telling that to old established sandstone charities) however it is not about making money for the sake of making money it is about making money to add value to service delivery, to enable creative solutions to be applied outside of the Government funded 'boxes', to ensure sufficient reserves to pay an equitable and competitive salary to key staff, to ensure adequate professional development and where necessary to shore up the gap between Government funding and community needs. Let's stop being precious about our funding sources and our financial surpluses and get on with the job of doing what needs to be done to attract and retain good people and deliver good services. Don't use other revenue to reduce the level of Government funding, use it to reduce reliance upon Government funding and to give your people true choice.

It is also time the sector clearly explained the unique characteristics that define a funded nonprofit organisation. Funded organisations that provide services on behalf of Government are not the same as your local football club. At the community level it is expected volunteers will work for love. This perception cannot be carried over to funded service providers. Yet we persist with a model for funded providers based around the old volunteer community organisation model. Along with that come outdated perceptions of Governance, funding, expenditure, recruitment, working conditions and demarcations between passion and profit.

Human Resources - Stop waffling about the lack of professional development. Yes it's important, however professional development is only a small part of developing an effective workforce. More important is learning how to do more with less. That doesn't mean working people to the point of breakdown, quiet the opposite. Let's find ways to make work easier to do, less stressful, more enjoyable. Let's redesign the workforce. What we have has worked to date but it is becoming dated and less effective; the labour resources of the past twenty years will not be the same for the next twenty years. If we continue with the same workplace strategies used in the past then the sector will go backwards. We have an entire core of predominantly Baby Boomer managers who cannot get over the fact that they dont know the answers. Go to your workforce and ask them how to do it. You might not like them telling you how to run your organisation but I will bet my fee anytime that they know exactly what needs to be done to get the job done. Yes they would likely seek more money and more people, as we all would, however when people realise that hanging onto that belief will likely result in no one working in the sector then they will come up with better ways of doing things. One person, the head of the organisation simply does not have sufficient understanding or knowledge to impose such a change.

Research, capacity, evaluation - evidence, evidence and more evidence. The sector needs to stop hiding behind the old furphy that it is too difficult to measure outcomes that occur over a long period of time. We all know that, we also know its an excuse for not wanting to justify our expenditure. Stop believing the sector has a right to exist and spend money, provided by others without having to explain where and how that money was spent. That is irresponsible. We need to develop the means to provide evidence of community need, evidence of impact and effect of service delivery and evidence of social return on investment. It is the only way the sector can combat negative perceptions of money being wasted. Simply stating that the sector is fiscally responsible because it is audited by multiple stakeholder groups is insufficient and doesnt cut the mustard with those looking in from the outside.

Anyway those are my thoughts. I hope others will either agree or disagree with me and add their thoughts and together a variety of possible solutions will emerge which might, just might be more useful to our non profit sector than those offered in the Listening Report.

Let The Journey Continue
John Coxon

Taking You From Frontline Manager To CEO
john@johncoxon.com.au
Skype: john_coxon
Twitter: john_coxon
Facebook: johncoxon1
Telephone: +61 427 390376

Preparing for adverse events

2010-09-29T16:53:00.004-05:00

Third Sector magazine from the UK reported recently that only 25% of charities have experienced an adverse event in the past two years yet only 44% have in place plans for dealing with threats to the credibility and viability. http://bit.ly/aWZaT0

Recently while working with a nfp that had weathered a period of bad publicity about internal events I became aware that in this instance, while the organisation had weathered the storm, and while the storm had been predictable, there appeared to have been little in place in the form of prior risk assessment or any form of positive publicity to counter the negative publicity. This is a short sighted practice.

It is my experience the not for profit organisations are good at telling each other how well they do but not very good at telling the whole world about the good the do. We tend to assume the term 'charitable organisation' will protect us from the evils of the world. Once upon a time when charities were entirely volunteer operated organisations there might have been a certain level of forgive and forget. In today's world where charities are managed by professional mangement teams, are responsible for the daily income and lives of corps of employees, compete for funding and for service delivery and market aggressively for donations, they are viewed in much the same way as any profit making organisation might be.

The traditional approach to risk management in a charity has been to (a) keep costs so low that it cannot spend more than it earns and (b) dont engage in activities that stray from the core mission. The traditional risk management activities have been for auditors to audit accounts, the CEO/EO to present financials to the Board or Committee, who then oversee to ensure money is not spend in a 'frivoulous' manner.

There is nothing wrong with that approach, however it is only the beginning of the process of risk management. How would your organisation cope with a major fraud incident, or if the premises burnt down, or if you were taken to court over an employment issue, or if the media exposed some form of dubious practice? The list of possible risk events is almost endless.

True, risk assessment is a bit like life insurance. You dont want to have to have it but you dont want to not have it in the event of your death. How many of you forgo having appropriate insurances in place? Not many, I suspect. We have insurance in place in case some thing goes wrong. It is to late to put insurance in place after an event. Risk assessment is a governance activity. Board members should have in place a process and a timetable for assessing risk and deciding upon appropriate risk management activities.

There are four stages to the risk management process. The first is identifying what potential risks exist and assessing the likelihood of any specific risk occuring and of it having a negative impact. The assessment should cover all areas of an organisation including governance, financial, operational, human resource and service delivery. The second stage is to implement risk management strategies, or in some instances, harm minimisation strategies. The further ahead a potential risk is identified and strategies implemented the less harmful the impact will be. The third stage is to have in place a process for coping with the fallout should a risk event occur. The fourth stage is to evaluate the lessons learned and repeat the risk assessment process.

Health care providers, due to the nature of their environment have in place very specific risk assessment and risk management processes. When your organisation deals daily with keeping people alive then the environment calls for such an approach. Outside of the health sector, where the fall out will most likely not result in death, we have a tendency to take risks for granted. At our peril.

Imagine if a client was to take their life while engaged in an activity at your premises and imagine if the media were to try to make a story of it. Would you have the processes in place to cope with the media attention, would staff know who had responsibility for speaking to the media, would you have in place a set of guidelines for staff using online media sources? How would your organisation cope with a loss of funding, or a service or a competing nfp? Do you have a relationship with the media, can you get your message into newspapers and onto radio or television? Do you have a relationship with a publicist or a media consultant? How well developed are your managers in transitioning people through change or a crisis?

Recently in Christchurch a significant earthquake caused a lot of damage to infrastructure. Another notch up the Richter scale and much of the City would have ceased to exist. Fortunately deaths and injuries were minimal however the disruption to commercial activities has been significant. If some form of natural disaster were to take place in your area, how would protect confidential records, maintain computer systems and gather together people to be able to get back into operation at the earliest moment?

Does your Board choose to plan for the possibility of such events or does your Board and Management simply assume they will be able to make do on the day?

There's money in those bank accounts

2010-07-15T15:56:00.003-05:00

Pro Bono news recently reported that nonprofit organisations in Australia have around $295 billion - yes that is billions, sitting in daily trading accounts, where the money attracts little or no return on investment. This sum represents considerably more money than is needed for day to day operation of the sector.

This single factor highlights both a dilemma and an issue for our nonprofit organisations. The dilemma is that they are trustees of public monies and community interests and by nature risk averse. For Boards of Management it is less risky to leave funds lying around, earning little, that to risk the consequences of a poorly considered investment.

This leads to the core issue. That is managers that do not have the knowledge or skills in financial management to be able to provide Boards with well informed and strategic advice on investing. This is a more significant issue than it might appear on the surface. High end financial management is not something to be done intuitively, afterall it can go wrong. It is a learned skill - learned from very experienced and skill people. This requires an investment in appropriate development. Equally importantly it requires board members with similar levels of experience to enable them to firstly understand investment processes and tool; while also assessing the risk of such investments.

At the top level, perhaps in the 1% of larger nonprofit organisations these skills exist. For the remaining 99% of nonprofits, the lack of knowledge, experience and education at both board and management level is creating a situation where money that could be generated and used to enhance service delivery to the community is being squandered and donated to the banks - who, in turn, use your money to make their profits.

What is the answer? A two-fold approach is required. The first is that board members and managers gain knowledge and understanding of financial management, beyond simply setting organiational or program budgets. The second is people involved in the management of nonprofits need to base their investment decisions on knowledge and facts rather than misconceptions about how financial tools may be used; or worse still based upon common mythology.

Let The Journey Continue

John Coxon
Taking You From Frontline Manager to CEO

Ruckus at Vinnies

2010-07-15T02:45:00.005-05:00

St Vincent's NSW have recently experienced their State Board being replaced by its national body, amid claims of 'corporate bullying' and counter claims of 'political interference' and 'wanting to get hands on monies'. Likely the truth will never come out.

The aim of this blog is not to engage in debate about St Vincents or any other church based charity, but to highlight what I believe to be the bigger issue and one that is being faced by many other nonprofits, regardless of their origins throughout Australia and New Zealand.

Most nonprofit organisations are mission-driven, yet increasingly pressure is being placed upon them by funding bodies to become more accountable, to have in place appropriate systems and processes and to maintain a triple bottom line. These demands clash with the mission of many involved in these charities. In short many people cannot grasp the connection between systems and sustainability. They continue to believe that somehow, money will always appear from somewhere and that the service they provide will continue ad infinitum. This issue is compounded by the increasing gap between those that volunteer their services and those that are paid for their services. This issue is not going to go away - despite the best efforts of volunteers to try and achieve just that. The reality is that if charities want to perform to their best ability, by achieving the high possible funding from various sources and providing the high level of service to those in need then they need access to people with appropriate experience and skills.

Is there a way to reduce this tension? Yes there is and the answer lies in doing something different to what is being done at present. The corporate model doesn't sit comfortably with mission driven organisations. Yet elements of the corporate model are necessary to achieve transparency and accountability. The gap between volunteers and paid employees, in particular managers, doesn't sit comfortably in a nonprofit environment; yet these people are necessary as they have the experience and skills to provide transparency and accountability.

I am not laying the blame at the feet of funding bodies either. They disperse public monies, as a donor I expect them to do so in a transparent and accountable manner. Public money is not money to be wasted. Yet I don't believe funders fully understand what it is they are funding or properly fund all aspects of service delivery.

Firstly I believe it is important board membership is made up of people with passion but who also have business skills in areas such as finance, marketing, fundraising, strategic planning and volunteer management. All board members should have a good understanding of governance best practice. Such skills and experience in themselves do not constitute a corporate model; these are simply the preferable degrees of experience to ensure transparency and accountability.

Secondly the time has come to stop treating volunteers as volunteers and instead treat them as unpaid staff members, subject to exactly the same standards and expectations that apply to paid employees. It is time for volunteers to understand that they don't own the business; it does not belong to them, they, as do paid employees, serve the greater community.

Thirdly management groups need to develop the ability to lead through collaborative actions, not through 'command and control'. This means managers need to learn how to engage everyone, at all times, in all aspects of operation, by creating an environment of sharing and continuous learning. This requires an investment in learning and development at every level of the organisation, including volunteers.

Finally, funding bodies, especially Government funders need to recognise the long term benefit of investing in development, of having in place effective systems and processes and having in place people with appropriate experience and skills. They in turn need to fund the development of people. A for-profit organisation funds this development from its sales. In the non-profit sector, Government is the chief source of revenue (so that nonprofits can do the job that Govt doesnt want to be held accountable for) and therefore have an obligation to provide sufficient funding to enable investment in people. To do otherwise is to short change both the sector and the community. Funding bodies claim to have the interests of stakeholders at heart, in particular the needs of clients. They need to understand that there are internal stakeholders as well as external stakeholders; staff also are stakeholders and clients.

Lastly, nonprofit organisations needs to develop hybrid models that enable them to maximise revenue from business activities, without compromising mission, to that they might have sufficient funds to invest in the development of their people. Which of course means, that they will need to build capacity at all levels in business development and business management (which most do not currently have) and so the cycle goes on . . .

Let The Journey Continue
John Coxon

Taking You From Frontline Manager to CEO

Acres of Diamonds

2010-05-21T16:30:00.003-05:00

The Baptist preacher Russell Conwell wrote the original story titled 'acres of diamonds' about a farmer that sold his farm to seek his fortune in diamonds only to fail; yet the person that purchased the farm discovered what he thought were crystals in a creek; that turned out to be diamonds in their raw state. The very diamonds the orignal farmer sought were on his own farm - if only he had taken the time to study what diamonds in their raw state actually looked like. Many of us chase the gleaming, polished gem that others have already discovered while we fail to look for the raw, undiscovered gems in our own backyard.

Earl Nightingale expanded upon the story in his series of motivational lectures where he asked the following questions (which I have adapted and modified for managers)

1: How well do I do what I do at present? Think in terms of customer satisfaction.
2: Can I call myself a first-class professional at work? Think in terms of continuous improvement.
3: How does my management compare to other managers? Think in terms of best practices.
4: How well do I understand my sector and its environment? Can I link impacts of emerging events?
5: How can I improve customer service? Ask how do my customers use our services?
6: How can I increase my customer service? Ask my customers how I might better help them.
7: Do I understand what a 'rough diamond' looks like in my sector? Think in terms of customer benefits that remain unexplored.
8: Have I broken down my work and removed barriers and blockages that impede effectiveness and customer service?
9: How well do I understand how we might serve customers in 20 years time?
10: How can I look ahead, do the things that are not yet being done and lead the way?

To often during a recession we hucker down into our bunkers and try to protect the status quo while all round us the status quo is changing, being taken away or ceasing to remain the same. When we emerge from our bunkers we discover that what we were trying to protect has gone and we are all alone.

All to often when times get tough we begin to look at other people's gleaming gems (cars, houses, jobs, holidays) and we leave our farms in search of riches. What we fail to understand is that they got what they have by being ahead of the game, in the past.

Your farm is yourself, yet the one thing we neglect to develop is ourselves. We are to busy following the development of others. On your farm you have an undiscovered diamond mine of opportunity. For a start you are in control. You can choose what you want to do. You can make your own decisions. You own your farm, noone can take it away from you. Others can take your home, your car, your passport, even your freedom but they cannot take you away from you. They cannot take away your ability to choose a future for yourself.

No matter how difficult your life may appear you have options, lot of them. Start by looking at yourself. What do you have to offer? How could others benefit from what you have to offer? Look at your work situation. If you could do something better for a customer, what would you do? Then go and do it. So many of the things we take for granted today started with an idea in a garage, a pub or a kitchen. Yes money invested made the idea big - it was passion and self belief that got the idea off the ground. Someone said, bugger the world, I'm going to do it anyway. There is something very satisfying about giving the one-finger salute to those that would rather you drowned in mediocrity!

Stop thinking about you. It will only make you miserable. Instead think of others, think of customers. Instead of saying to yourself, this is what I want or this is what I need, change it around and ask yourself what am I interested in? You will soon discover others interested in the same thing. They become your initial customers. Change how you perceive a customer. Many people perceive a customer as being someone that purchases something from them. This is wrong. A customer is someone that benefits from your services. It's not about money dummy, it's about what you can do to help others obtain their 'polished gems'. In helping others to succeed they then help you to succeed.

Let The Journey Continue
John Coxon

Taking You From Frontline Manager to CEO

Why They Change Jobs

2010-05-14T15:22:00.003-05:00

Recent research conducted by Catalyst and reported in Harvard Business Review, March 2010, showed that almost 25% of women, and 16% of men left their first job due to experiencing a difficult manager.

This serves to underline the importance of those in frontline management roles and in line management. This is often a new employees first experience of working with a manager in a full time work environment. Your experiences here impact upon us and form our perceptions for a long time, maybe forever. It is feasible more talent is lost at this stage than at any other stage. Yet now more than than at any time in the past 30 years we need to focus on retention rather than recruitment.

The initial direct report relationship is critical. The development of frontline managers is critical and it is important those in such management roles develop the ability to build effective manager-employee relationships.

The traditional 'sink or swim' approach is a dinosaur, a rock around your organisation's neck. When you fail to develop the potential of your frontline management team you risk the future of your organisation.

What can managers do to build good workplace relationships? The first thing is to ask questions and listen. People want to feel they are valued for their experiences and their ideas, they want to contribute. Collectively those in your work group have a better understanding of any issue than you, alone will ever have. Tap into that collective knowledge. Your team will perform well, they will achieve their outcomes and you will get the brownie points because you have the title of 'leader'.

The second piece of advice I offer frontline managers is to 'shut up'. No one cares about your opinions, and rightly so. Your role is not to tell others what you think, it is to facilitate a process of collective decision making. That doesn't mean you abdicate responsibility for making a decision; it means you make an informed decision. How? By asking questions and listening to what others have offer.

Thank people for their input and provide them with feedback on progress. When it comes to the workplace, it is preferable to over-commmunicate than to under-communicate.

Take time to learn about the people on your team. What are their individual strengths and weaknesses? What does someone do well and where do they need development or support? Encourage people to use their initiative and support them through the learning process than comes with making mistakes.

Get out of their way and let them get on with the job. If you want to do something then remove or minimise the impact of organisational barriers that get in the way of actually doing stuff.

Lastly, celebrate every little win as if it were a landing on the moon, give credit to those that did the work and came up with ideas; then start the cycle all over again.

The benchmark has been set. The challenge is in place. What can you do to ensure you minimise the loss of new people and continue to build the experience in your team?

Let The Journey Continue
John Coxon

Taking You From Frontline Manager to CEO

Dare To Dream

2010-05-08T17:27:00.003-05:00

Over the past few months I have followed the progress of Jessica Watson in her epic sail around the globe. From the outset their have been those intent on knocking this young girls adventure; these are the couch potatoes, sitting wrapped in their own mediocrity. Living in a world where it is easier to criticise than it is to actually get up and do something positive and innovative themselves. These are those with unfulfilled dreams. Yes Jessica Watson has done something a little daft, even silly. yes she is very young, almost too young. Yes it could all have ended in disaster, with a couple of weeks to go, it may still, but so far it has not, but she followed her dream.

When was the last time you followed your heart? When was the last time you sang like noone was listening, danced like noone was watching and loved like there was no tomorrow? When was the last time you took a risk that made your heart pound with excitement? I don't mean taking out a mortgage on your house either. I am talking about the sort of risk that you find so exhilerating that you want to share with the world. The sort of risk where the sheer absurdity of it makes you want to laugh.

There are a lot of Jessica Watson's in this world, but not enough. There is vast untapped potential in any organisation, in every community, yet instead of fostering and encouraging people to be innovative, we put in place processes to actively discourage them.

There are some lessons to be learned from Jessica's achievements. She didn't try to do this alone. Yes Jessica sailed alone, yet at the same time she is surrounded by a support team of managers, sponsors, family and supporters. She may have been physically alone but she was not alone. Innovation often fails because the person with idea is unable to gather the support team around them. The support team has a dual function, it not only provides support, it acts as unofficial media and it champions the change. The support team provides reassurance and demonstrates safety.

Jessica's support team utilised a variety of media, constantly, to inform, to education and to enable multi directional communication. Jessica did not function in isolation. At all times she, and her support team were guided by the feedback of thousands of others, including the couch potatos.

At the end of the day Jessica chose to not sit on the couch and dream about the possibilities; instead she got off the couch and did the things that needed to be done to make the dream a reality. Each of you has exactly the same choice. You don't need to sail around the world, there are so many other things you could do that will provide you with the same amount of excitment and satisfaction.

Imagine what Jessica will be talking about for the rest of her life, imagine the stories she will have to tell her grandchildren, her mokopuna, imagine how in 80 years time she will look back and smile. Will you have able to do the same?

Let The Journey Continue
John Coxon

Taking You From Frontline Manager to CEO

Will You See The Change Coming?

2010-04-08T15:07:00.005-05:00

I lifted the following from http://bit.ly/aX7HiM - Mike Myatt's blog on Leading Change. The image is courtesy of FutureMakers a not-for-profit organisation based in south west Victoria.

Why didn’t Folgers recognize the retail consumer demand for coffee and develop a “Starbucks” type business model? Why didn’t IBM see Dell and Gateway coming? Why didn’t more established social networks see Twitter coming? How did the brick and mortar book stores let Amazon get the jump on them? I could go on-and-on with more examples, but the answer to these questions are quite simple…The established companies become focused on making incremental gains through process improvements and were satisfied with their business models and didn’t even see the innovators coming until it was too late. Their focus shifted from managing opportunities to managing risk, which in turn allowed them to manage themselves into brand decline…

As a manager in a not for profit organisation you may be asking what has this 'profit making' stuff got to do with me? Here is a question for you to ponder. If you were a Government funding organisation and you had on your desk two funding submissions, both from non-profit social agencies, both with established history and both seeking funds to achieve the same outcomes. The difference is one of these agencies is a social venture operation, it generates revenue from business units, it doesn't rely upon Government funding to remain viable and it is seeking a lower input from Government. Where do you think the funding is likely to end up?

Your response to this question may determine whether your organisation continues to provide a service into the future or whether historians will look back and ask, why didn't they see this coming?

For decades now, not for profit organisations have stuggled for adequate funding and they continue to do so from an ever diminishing pool of funds. For the next 30 years Governments will face severe pressure on taxation revenue and increased costs, in particular associated with ageing and health care. This will place pressure on funding for disability, mental health, AOD, Family & Children, community capacity building and so on. Service providers will also face increasing costs, in particular labour costs. This will place pressure upon financial reserves for many.

Is the answer to engage in social ventures or to create business enterprise units that generate cashflow and supplement Government funding? I cannot answer that. This is an issue for every Board and Management team in every not for profit organsiation to begin to address - NOW.

To achieve this will require a different mindset and a different set of skills at both board level and management. This will be the age of the social entreprenuer. The high energy, visionary that sees community needs and understands that these needs cannot be fully met from Government funding alone. Instead of being trustees of community funding, Boards will become strategic planners for the future. Instead of being passive managers learning how to work within severe financial constraints, management teams of the future will push their Boards to plan ahead, they will demand their boards work with them to find the means to adequately fund people and service delivery. It will be a brave new world where many current and passionate community-minded people will struggle and a new breed of leadership will emerge, along with new operating models.

Many people involved currently with non-profit organisations will struggle with this concept and likely prefer to not read about it. Many will experience conflict between passion and mission and profit. Many will say it shouldn't be about making money and they are right. It isn't about making money per se; it is about making sufficient money to firstly attract and retain the best people for the future and secondly developing customised service delivery that actually meets the needs of the community. Do you truely believe this is being achieved to its fullest potential under the current funding models? Will you be a part of the future or will you be looking back with a sigh and asking, What If I had . . . ?

Let The Journey Continue
John Coxon

Taking You From Frontline Manager to CEO

The NFP CEO of the future

2010-03-10T01:17:00.004-05:00

Over the next decade the majority of existing nfp CEO's will retire. You might shrug your shoulders and say, so what, the same happened in the past decade. Probably not. Even if it did, the next generation of CEO's will face a different environment to those currently in the hot seat.

The next generation of CEO's will be faced with generational change on an unprecedented scale, with labour shortages, rising costs, reduced government funding, greater accountability and greater scrutiny from Boards of Governance.

What does your organisation need to look for when recruiting its next CEO?

Any CEO works at three levels. The first level is the governance team. The second level is external stakeholder groups and the third level is with people working or volunteering in the organisation. This is not an order of preference or priority. Most CEO's would be working with all three levels simultaneously.

When working with the governance team a CEO provides two services, the first is to provide information on the emerging external and internal environment that enables the governance group to make informed decisions. The second service is to facilitate the strategic planning process. Increasingly governance groups are comprising experienced professionals, many with considerable strategic and management experience gained in the corporate world. Such people have greater expectations of the CEO;they do not believe they are there simply to rubber stamp operational decisions. They expect to be able to question the CEO as to intent and plans and progress. The CEO of the future will need to be able to demonstrate an ability to tap into the collective wisdom of the governance group while also understanding the needs of this group.

A large part of any CEO's role is liaising with external stakeholder groups. These can range from funding bodies to end users in the community. The CEO that isolates themselves from external stakeholders does so at their own peril and to the disadvantage of the organisation. External stakeholders provide access to broad collective wisdom. They provide an indicator of the emerging environment and its potential impacts.

The third group of people that a CEO is required to work with are those employees and volunteers in an organisation. Here the key skill of the CEO is the ability to listen, to explore, to understand how systems and processes act as barriers to progress, develop more effective processes and people and nurture a pathway between vision, mission, strategy and outcomes.

What should you look for in your next CEO? Firstly the ability to learn constantly from experience. A CEO who believes they know it all is a liability. CEO's do make mistakes. Many mistakes made by CEO's are errors of judgment, bought about by their inability to sense the emerging environment or their inability to develop open and transparent channels of communication. The ability to reflect upon past errors and point to the learning and development. An understanding that they as an individual can never know all the answers and have the ability to tap into the collective wisdom of all stakeholder groups.

Look for someone able to demonstrate their ability to recognise potential and to develop that potential. This is a sign of someone able to develop trusting and respectful relationships amongst employers and volunteers. This is essential for future succession planning. It will be essential for attracting and retaining high quality employees.

Nfp organisations are a business. Yes they are mission driven, yes they often have a unique set of values; yet only those with a focus on outcomes will remain around long enough to deliver on their mission and vision. A CEO must be able to demonstrate their ability to balance revenue and costs and where necessary increase one and/or reduce the other. A CEO must be able to demonstrate a record for achieving outcomes and results consistent with strategic direction.

The challenge when recruiting your next CEO is to find someone able to demonstrate their ability at all three levels. Should your CEO turn out to be deficient in one of these three areas then the success and potential of your organisation is at risk.

Let The Journey Continue
John Coxon

Taking You From Frontline Manager to CEO

Join us johncoxon1 on Facebook
Follow john_coxon on Twitter
Email john@johncoxon.com.au

The truth is not always important!

2010-03-02T04:32:00.003-05:00

A couple of years ago I publicly slam dunked a colleague in a manner that was cruel - even though the sequence of events as reported were factual. At the time another colleague said to me, the truth isn't important, you cannot treat others in this manner. At the time I apologised for the method used (email) but not for the words used. I still believe the truth is important yet I have learned there is more than one way to speak the truth.

A few weeks back the CEO of the colleague I attacked approached me and said 'you were right, this person has been nothing but problems'. Revenge isn't sweet, it isn't about being right and I write about the experience as both a means of reflection and a way of sharing the experience for the benefit of others.

We should all aspire to tell the truth; yet sometimes the price for doing so can be high. Look at the number of whistleblowers who have lost their job, despite being supposedly protected by legislation, simply for telling the truth. I recently read a report of someone being prosecuted for posting slanderous comments online on social media. Tempting as this may be for some people, it is a practice to be avoided. Stuff you place online can come back to bite you long after you thought it had disappeared.

As a management coach a part of my role is to guide others to 'see their own truth', regardless of what I believe, it not my perspective that is important it is what the client sees that is so. When I slam dunked my colleague some time ago I neglected my hard earned coaching skills and went on the attack. Despite being right in essence, the consequences to myself were significant. While it didn't cost me any loss of revenue, I certainly damaged my personal credibility and had to work very hard to regain it.

We need to think before we speak. We don't need to think about whether we should or shouldn't; we need to think about how we should, what means will be most effective while least damaging? Regrettably the world is full of liars and cheats and while none of us is perfect, when the time comes to stand up and tell the truth. Remember this, the truth is important.

Let The Journey Continue
John Coxon

Taking You From Frontline Manager to CEO

How new managers gain respect

2010-02-23T05:14:00.003-05:00

I came across this blog post on another website recently and felt it worthwhile copying both the original question and my response here for everyone to read.

Im 27 years old and got a job as a PM in a highly prestigious organization. Unfortunately, I look a bit young even for my age and every body else I am working with is at least 20 years my senior. the look on their faces when i step in the room says it all " would you like a barbie to play with,little girl?" How do i not let this get to me?

This was my response:

Your age is not the issue, nor is the lack of respect from others your issue it is their issue. Can I suggest you focus on the things you can control. You have control over your demeanour, how you behave, how you present information and how much knowledge you have. These are the things that will gain you respect - in particular how you relate to, interact with and build relationships with people.

I would like to suggest you try to identify at least one, influential old timer you can build a relationship with, develop a way to work together where you share your combined knowledge and he/she becomes a mentor. Others will see this and understand you are not coming across as a 'know all'. That you are open to learning from the experiences of others.

Let The Journey Continue
John Coxon

Taking You From Frontline Manager to CEO

Facebook: johncoxon1
Twitter: john_coxon
Email: john@johncoxon.com.au
Skype: john_coxon
LinkedIn: John Coxon, Australia

Action Centred Leadership

2010-02-01T17:43:00.003-05:00

John Adair, British-born expert on leadership is renowned for his work on leadership and on how to motivate people.

Adair developed the action-centred leadership model, essentially three overlapping circles representing the individual, the team and the task. Effective leaders focus on all three elements. The task needs work groups or organisations to come together in a collaborative manner as often one person alone cannot acheive the outcome. The team needs constant attention to who is in the team, differing skills and experiences, personalities. Adair believed in the 'united we stand, divided we fall' principle. The individual needs must be attended to, in addition to remuneration is physical comfort and safety, recognition, being engaged in the process and a social need to share with others. Adair's model suggests that for organisations to be effective leaders need to focus on all three circles without neglecting any single one of them. Key reading - Action Centred Leadership. 1984. McGraw Hill.

Do not be fooled by the simplistic nature of Adair's model. Leadership and management is not rocket science. Leadership becomes complex for some due to an inability to understand what is expected or required of them. There is no mystery about leadership. As a leader you need to have some knowledge and understanding of the people you work with, and other stakeholders. You need to be able to motivate them in a manner that will see them work together and helping each other. This is not 'command and control'. You need to have a clear vision of the task and the desired outcome and be able to involve others in that vision. Adair's model is applicable today as it was 25 years ago. Sure the contemporary organisation, in some instances, has moved towards a flatter structure however this doesnt reduce the need for leadership. The elements of success remain the same, develop the potential of your people, create a collective vision, manage time, tasks and processes and encourage people to work together collaboratively.

If you would like help to develop the leadership capacity in your organisation please call John Coxon on +61 03 55612228 or email john@johncoxon.com.au

Let The Journey Continue
John Coxon
Taking You From Frontline Manager To CEO

Follow john_coxon on Twitter
Share with johncoxon1 on Facebook
Join at LinkedIn

Join us at nfp2010 a conference in Open Space to discuss generational change in our non profit organisations. Auckland (May 21-23) and Geelong, Victoria (August 11-13)

Living Out Our Expectations

2010-01-15T14:52:00.004-05:00

For the past 80 or so years organisational managers have taken a reductionist approach to organising labour and achieving productivity. The theory being that if we understand what makes people tick, and we break down a task into its necessary component, then marry predictive behaviour with prescriptive tasks, work will done in the most efficient manner.

The benefit of hindsight and access to far greater amounts of information than ever before means that we now understand people are not machines, they do not perform in a preformatted manner and even when a task is broken down, there are often environmental factors that impact in an unpredictable way. This means we manage and work in a world of uncertainty.

Imagine arriving at work tomorrow. As you wander into work you ask someone where shall I begin? They respond, begin where you believe you will achieve the most impact. You ask who will I work with? The response is, we don't know, whoever else has an interest in the work. You ask how well will they work together? The response is, that is for the future. Finally you ask what are the work procedures? The response is, there are not any, they will evolve with time! Now you have to make some decisions. In this situation there are no correct answers. What is right is what is best for the circumstances, both known and emerging.

Would the work get done? Yes it would. Would you find the right people to work with? Yes you would. Would everything collapse and fall into a heap? Not likely. Why not? Human beings have the ability to self organise. They are able to think, they are creative and they are adaptive.

Brian Arthur in his book titled The Economy As an Evolving Complex System talks about how we make decisions based upon our expectations. This is a place somewhere between reality and fantasy land - where based upon our expectations we can convert something to reality or otherwise. For example, you arrive at work with a vision of being treated with dignity and respect. If you remain open to that vision you will behave in a manner that sees you treat others in this manner and results in you being treated as such. If on the other hand your expectation is that you will be treated indifferently then your behaviour as you walk through the door will likely be very different.

Management techniques of the past 80 years, along with an indifferent education system, have robbed people of their ability to think and causes them to duck for cover behind rules and procedures. We are scared of complexity as it requires us to adapt to an uncertain future. Yet as a species, as an individual you have the ability to work, to manage and to live in a complex environment and survive.

Today, there are millions of people in Haiti that are homeless, without water or food and without employment. Their environment, poor as it may appear, has been flattened in a devastating earthquake. Many have died and many more will die; yet many will be saved. As a community they will survive and they will rebuild. The people of Haiti have the very same abilities as you do; without the benefits. Don't tell me you need rules and regulations and procedures to enable you to work, to survive. What you need to do is develop your inherent ability to observe, to avoid harm, to adapt, to make a decision, to work with others, to the do the right thing and to achieve the best outcome.

As the Nike advt once said - Just Do It! (Please make a donation to help those in need in Haiti)

Let The Journey Continue
John Coxon

Taking You From Frontline Manager to CEO
Email: john@johncoxon.com.au
Skype: john_coxon
Facebook: johncoxon1
Twitter: john_coxon

Are You Passionate About Your Work?

2009-12-19T17:21:00.003-05:00

This may seem a strange question to ask of people working in the non-profit sector where common mythology would have us believe people work in this sector due to their passion. There is a difference between being passionate about a cause and having passion for your work.

If you have no passion for your work you are simply working for wages. This can lead to disillusion and you may eventually become negative about your work. You can eventually become trapped in a vicious cycle of dislike and negative thinking; unable to be fully effective yet unable to find a way to do something different.

Check out your values. What are the things that excite you? What turns you on each morning and drives you out of bed with a spring in your step, raring to go?

Everyone has the option of choosing the work they do. In today's environment the opportunities to create your own work are limitless. By that I don't mean you must run out and start your own business, though that is an option. You might consider looking at areas of need in your organisation that you have an interest in. You might combine paid work with study and volunteer work or with part time self employment.

How can you become passionate about your work? Firstly, follow your heart. What excites you? What dominates your thoughts and conversations? Ask yourself, if you had a choice what would you love to do? Well you do have a choice and you can do what you love. Think outside the square. Today there are countless opportunities for employment. Avoid being corralled by past experience or by qualifications. Instead look to your strengths and ask yourself what you would bring to this new experience?

Shivani Gupta, author, Passion @ Work refer to this as flying like a butterfly; learning to grow beyond your own boundaries and being in charge of your own destiny. This journey begins when you do something different to what you are currently doing and you realise the world hasn't collapsed around you. You create an environment where you can learn and live and be excited.

Change isn't easy. Taking a risk is scary. So don't go it alone. Seek ideas from others. Note I said ideas rather than advice. The majority of people will advise you to stay where you are. Change is just as fearful to those that don't want to change as it is to those making the change. This means you should surround yourself with people who will be positive, will be mentors and will encourage you. People who will feed you with ideas.

Write down your goals. Establish an action plan and time frame. Face your fears and accept that you will always be fearful. Convert negative thoughts to positive alternatives. Remember you will make mistakes. These are not a sign of failure, rather they are a sign that you are experimenting and learning.

Put a little bit of 'me' into your thinking and ask yourself will what I am about to do make me happy. If not then don't do it or change something. Being wealthy is a bonus; it is not the reason for living. You and the people you help are the reason for living.

Let The Journey Continue
John Coxon
Taking You From Frontline Manager to CEO

Facebook johncoxon1
Twitter john_coxon
Skype john_coxon

It's time for non-profits to bounce back

2009-12-14T21:02:00.002-05:00

A recent report into not for profit remuneration in Australia (http://bit.ly/4LGiJw)found that in 2009 executive remuneration fell almost 2% on that of 2008. Anecdotally, well not really anecdotally, as we have emails from clients that confirm this, not for profits, over the past twelve months have battened down their hatches in other areas including professional development, bonuses and hiring of staff.

It's time to bounce back. Let's acknowledge that we have emerged from a global financial crisis in better shape than some other nations but not without cost! Let's acknowledge that there remains still some downside risk, in particular uncertainty of ongoing funding from the Commonwealth as it moves to reduce stimulus spending debt in coming years. Let's also acknowledge that continuing to operate with the battens firmly in place could allow the ship to drift onto dangerous rocks.

There comes a time when Boards of Governance, Chief Executive Officers and management teams need to stand up and be counted. That time is now. Yes you are trustees of community organisations however continuing to duck for cover will serve noone in the long term, not the community, not staff and not Government funding bodies. Every management team needs to be able to manage its way through turbulent times and it also needs to be able to identify creative ways of moving out of turbulence and into calmer waters. It is time for the Captain of the ship and the entire team of ships officers to emerge from below, take a place on the bridge and look out over the bow of the ship into the future rather than out over the stern at the past.

Many not for profits will emerge from the current financial crisis seeking a different and better way of doing business. They will seek a model that is more sustainable and less at risk of funding issues. I am prepared to project that over the next 5-8 years many will be forced to reexamine their business model and to look at alternatives forms of revenue. As the movement towards social enterprises continues to grow Government funders will also reexamine how they distribute funds. Any shortfall in Government funding in the foreseeable future will increase the demand for greater accountability by the sector. This in turn will place pressure on management teams to perform to higher standards and become more creative.

The for-profit sector will emerge from the current crisis at full tilt. The demand for employees in the for-profit sector will be insatiable over the next two decades. Not for profits will have difficulties retaining and recruiting staff. Many, many key staff will be enticed away from the sector.

How do non profits minimise the impact of these emerging events? For a start give your current management team something to get their teeth into, something that stretches and develops their potential. In other words give them a reason to stay in the sector, with your organisation. Encourage them to reinvent the future of non profit service delivery rather than asking them to maintain the past.

Encourage your managers to join the Boards of Governance of other non-profits. The sector needs collaborative alliances to move forward into the future. Your organsiation needs managers with a broad perspective of the emerging environment. Every Board of Governance needs a shake up. Too many Boards are sitting on an age old belief that they are there to be trustees of some ideal or a pot-full of old money. Communities need to learn that not for profit organsations must be operated in a business-like manner and that this requires people on the Boards able to look to the future while being mindful off, but not beholden to the past. Even centuries-old, bluestone charities will need a tsunami every couple of years if they are to maintain their level of donations.

Finally, bring your Board members, management team and staff together, frequently to talk about the future. Don't leave this discussion to the board only. The future will not be dependent upon one person, it will happen because of such collaborative activities.

Well that's my opinion. This is my final blog for 2009 for the not for profit sector. I have a parting request. If you disagree with me, or take issue then say something, respond to the blog, send me an email. Let's have some healthy and robust debate about the future.

For those that have followed this blog throughout the year, I thank you, I wish you well for the festive season, however you celebrate, and you should know that I will return in 2010. May each of you mention the word 'peace' at least once in your New Year wishes.

Let The Journey Continue
John Coxon
Taking You From Frontline Manager To CEO
Follow john_coxon on Twitter
Share with johncoxon1 on Facebook
Email: john@johncoxon.com.au

Managing Conflicts

2009-11-02T23:33:00.004-05:00

At a recent workshop with hospital supervisors a question was posed along the lines of why is conflict management so difficult? And by inference, often so unsuccessful.

I put forward a perspective that as managers we focus primarily on the term 'management' - in other words having a solution. The risk here is that we move to the solution phase to quickly, before we have spent time actually determining the facts of the conflict.

Conflicts are emotionally driven events. People relate their experiences as interpretation of what took place. They don't always intend to mislead; though they do intend to present their perspective in a manner that reflects their desired outcome. They also use emotions to bully their manager towards making a quick decision. Conflicts rarely arise from an instantaneous set of circumstances; they often build up over a prolonged period of time. This can add to the complexity of the situation. The more complex the situation the more difficult it can be to resolve.

Take a step back. Ask questions. Facilitate conversations. It is unlikely you will have the answer yourself, instead you need to enable the outcome to emerge through skillful questioning and conversation. Instead of setting yourself up to be the fall person, be seen as the one that facilitates an outcome. In this way you shift the responsibility for the outcome back to those directly engaged in the conflict.

Yes this takes time. You have plenty of time. Believe me an unresolves, or poorly resolved conflict will take far more of you time and energy that all the time you spend establishing the truth before moving towards a decision. Suspend judgment and seek to establish the facts - when the evidence is on the table it is much, much easier for all parties to move towards a self selected resolution.

Let The Journey Continue

John Coxon
Taking You From Frontline Manager to CEO
Skype john_coxon
Twitter john_coxon
Facebook john.coxon1
http://nfp-management.blogspot.com
http://healthsector.blogspot.com

Virtuous Intent and Ingrained Beliefs

2009-10-19T05:01:00.004-05:00

I recently spent some time with the Chairperson of a small non profit organisation. This organisation has been experiencing problems between the committee of management and a paid employee. At our meeting I suggested to the Chairperson that nothing was changing because everyone kept doing the same ol things, that if she wanted a different outcome then she needed to do something different to achieve it.

The Chairperson nodded and agreed with everything I suggested yet it was clear to both of us that nothing was likely to change. Why not? My belief is that the Chairperson is conflicted between her desire to be consultative and conciliatory and the need to be decisive and provide leadership. The next day I watched a television doco showing how religous belief in India was preventing those people reliant upon the Ganges river from taking steps to minimise pollution or even avoid harming themselves through bathing or drinking from the Ganges.

These two experiences caused me to reflect upon how our ingrained beliefs can become barriers to our own wellbeing or success. How often have you observed someone in a management position defy reason and maintain practices that have passed their use by date? Our fear of change can also be a barrier. Change is hard work, it requires new practices which in turn mean we must challenge our own beliefs and assumptions, we must accept the possibility that we are no longer right. This is not something any of us find easy to do. It is much easier to maintain the status quo.

The issue here is not that we cannot change. The real issue is the impact our reluctance to change has upon other people - the very people we want to help. The more reluctant someone is to change the more energy and time they must invest in maintaining the status quo or avoiding change. This is so wasteful. While this is taking place more positive and productive outcomes are being missed. People who once respected you cease to do so. People who once supported you start finding reasons to support others. People who once wanted to work with you now prefer to work elsewhere.

The irony is that change is inevitable. You become blinded from reality by the sheer investment you have to make to maintain the status quo. You not only fail to see the opportunities; you also fail to see the forces marshalling against you. The inevitablity is created by you as you provide those forces with a reason to seek your replacement.

The challenge is to avoid remaining stuck in the past. While you have one eye on the present the other eye should be on the future. You should be constantly asking yourself what more can I do for our stakeholders, or what can I do better?

Are you stuck in the past? Are you still doing the same thing as you always have? How relevant is what you do and how you do it to current stakeholder needs? Are you failing to achieve a desired outcome? If so, then now is the time to do something different before someone else forces you to change against your will.

Let The Journey Continue

John Coxon
Taking You From Frontline Manager to CEO
Skype john_coxon
Twitter john_coxon
Facebook john.coxon1
http://nfp-management.blogspot.com
http://healthsector.blogspot.com

Some Managers Never Learn

2009-09-23T08:32:00.002-05:00

In the news today, a manager of an IT/Telephony company in Australia pretending to be a 'Gordon Gecko' with harassment emails to an employee saying 'lunches are for wimps'. The case is now headed for the Federal employment court. Should the employment court find the situation to be as reported in the news then I hope they jump on this manager from the greatest height of the law. Had that employee sent a similar email he could have been lawfully dismissed and the dismissal upheld by the employment court. What's more I hope the media continue to highlight these poor management practices so that good people will not waste their time and talent propping up inadequate managers.

The manager of this company just doesn't get it. He may have a successful business; but not for long if he continues to lose good people. It is possible there is more to this story. It is possible the employee involved is a liability. Even if that were the case, a manager does not have a right to mistreat someone in the workplace - even those managers that manage their own business.The sooner people stop working for managers without a clue the sooner these managers are forced out and replaced by people able to treat others with dignity and respect.

No organisation, whether it be a top 500 corporation, a private company, a not for profit or a government organisation is successful due to the efforts of only its managers. They are successful due to the combined efforts of effective managers and good people working together in a collaborative (not compliant) manner. A truly effective organisation would continue to function without its management team!

This is not suggest that managers are useless, though some have shown themselves to be of little usefulness. Effective managers are very important. They are an asset. They are the ones that understand their own strengths and weaknesses, that understand they cannot possibly know all the answers, that foster collaboration and cooperation not only within their team but between teams, functions and organisations. They are the ones that provide clear, unambiguous and non-conflicting direction as to expected outcomes and provide constructive feedback supported by data and evidence. They are they ones that coach and nurture potential of their people and guide them through their mistakes and back towards productivity. These managers do this with dignity and with respect. In turn they are treated with dignity and respect. The result is high productivity.

Of course if you manage a business and your focus is on short term financial gain then you can afford to employ short term management strategies. From my perspective, the sooner these managers make their fortunes and retire to a Queensland beach house the better - for the rest of the world, we have to live together and work together in a more sustainable manner and that requires vastly different management strategies and skills. As a management consultant I know which of the two managers I want to work with. As for those people employed by our friend on the news tonight - I know what advice I would give them.

Let The Journey Continue

John Coxon
Taking You From Frontline Manager to CEO
Skype john_coxon
Twitter john_coxon
Facebook john.coxon1

You Are Missing Out

2009-07-07T02:17:00.003-05:00

Not for profit organisations are failing to take advantage of one of the most important sources of information and feedback available today. Increasing numbers of employees are engaged, overtly and covertly, in social media. They are blogging, Twittering and exchanging ideas and info on the likes of Facebook. These spaces contain an extraordinary amount of information.

To date the focus of many CEO's has been on how to prevent or limit the use of this technology, with some of the less enlightened ones seeking to use the information available to penalise employees. A more enlightened perspective would be to learn how to benefit from the technology. Those that do so will have a distinct advantage over those that do not.

Instead of trying to stop the flood by putting our fingers into the proverbial dyke, consider enabling your employees to use social media as a workplace tool; to communicate with each other, to share ideas and information, to communicate with stakeholders. They are doing it now, just not in a way that is of a benefit to your organisation.

By all means put some boundaries in place. Some online behaviour is unacceptable and can be harmful to the reputation of an organisation. Instead of trying (and failing) to impose a blanket ban instead be clear in your expectations and consequences. Be sensible. The greater the barriers you impose the less info you will have available and the less you will benefit. Encourage employees to share ideas and info on programs, benefits, customer needs, community needs, what other orgs are doing, what they see and what they hear, research, concepts, models, frameworks, other perspectives.

Why not encourage your employees to be active in the social media space, ask them to declare where they live online, and then gather together a couple of volunteers and charge them with the task of scanning social media. Identify some key themes and key words that are off interest. Be positive and pro active. Make it a collaborative activity between management and employees and volunteers and stakeholders. With experience I predict you will be amazed at the info, the linkages, the warnings, the new ideas that will emerge - not to mention an entirely new level of communication taking place in your organisation.

Let The Journey Continue
John Coxon

John Coxon & Associates
Taking You from Frontline Manager to CEO
Email john@johncoxon.com.au
Skype: john_coxon
Blog: http://healthsector.blogspot.com
Blog: http://nfp-management.blogspot.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/johncoxon
Follow john_coxon on Twitter
Join John Coxon on Facebook

Habits of Mind

2009-07-01T14:45:00.004-05:00

Huh, its 5.46am. I should be asleep however I am not, I am awake, the brain is active, I've enjoyed my first cuppa and have been reviewing material from Costa's Habits of Mind in preparation for working with a client. As I read through this material I was reminded of how easy it is to become stuck in how we go about doing things.

As a management coach I spend a good part of each day in discussion with individuals, asking a lot of questions and I believe I'm reasonably good at it - at least feedback indicates I am - yet as I reviewed the Habits of Mind material I realised how we create our own habits. Some of them are good, some not so. I realised also how we have a tendency to complicate situations.

Take asking questions for example. Costa talks about Questioning with Intention. To engage with plurals, What are some of your goals? rather thanWhat goal have you set? To explore tentatively using words such as might, could and may. To invite further exploration with questions that include an invitation to envisage, evaluate and to probe.

As I think through this process I am reminded that our 'toolkit of questions' doesn't need to be extensive. A handful of well designed questions, asked when relevant, will be more productive than a list. I recall that when I first engaged in coaching, some 7-8 years ago, I would go into a meeting with a bullet point list of questions to ask. I soon learned that coaching conversations are a journey, without a preset destination. They are not an interview. I learned how to replace my fear that I would forget to ask something with the ability to ask just one or two relevant questions and then to focus upon listening to the response. Further questions would derive from how well I listened to what the other person was saying.

We create our own habits. The challenge we face is to recognise this and to put aside time to reflect, to review our practices and to ask ourselves how we could achieve the same outcome without making the process complicated? I didn't conciousely set out to review my habits as I read through this material. I was seeking to adapt it for the adult audience of my client. I discovered that though Habits of Mind material is aimed at the school market, it is relevant to all, young and old.

All this suggests the key to a good life may well be to never stop learning, to constantly be trying to connect the dots and rediscover new ways of looking at old problems. Now that is getting a little to philosophical and probably reflects the time of the day and lack of caffine.

To those reading this blog, I hope your day has started as well as mine has.

Why Would You Want To Be A Manager?

2009-04-11T20:30:00.002-05:00

In an bemusing manner this is a question I am sure every existing manager has asked, usually following some particularly frustrating experience.

As far as I am concerned there is only one reason why anyone would want to become involved in management. That is because they actually enjoy working with people, they actually want to help other people to develop and to perform to the fullest potential. Now, I don't actually believe that is why the majority of do become involved in management. My experience is that the majority of manager get there by default; they become managers because they were the last person standing, they were the best performer, they wish to massage their ego, they like giving orders or wearing a cap that says 'The Boss'. Very few actually sit down and make a concious career decision to become a manager because they want to help others people achieve their full potential.

Imagine the difference it would make it that were the reason. To begin with your entire perspective about management would change. Instead of seeing management as a potential conflict situation, a negative, a them versus us situation, you would view management as a positive, a great place to be, as you would be going there to help others. It would cease to be a job and would become a calling. Your passion for helping others would drive you out of bed each day. Imagine being able to view each issue or problem as an opportunity to develop and improve rather than a potential source of conflict. For a start every consultant advising on conflict resolution would be out of work and you would never have to attend another workshop on conflict management!

Imagine the difference there would be in our conversations. No more snide comments about generational gaps, glass ceilings, male versus female, Islam versus Christianity, conservatives versus democrats etc etc. None of these would be our focus, our focus would be on developing the potential of the people around you so that they are able to do the things you need done.

Try this tomorrow when you return to work. Over the next few days go to each person you are responsible for and ask them two questions. The first question is, I would like to hear about your work, can you please tell me how you are doing with your work, program, project? Second question, is there something I can do to help you achieve the desired outcome?

Let The Journey Continue
John Coxon

John Coxon & Associates
Taking You from Frontline Manager to CEO
Email john@johncoxon.com.au
Skype: john_coxon
Blog: http://healthsector.blogspot.com
Blog: http://nfp-management.blogspot.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/johncoxon
Follow john_coxon on Twitter
Join John Coxon on Facebook

Innovative leadership

2009-04-02T18:20:00.004-05:00

It may be tempting for funded non profit organisations to feel a tad complacent. Afterall, many will be in the middle of current funding rounds and service agreements. Their funding is in place. The economic downturn will likely have very little impact upon current operations. You might want to think again.

I would warn against complacency. Economic downturns impact in many different ways. Those non profits with business enterprise units may be subject to a drop in revenue as consumers feel the pinch - even those with second hand stores are not immune to consumers tightening the purse strings. Those entirely reliant upon Government funding have little options open to them should future Governments decide to maintain current levels of funding or worse still, cut back on funding.

In good times organisations can carry a little excess weight, they can indulge in activities that carry a cost without having to worry much about accounting for that cost. In times of economic downturn, it is imperative to identify and trim unneccesary costs - those that are not directly associated with service delivery aligned to the mission of the organisation - this requires innovative management.

When things begin to go wrong, continuing to do the same as has been done in the past is not an option - when the structure breaks down it is time to do something different.

It begins with effective governance - let me reword that - effective leadership. Boards need to be extra diligent. They must not assume anything. They must question everything. They must know what is happening now and what the impact of the emerging environment may be. Boards of governance need to be proactive in troubled times. Now is a good time to look at board composition. Does your board have the experience and skills to be effective when change is needed?

The key is sustainability. Governments worldwide are giving away their nation's savings in the name of 'economic stimulation'. Admirable as this policy may be in the short term, we will have to pay for it in the future. Those organisations dependent upon future government funding need to consider the risk of reduced funding. Philanthropic trusts, amongst others, have taken hits from investments in the markets. It will take many years to recover from this. In the meantime the level of philanthropy may drop. What impact might this have on your agency?

Interest rates are falling at present. That simply means they must rise again in the future. Will they rise quickly or slowly? How would you answer that if you were manager of a bank? Will consumers continue to give to charitable causes in 12 months or 18 months or will the level of giving actually reduce? If you don't know, try talking to some of the old hands around during the last economic downturn - see what they can recall.

And in case you are thinking, no worries we will get through this okay, have a look down the track a little. In Australia and NZ, 25% of the population is moving into retirement at present and will continue to do so for the next 20 years. There will be a global labour shortage for the next 20-30 years. Historically the not for profit sector is underfunded for paying salaries and wages - how will you compete for staff in the future? Where will the money come from to enable you to compete? You can talk about job satisfaction after someone starts work with you - getting them to work for you requires access to money.

These thoughts were part of a discussion I had with a not for profit manager yesterday during a coaching session. Are you a not for profit manager? Have you been thinking about these issues? If not, why not? In tough times you need to be thinking differently than you have in the past. Your organisation needs to be doing things differently than it has in the past. This requires innovative leadership.

Let The Journey Continue
John Coxon

John Coxon & Associates
Taking You from Frontline Manager to CEO
www.johncoxon.com.au
Email john@johncoxon.com.au
Skype: john_coxon
Blog: http://healthsector.blogspot.com
Blog: http://nfp-management.blogspot.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/johncoxon
Follow john_coxon on Twitter
Join John Coxon on Facebook

Defining Leadership

2009-03-31T04:59:00.003-05:00

There are as many definitions of leadership as there are writers on the topic, which simply serves to confirm that leadership is not something that can be placed into a 'how-to' list or a process matrix.

In my role as management consultant and coach I meet a lot of managers. Some would refer to themselves as leaders; others would simply be kidding themselves and everyone round them if they were to make such a claim. Just making such a statement myself implies I have my own thoughts on what leadership is! And I do.

When I look back over the past 35 years and I attempt to identify those managers I have met or worked with that have displayed leadership, I see the following -

I see the leader who took the time to listen to a young apprentice, to hear his views on some of the issues the apprentices faced in the workplace, then encouraged and assisted this young apprentice to do things differently.

I see a leader, who when the chips were down, instead of condemning his young employee for his actions, instead provided support and advice, while at the same time ensuring his young charge understood he was responsible for his own behaviour.

I see a leader who recognised the desire in one of his employees to develop new skills and proactively created opportunities for that to occur and also for those skills to be used for the benefit of the organisation.

I see several leaders who put aside any preoccupation with formal qualifications and said, instead, let's look at potential.

These are only a handful of people I have worked for or with over the years. Some have been employers, some have been peers and many have been clients. The group that i would refer to as leaders are in the minority. There are many, many, more who simply did not understand the concept of leadership. Do you? Consider these examples I have provided here. Think about the people you have worked with over the years. Think about yourself and how others may percieve your leadership ability.

I can help you develop your leadership capacity, be it through one of our leadership workshops or through one-to-one coaching. It costs nothing to discuss the options. Call me now, I am happy to help you prepare a business case to your manager which will show the benefit to your organisation in developing your potential.

Let The Journey Continue
John Coxon

John Coxon & Associates
Taking You from Frontline Manager to CEO
www.johncoxon.com.au
Email john@johncoxon.com.au
Skype: john_coxon
Blog: http://healthsector.blogspot.com
Blog: http://nfp-management.blogspot.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/johncoxon
Follow john_coxon on Twitter
Join John Coxon on Facebook

40 'dumb' questions

2009-02-22T21:03:00.002-05:00

I follow the ‘projectshrink’ Bas de Baar, from the Netherlands, on Twitter. Bas writes stuff on project management. As you know, John Coxon & Associates has a workshop, ready for your team, titled Practical Project Management for Non Profits. (Give John a call on +61 3 5561 2228 to organise). Anyway back to Bas. He pointed me to a squidoo lens titled Not So Dumb Project Management Questions, hosted by Hal Macomber.

Even if you don’t have any interest in project management you gotta read this list of so-called dumb questions. They are not really that dumb – what is so dumb is that many people fail to ask them in the first instance. While written in the context of project management, every one of these questions applies to every other aspect of organisational management. I will even bet there are few in this list that you have failed to ask from time to time and wish afterwards that you, or someone, had done so. How dumb did you feel after not asking?
Let the Journey Continue
John Coxon

John Coxon & Associates
Taking You from Frontline Manager to CEO
Email john@johncoxon.com.au
Skype: john_coxon
Blog: http://healthsector.blogspot.com
Blog: http://nfp-management.blogspot.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/johncoxon
Follow john_coxon on Twitter
Join John Coxon on Facebook

Succession Planning

2009-02-22T04:33:00.004-05:00

Marshall Goldsmith, Harvard Business School, renown executive coach and author, writes in the January 09 issue of the Harvard Business Review, on succession planning and why it is many 'nominated' successors fail to gain the promotion into the top job.

Goldsmith points to the inability of potential successors to build relationships with stakeholder groups prior to promotion. Many executive managers are tapped on the shoulder by an existing CEO and assured they will transition into the top job - only to find that when the time comes, the board appoints someone else.

Appointing someone into the top job is as much about confidence in their abilities as it is in their prior experience. On the surface it appears logical to suggest an insider should recieve the promotion. Afterall they know the ropes, they know how things are done. All of that may be true. Do they have the confidence of the board?

Being known as an excellent employee is not sufficient. Being 2IC often means you operate in the shadow of the current CEO or Director. It is not safe to assume that person is promoting your talents to the board - afterall not all CEO's feel that sure of their own abilities. The CEO might want you to succeed him or or her, on the other hand they may be trying to keep you on board, avoiding conflict between potential successors or simply trying to be friends with everyone. You have to do the work.

Goldsmith suggests six stakeholder groups a potential CEO should be working with - in advance of a potential promotion. These include, the current CEO, peers, direct reports, customers, analysts (substitute funding bodies) and the board. Most potential CEO's focus only on building relationships with the current CEO.

This is not about currying favours or building up markers for future leverage. Relationship building is a long-term exercise. It takes time and patience. Building relationships requires diplomacy and a desire to give back as much as you get - often more - with the certainty of not knowing whether all this work will be any help in the future.

What is know for sure is this. If you aspire to the CEO's role in your current organisation and you fail to build long-term, sustainable relationships with all stakeholder groups then you increase the chance of failing to achieve the top job.

Let The Journey Continue
John Coxon

John Coxon & Associates
Taking You from Frontline Manager to CEO
Email john@johncoxon.com.au
Skype: john_coxon
Blog: http://healthsector.blogspot.com
Blog: http://nfp-management.blogspot.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/johncoxon
Follow john_coxon on Twitter
Join John Coxon on Facebook

Are you warming your management seat?

2009-02-02T22:56:00.002-05:00

While facilitating a recent workshop on Managers as Coaches I made a statement, where I suggested that those in front line management roles without ambition to be involved in executive management were simply warming a seat and preventing those with real ambition from gaining appropriate experience.

As I expected my comment generated a lot of discussion both during and following the workshop. Excellent, objective achieved. As Socrates has been quoted, I cannot teach you anything, I can only cause you to think. If, as a result of my workshops I cause people to think then I believe it is an outcome worth achieving.

Let's look at this in more depth. Over the next decade every current CEO or EO or Director, aged over 50 years, in both Australia and New Zealand will retire. These people form the bulk of leadership roles in the not for profit sector. I calculate this to represent a turnover of around 30,000 leaders.

Who will replace our current leadership group? Those warming a front line manager seat or those young, ambitious 30-somethings chomping at the bit? If you are currently in a front line management role or middle management role, do you have the ambition to lead an organisation? If not, someone younger, more energetic and more ambitious than you will do so. Maybe they will want you to remain warming your seat or maybe they will not. I will leave you to think about that!

Let The Journey Continue
John Coxon

John Coxon & Associates
Taking You from Frontline Manager to CEO
www.johncoxon.com.au
Email john@johncoxon.com.au
Skype: john_coxon
Blog: http://healthsector.blogspot.com
Blog: http://nfp-management.blogspot.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/johncoxon
Follow john_coxon on Twitter
Join John Coxon on Facebook

Succession Planning Time

2009-01-07T18:54:00.002-05:00

Look around you. Estimate the average age of those in leadership roles in your non profit organisation. Where would you calculate the average age to be? 40 years. 50 years. 60 years. If you calculated the average age to be between 50 and 60 then sometime in the next decade your organisation is going to require a new CEO. Even if you were to calculate the age younger than 50 there is a good chance your current CEO will leave during the next few years.

Does you organisation have in place a succession plan? Or do you leave it to chance when the time comes? Does your organisation develop the a corp of internal leaders or do you leave that also to chance with the time comes.

If your organisation hires an external person to fill a key leadership role what message does that send to your management team? The message it sends is that they are not good enough. Or it may tell them they they shouldn't have been in that management role in the first place. If a top position becomes available in your organisation and none of your current managers apply for that position, what message does that send? It tells you they should never have been placed in that role to begin with. There is no point in having senior managers unable, or unwilling, to step into the leadership role if and when it becomes available.

Have a look around your organisation. Who are the people on your leadership team, do they have the competencies to lead as well as manage, are they able to step into the CEO role if called upon?

Identify the key leadership competencies needed by your organisation. Conduct an audit of current managers and identify the gap between their current skill level and the desired skill level. Prepare them in advance. This creates loyalty when they can see an investment being made in their professional development. Provide them with opportunities to lead the organisation, to make decisions and to learn to live with the consequences. Test them, find out those that have both the desire and the ability and nurture those people by providing them with increasing levels of responsibility. In this way the transition will be smooth and painless. In this way even if you do hire an external appointment you will have confidence in the internal team in holding the ship on course. Should one of your existing managers put their hand up for the leadership role then you will have confidence in them because you invested in their development and you will have saved the recruitment fee.

Let The Journey Continue

John Coxon & Associates
Taking You from Frontline Manager to CEO
www.johncoxon.com.au
Email john@johncoxon.com.au
Skype: john_coxon
Blog: http://healthsector.blogspot.com
Blog: http://nfp-management.blogspot.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/johncoxon
Follow john_coxon on Twitter
Join John Coxon on Facebook

Were taking a break

2008-12-20T07:04:00.001-05:00

Its the festive season and we are taking a break for a couple of weeks. We are shutting up shop, leaving the laptop in the office and putting the phones on message bank while we spend time with friends and family and recharge the batteries. To all those that chose to follow this blog through 2008 we thank you and we feel humble you should choose to share the journey with us. We hope you all enjoy the festive season, however you celebrate, or otherwise, and we look forward to traveling with you in 2009.

John Coxon

How does your nfp fare in these economic times?

2008-12-10T04:06:00.002-05:00

Glastonbury Child and Family Services was recently reported in local media.Glastonbury is reported to be experiencing financial difficulties due to the economic downturn. Many programs are funded from Glastonbury's reserves, according to CEO Judy Wookey; these programs are under threat and may result in workers being deployed.

How is your organisation faring in these difficult times? Have you invested reserves in non-bank organisations? Are those funds accessible or frozen?

It is to be expected non-profits will have in place a policy and framework to guide the board and management on investment decisions. Afterall we are trustees of those funds we hold. The problems can begin when economies go into freefall. Decisions made in the past, when stability reigned, can be inadequate in these changing times. Of course, the economic decline has been in place for a while and many organisations have felt the impact - yet there is likely to be more pain before stability returns. If your board hasn't looked at its policies and applied a risk management analysis to its funding and reserves then now might be the time to do so. Better late than never.

An investment policy should contain clear guidelines on objectives such as investment types, timeframes and even levels of return on investment, details on who is responsible for investment decisions and reporting processes and even costs. While it is clear the management team must take responsibility for any losses incurred, equally so must the board or committee. It is a responsibility of the governance team to have in place risk management process, which should include an analysis of risks associated with financial investments.

Government funding bodies have a responsibility to ensure adequate funding of programs delivered by social service agencies on behalf of the government. In the case of programs funded through non-government means the responsibility for fiscal conservatism falls squarely on the shoulders of the board and management team.

It is rare for financial calamity to occur overnight. When it does occur, hindsight, wonderful as it is, will almost always show that a series of 'key events' occured, which if they had been monitored and given appropriage analysis would have served as a flag to management that whatever was being done wasn't working and that it was time to do something new. Every non profit has the opportunity to avoid financial disaster. Does your organisation have the experience and skills amongst board members and managers to spot the trends, to analyse the data and to make proactive decision?

Let The Journey Continue
John Coxon
Taking You From Frontline Manager to CEO
Email john@johncoxon.com.au
Skype: john_coxon
Blog: http://healthsector.blogspot.com
Blog: http://nfp-management.blogspot.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/johncoxon
Follow john_coxon on Twitter
Join John Coxon on Facebook

The environment is shifting

2008-12-09T05:53:00.003-05:00

I am in one of my bold prediction moods. Actually I might not be that bold, it might just depend on your perspective on the future.

Noone likes change. Seth Godin once wrote, 'successful companies dont like change, people in successful jobs especially dont like change'.

David Kirk, ex-CEO, Fairfax Group, this week paid the price for an inability to adapt to a changing environment.

Interestingly, David Kirk, quoted one specific environmental factor contributing to the changing environment that Fairfax operates in. That factor is called the internet.

Now lets return momentarily to Seth Godin. He pointed out that the internet is not going to change the world (surprise, surprise). The internet enables the world to be connected in a way that could never have occured in the past. It is this connectivity that allows information to be accessed by everyone, allows information, both good and bad, to spread quickly throughout the world and enables decisions to be made quicker. The internet is the enabler.

David Kirk, along with the Board of Fairfax, did what every other company tries to do when under pressure. They looked to cut costs to maintain profitability. This is what is demanded of shareholders. The issue here, as I see it, is that changing environments demand different strategies, creative strategies, maybe even something different, rather than more of the same traditional strategies. Try telling that to shareholders (or stakeholders).

Will Fairfax survive? I don't know. It doesnt really matter, there will be someplace else for shareholders to move their investments into. The bigger question for you as a manager in the not for profit sector is to ask how the shifting environment might impact upon your organisation?

Do you believe your organisation could be replaced by a faster, more nimble, less expensive to operate alternative? If you are tempted to answer no to this question then I truely hope you are within a couple of years of retirement. At least then you will not have to pay the price for your short sightedness.

Informaton is no longer the sole domain of professionals. Look at how health information is becoming accessible to a wider group of people. When people become informed they become empowered to make their own decisions.

You might be aged 40+ and working with people aged 20+ at present. Those that will succeed you over the next 20 years are those from the ranks of Gen X and Gen Y. These people have been bought up in an online environment. As will many of those that will seek their help. They are not afraid of a changing environment, they will adapt and learn and continue to adapt. Their success will not be measured in terms of stability rather in terms of achievement.

So are you still thinking in the past or has your thinking shifted to the future? Do you plan to stay in the present and take whatever happens to you or do you plan to adapt, learn and continue to adapt? If you do not, others will, and you will be left behind sitting at your desk looking at a very antiquated desktop and wondering why there is noone there to talk to!

Let The Journey Continue
John Coxon
Taking You From Frontline Manager to CEO
Email john@johncoxon.com.au
Skype: john_coxon
Blog: http://healthsector.blogspot.com
Blog: http://nfp-management.blogspot.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/johncoxon
Follow john_coxon on Twitter
Join John Coxon on Facebook

Using Social Media

2008-12-02T16:20:00.002-05:00

We are new to this stuff. Well kinda new. And in speaking up we run the risk of 'having a little bit of knowledge and appearing dangerous' so please take our comments in context and treat them as part of our learning experience as much as yours.

This whole social media stuff can appear daunting and even somewhat irrelevant to anyone aged 50+. Believe me I've given myself a headache over the past few weeks as I've worked my way through it. You know I'm reasonably tech savvy, have been online since 1994, designed my first website in 1997, started blogging in 2005, used IRC to connect remote peoples back in 1998 and can recall ICQ - does anyone use that anymore? But this social media stuff is something different.

What is my take on it so far? It's not about me. It's about creating something called community. Oh that is so easy isn't it? We can all do that, we are all community builders, aren't we? Not!

What do I mean by community? I mean it is about people you may not know, may not even be aware off, likely cannot see, may never meet, from anywhere in the world. Why are these people important? Cause they communicate with each other. They share ideas and information. Now there is a new concept - sharing ideas! That will take the world by storm.

Increasingly people, in particular those aged under 35 use the online world to seek referrals, reassurance, familiarity etc. They are so familiar with locating information online it is the first place they turn to. Back in the good ol days when I was at primary school I used to see my Mum and all the other Mum's in our street standing outside one of our houses, sharing information - that is community.

What are the implications for ourselves, for those in the non profit sector? Don't even get me started, it will take more than this blog and I am not really qualified yet to answer that. Click on the link under 'Stuff worth viewing' to read Laura Papworths blog - it is humerous, it is enlightening, its in your face and yes to many of us old f*#ts, some of it will be confronting.

Does it work? Buggared if I know. Havent worked out how to measure it all yet.

Do I believe it is worth it? Yes, so far.

What do you need to help make it work? Panadol and lots of spare time, and we all have plenty of that - the time I mean, don't go near the Panadol!

Do you have to learn this stuff? Yes you do. Why? Because if you do not, others will, and they will establish how to benefit from it and you will be left wallowing in the dark ages.

Now here is a suggestion for you. You have been wondering how to engage those 20-somethings that want to work for you or volunteer for you. Gather them all in a room, give them broadband access and a couple of laptops, tell them what you want to achieve from this social media bandwagon, leave them ample food and water, lock the door and dont let them out till they have finished.

Let The Journey Continue
John Coxon
Taking You From Frontline Manager to CEO
www.johncoxon.com.au
Email john@johncoxon.com.au
Skype: john_coxon
Blog: http://healthsector.blogspot.com
Blog: http://nfp-management.blogspot.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/johncoxon
Follow john_coxon on Twitter
Join John Coxon on Facebook

Are You Engaged In Your Workplace?

2008-12-02T14:55:00.003-05:00

The Gallup Organisation created the following set of questions to determine the level of engagement of employees in their workplace. Through their survey they determined only 29% of people were engaged in their work. Authors Buckingham and Coffman, in their book First Break All The Rules discuss the significance of these questions.

Try answering the questions for yourself and then ask you own employees to answer them. What are the results for your organisation? View articles written by Renee Cormier on this issue.

1. Do I know what is expected of me at work?
2. Do I have the materials and equipment I need to do my work right?
3. At work, do I have the opportunity to do what I do best every day?
4. In the last seven days, have I received recognition or praise for doing good work?
5. Does my supervisor or someone at work seem to care about me as a person?
6. Is there someone at work who encourages my development?
7. At work, do my opinions seem to count?
8. Does the mission/purpose of my company make me feel my job is important?
9. Are my co-workers committed to doing quality work?
10. Do I have a best friend at work?
11. In the last six months, has someone talked to me about my progress?
12. This last year, have I had opportunities at work to learn and grow?

If you find either you or your employees providing negative answers to more than half of these questions then it is time to call contact John Coxon & Associates, to discuss strategies to help improve employee engagement and reduce the cost of staff turnover.

Let The Journey Continue

John Coxon
Taking You From Frontline Manager to CEO
Email john@johncoxon.com.au
Skype: john_coxon
Blog: http://healthsector.blogspot.com
Blog: http://nfp-management.blogspot.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/johncoxon
Follow john_coxon on Twitter
Join John Coxon on Facebook

Creative staffing solutions

2008-12-01T15:08:00.002-05:00

Predicted labour shortages over the next two decades will challenge many non profit organisations, especially NGO's.

Non-government, not for profits will have to compete for qualified and experienced staff against the public sector and corporate sector. Both are more adequately funded to attract quality staff.

The key strategy for non profits for the future will be to focus not on recruiting people but on retaining their best people, while also developing the potential of those that are not delivering on their potential. A loss of key staff will impact on how services may be delivered and ultimately will impact on future funding. It is not an overstatement to suggest the very viability and sustainability of many non profits will be on the line over the next ten years or so.

What can your organisation do to combat this? There are a number of potential solutions. Some will require you, and your committee, to move outside of their comfort zone.

Look to other organsiations in your region. Form an alliance with them. Meet to discuss staffing issues, needs and wants. Identify ways in which you may all work together on common issues. It could be you create job sharing, or second workers from one org to another. You could share some back office functions for example to free up cash flow which can then be used to bolster salaries of key people in service delivery.

Move beyond clinical supervision and look to develop potential. Every employee has potential, most of it hidden, simply because noone puts in place a process to identify how they would like to contribute - and I am sorry to say that most supervision or appraisal processes are woefully inadequate and incapable of achieving this. Look at leadership and management development. Look for areas where people might take on additional responsibility. Look at how work and jobs are structured.

A key area for helping to retain key staff is workplace stress. Research shows the quickest way to lose a key player is to not address the core causes of workplace stress. When there is an alternative to workplace stress, when another organisation offers a less stressful environment then money is not even discussed. People do not need, nor do they deserve, to be placed in ongoing stressful environments at work. The key activity here is to focus not just on the individual but also on the organisation and to identify the root cause of stress - then try to remove the cause.

Stop taking employees for granted. Every day I hear this, 'people work in this sector because they have passion'. Granted, it is true, that is until the cost of petrol and groceries escalates due to increased cost of labour and then, man oh man, passion be damned - it will be show me the money.As an employer you need to work with each employee. You need to help them identify what it is they actually contribute to your organisation, the value of that contribution and how their work contributes directly to the strategic direction of the organisation. This creates pride in what they do.

Find a way to get rid of the deadwood NOW. It will be to late to do so when there is a labour shortage. Those that have no desire to develop their potential have no future. They will be the last people to leave voluntarily. Give them to someone else to worry about. You may well be running a charity - for the community that is - not for deadbeats who want to collect a paypacket without actually contributing to the organisations sustainability or to the community.

In summary, it is time to take an organisational-wide perspective on the entire issue of workforce development in your organisation. A bit of time and money spent now will place you in a good position for the future. Call John Coxon on +6135561 8882 or email to discuss how we are able to help you achieve this.

Let The Journey Continue

John Coxon
Taking You From Frontline Manager to CEO
Email john@johncoxon.com.au
Skype: john_coxon
Blog: http://healthsector.blogspot.com
Blog: http://nfp-management.blogspot.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/johncoxon
Follow john_coxon on Twitter
Join John Coxon on Facebook

Sustainability

2008-12-01T04:57:00.003-05:00

Many involved with the not for profit sector have an interest in sustainability, especially creating sustainable communities. How often do you give some thought to the sustainability of the organisation you work in?

Community organisations, whether they be schools, local government, hospitals or community organisations have a responsibility to build sustainability into their service delivery. They cannot help build community wellbeing if the organisation is unwell or missing in action.

For some sustainability is viewed in purely economic terms. Such a perspective can create its own barriers. Serving the community is not about doing something for the money, yet it is not about wasting community resources either. The money your organisations garners to enable it to deliver its services comes in part from funding bodies, philanthropic trusts and donations. Your organisation has been entrusted to utilise these funds and the resources they purchase in a responsible and sustainable manner.

This essentially means everyone in your organisation should focus on leaving the organisation in better shape that when they joined. It is a joint responsibility to ensure this. Can you truely say this about yourself? If so, how have you measured your contribution to the sustainability of the organisation. Are you guessing or have you some process of measurement in place?

Do you set personal goals for your contribution to building sustainability or do you simply do the job as described and go home at the end of the day? Do you review your progress on meeting those goals and make adjustments to your activities if your not on track or do you simply carry on as usual?

Building sustainability is not about sitting on apple crates in a dilapidated building someplace. People working in non profit orgs have as much right to beneficial workplace environment as any one working in the the corporate sector or the public sector.

Sustainability starts with taking an interest in areas beyond your role. It begins with have an understanding of the value of your contribution. It continues with building collaborative relationship in all directions. It builds momentum by ensuring everything you do in your work is aligned with achieving the goals you have commited to achieving. It gains strength by ensuring you as an individual are aligned with others in your team, and that your team is aligned with the wider function and that the function is aligned with the over strategic direction of the organisation.

Where might you start? Begin by reading the annual report and any other documents about your organisation. Many do not do this one simple thing. Dont gloss over it, especially the financial pages. Read, question, learn, develop and then contribute. That is the beginning of the process of building sustainability.

Let The Journey Continue

John Coxon
Taking You From Frontline Manager to CEO
Email john@johncoxon.com.au
Skype: john_coxon
Blog: http://healthsector.blogspot.com
Blog: http://nfp-management.blogspot.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/johncoxon
Follow john_coxon on Twitter
Join John Coxon on Facebook

Creativity needed in face of labour shortages

2008-11-28T05:58:00.004-05:00

If there is an upside of the current economic crisis it is that a greater number of people will remain in the workforce longer than they may have planned to, say six months ago. I appreciate some will consider calling this an upside a little strange. My point in doing so is to show the need for managements to think outside the square.

The current economic meltdown is temporary, it is a blip on the future and will have only a small impact upon a looming, more significant issue - that being the exit of baby boomers from the workplace over the next twenty years.

Look around you. What is the average age of people involved in service delivery? I don't know the exact answer however I can see what you see - the majority are middle aged. Let's assume the average age is 45 years. In twenty years all those people aged 45 and above will have retired. I can tell you two other facts. This group of baby boomers represents around 25% of the population (including those already retired). The next group coming through represents around 15% of the population. The numbers coming into the workplace are less than are retiring - and much less than the total needed to maintain reasonable economic growth!

Our sector needs to retain as many mature workers as possible, for as long as possible. Let's identify what it is that makes them want to retire and then remove the cause - create a solution that enables them to remain productive for as long as they wish to contribute.

Older people are a fountain of knowledge and experience. Let's not throw away years of hard gained knowledge. Younger workers require access to that knowledge. Identify those mature workers with the ability to teach and coach, then let them become teachers and mentors to those coming into the system. The added cost will be low compared to the value of the benefits.

Look at changing the way work is done or changing how we go about working. Adjust the work to suit the needs of the worker. How work is done is not nearly as important as what is achieved. Utilise technology, modify places of work and adapt to get the job done.

Let The Journey Continue
John Coxon
Taking You From Frontline Manager to CEO
Email john@johncoxon.com.au
Skype: john_coxon
Blog: http://healthsector.blogspot.com
Blog: http://nfp-management.blogspot.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/johncoxon
Follow john_coxon on Twitter
Join John Coxon on Facebook

Partner with tertiary providers to conduct research

2008-11-28T04:11:00.003-05:00

An issue for community organisations is that they are not funded for research and often have limited funds to initiate such projects on their own.

There are a couple of solutions to this problem. Firstly look to partner up with other like-minded community organisations. Identify organisations with similar aims to that of your organisation, someone who will actually benefit from the results of the research. Approach your local tertiary provider. Universities, TAFE's and Polytech's offer course in psychology, applied research, quality, marketing etc. Students in their final year of these courses are keen to undertake research projects. Often all they require is for their costs, not salaries, to be met. In return they get real world experience, they produce something that will be use and they retain a copy of the final report to use for their own purposes.

Every community organisation can benefit from applied research. It might be an audit of existing programs, research into how consumers percieve the value of programs, or even seeking opportunities for growth. Funding bodies appreciate evidence of need to support funding submissions.

Student researchers are not an alternative to consultants and they are not suitable for all projects. Students have only limited experience and limited time yet in some circumstances the funding simply isnt there for consultants and therefore students can be a good alternative.

Let The Journey Continue
John Coxon
Taking You From Frontline Manager to CEO
Email john@johncoxon.com.au
Skype: john_coxon
Blog: http://healthsector.blogspot.com
Blog: http://nfp-management.blogspot.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/johncoxon
Follow john_coxon on Twitter
Join John Coxon on Facebook

New Plymouth workshop fully subscribed

2008-11-24T19:01:00.002-05:00

Good News. Our workshop on Practical Project Management for non profits scheduled for New Plymouth in New Zealand on February 16th 2009 is fully subscribed. The even better news is that we will hold registrations open and plan to offer a second workshop on February 15th. Email admin@johncoxon.com.au for an information kit and registration form. At the session on February 16th we have with us people from Hauora Taranaki PHO, Agriculture ITO, Womens Centre New Plymouth, South Taranaki District Council and Tui Ora Ltd. Don't be shy. More than 200 people attended these sessions in 2008 throughout Australia and New Zealand. Join us in 2009.

We had a great time in 2008 meeting all these people and sharing their stories. They also provided us with invaluable feedback, much of which we will be incorporating into our presentation. We are having a break now for the next couple of months while we prepare for the 2009 series of professional development courses. This one on project management will be back, bigger, better and brighter than ever. Plus we have two news courses. One on helping develop coaching competencies with managers. The other providing senior executives with an insight into how they might create a culture for successful project management. Details can be viewed on our websites.

Let The Journey Continue
John Coxon
Taking You From Frontline Manager to CEO
Email john@johncoxon.com.au
Skype: john_coxon
Blog: http://healthsector.blogspot.com
Blog: http://nfp-management.blogspot.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/johncoxon
Follow john_coxon on Twitter
Join John Coxon on Facebook

Generational Interaction

2008-11-24T18:49:00.002-05:00

Why should there be any generational gap in the workplace? Outside of work people have different needs and associate with different groups for different reasons. In the workplace we all have the same needs and goals. Most importantly we need to work together in a collaborative manner to achieve those goals. Organisations comprise teams of people. The majority of people work willingly and happily in a team environment. By definition a team is a system where each team member holds a piece of the jigsaw and needs the collaboration of others to complete the puzzle. Everyone contributes their piece of the jigsaw.

Young, middle aged or mature, we all bring something to the discussion in the way of our experiences. Being young and lacking experience doesnt mean having nothing of value to contribute. To the contrary the younger members of the workforce bring a fresh, and sometimes different perspective. Being older doesnt mean being stuck in the ways of the past. Those ways have been responsible for many of the economic issues we face today.

Leadership is paramount here. Team leaders must develop the ability to bring groups of diverse people together, to facilitate conversations, to help form collaborative action, to hold people to their commitments and promises. This is achieved by listening and asking questions. Effective leadership, and teamwork, is a process of continuous learning by everyone, regardless of their age or experience.

Let the journey continue
John Coxon
Taking You From Frontline Manager to CEO
Skype: john_coxon
Blog: http://healthsector.blogspot.com
Blog: http://nfp-management.blogspot.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/johncoxon
Follow john_coxon on Twitter
Join John Coxon on Facebook

Share your management experiences

2008-11-24T06:51:00.003-05:00

I would like to request your help. I am seeking feedback from managers at all levels on the issues they have faced as a manager and the strategies or tools they used to resolve the issue. Don't be shy. Your experiences will benefit everyone reading this blog. Your will enrich their knowledge base and we will all become or effective managers as a result. Share your ideas on here.

Let The Journey Continue
John Coxon
Taking You From Frontline Manager to CEO

A structure for future development

2008-11-21T18:48:00.004-05:00

As I was writing the previous entry for this blog I was reminded of a situation a client asked me to involved in about two years ago.

The client had been offered an opportunity to expand its services into another geographic region and the CEO at the time proceeded to develop a proposal for this to take place, and involved the board in discussions.

Issues arose when the time came to submit the proposal. The board backed away from the idea for a number of reasons.

Looking back, with the benefit of hindsight, this organisation didnt have in place a framework or process for growth. Prior growth had been opportunistic and had taken place on an ad hoc basis, albeit successfully.

The lesson here, amongst many others, is this. Opportunities can present themselves at any moment. Without a framework to work within these opportunities can be missed or an incorrect decision made. In the case of my client, the lack of a framework to guide both the board and the CEO resulted in a split between them. The lack of a framework can lead to the board becoming mission focussed or even risk averse rather than focusing on growth and sustainability.

What might such a framework include? First of all what type of opportunities might the organisation consider? What degree of alignment is needed with strategic direction, or mission, for such an opportunity to be considered. The framework might include parameters such as geographic boundaries (or avoidance of), ethical considerations, compliance with legislation or even quality compliance, the identification of risk factors and a model for assessing risk, the decision making process, level of information required to enable a decision. These are some of the components of such a framework.

With a framework in place there is less room for reactive or ad hoc decision making. There is less opportunity for misinterpretation, nervousness by boards or even executive staff taking an inappropriate direction.

John Coxon
Taking You from Frontline Manager to CEO

Manage Strategically

2008-11-21T15:18:00.002-05:00

I participated in a meeting with a group of non-profit CEO's yesterday where one of those present made the comment 'in my 50+ years I haven't seen anything like the current economic crisis. The next 18 months are going to be very difficult'.

Clearly this comment was made in context to the conversation at the time yet it made me think a little about how you might go about managing your organisation over the next two years.

There is an old adage that goes like this. When the going gets tough the tough get going. Similarly, those that are bold in troubled times will reap the benefits when times become better.

It is tempting to pull in the shutters, lock the doors and hunker down in the bunker till the storm passes over. It is a strategy. It ensures you will still be there to open the doors at a later date. It also ensures you will have missed out on the opportunties that present themselves during troubled times.

Conversely it is tempting to act in an ad hoc and reactive manner. Grabbing at everything that presents itself. This may be an equally disasterous course to steer. Troubled times need a structured approach to sustainability not just a grab for gold or a struggle for survival.

What systems and processes does your organisation have in place to facilitate strategic decision making? Are decisions made on the fly or do you have in place a framework within which major decisions are made? Do you have in place a process of collaborative consultation and discussion - not death by committee - an actual process of healthy debate? Is his process aligned to the mission and values of your organisation?

It might even be time to reconsider the mission. When things are cruising along happily, few take the time to consider what you do, why you do it, who you do it for and how you go about the process.

The environment in which we operate is changing. Assuming a sufficient level of financial support from Government funding sources is folly. The cost of providing social services, in every area of society, is likely to increase significantly over the next few years and continue for many years to follow. The increased cost will be driven by rising labour costs.

Looking at how you organisation goes about generating revenue will always be a contentious issue. Sometimes revenue raising flies in the face of being a mission-driven organisation. The reality is that if your organisation is not able to remain sustainable for the long term it will not be able to effectively deliver services to the community. Funding will then be directed to those organisations able to demonstrate effectiveness, viability and sustainability.

Bring together managers and staff. Conduct a facilitated brainstorming session on the emerging environment and the issues this presents. Then take the time to relate the future to the present. It may be time for some strategic planning.

My advice. Dont pull in the shutters. Dont hucker down to wait for the storm to pass. As a service provider you owe it to your staff and your consumers to provide them with the best opportunities and services possible. This cannot be achieved by moving backwards or standing still. The future is viewed by looking forward and having in place systems and processes for well debated decision making.

John Coxon
Taking You from Frontline Manager to CEO

Boring, boring, boring

2008-11-21T01:51:00.001-05:00

This blog is boring. Well that is not actually true. I just wanted to draw your attention to the fantastic offer I am about to make.
Would you like to participate in free management coaching? It’s an easy question to answer. Yes or No. If yes please read on.
Throughout 2009 I will be delivering a series of management workshops throughout Australia and New Zealand. At each event, on either the evening prior or the evening after I will be holding court in a lounge at the venue. I will be providing free, no obligation, coaching to those in attendance. I will help you solve management issues, develop competencies, reduce stress and enjoy your work more. It’s free, no cost, no obligation, no books, no CD’s, no hidden agenda’s or products and definitely no hard sell. If you are there you benefit from the combined knowledge of all in attendance. If you are not there then you miss out. Whether 5, 50 or 500 turn up I will find a place for us to work together. If need be we will move out into the street and work there.
Why am I making this offer? I operate a successful consultancy working with managers in the health, aged care and not for profit sector. The work I do allows me to travel throughout the two best countries in the world. It allows me to spend time with my wife, Liz, to enjoy holidays together and it allows me to spend time with my children, Tara and Byron. I do what I love and I love doing it. I also like to give back as much as I get. Most management advice is freely available. If you had the time you could read all the books, articles, blogs, research reports, white papers I do. After many years as a management coach I have learned one irrefutable fact. Most people can access information. What they need me to do is help them develop and implement the action plans that convert knowledge into results. By coming along, meeting me, letting me meet you, it means that when you do call me seeking my help we already have had contact. You are comfortable with and we spend less time becoming comfortable and move quickly to help you reduce stress and enjoy your work.
How do you register for these events? You don’t. Just turn up. If you wish you may SMS me a message on +61427390376 the day prior, regardless I will be there.
How do you find out about dates and times? Firstly, go our either of our websites, www.johncoxon.com.au or www.johncoxon.co.nz and follow the link to services and to workshops. Here you will find details of cities, venues and dates. Court will be in session from 5.30-7.00pm.
Secondly, sign into www.twitter.com and follow john_coxon, here you will see announcements of dates and venues also. You could also return to this blog in one week and you will see a list dates on here.
Are you in? What have you got to lose? Absolutely nothing. What value on the stuff you learn? Priceless.
Let me help you reduce stress and enjoy your work as a manager.
John Coxon

The practice of Governance

2008-10-09T00:03:00.002-05:00

The Carter model of governance sets out the roles and responsibilities for members of the governance group. The roles are clear; the board sets out strategy and the executive implements that strategy, and takes whatever actions are called for, within operating guidelines.

In practice the two groups meet at regularly scheduled meetings where issues of policy and practice are discussed and decisions made that enable the organisation to operate smoothly.

In practice it is not quiet as smooth as that, as I am reminded from time to time, when clients contact me to discuss the issues they are experiencing. A couple from the past twelve months or so come to mind.

In the first instance the CEO made a decision to expand a nfp organisation beyond existing geographical borders. There was a precedent for doing so, the organisation had done just that a year or so earlier. In a sense the CEO was simply continuing a process that had begun earlier. The issue here was the CEO assumed the board wished to continue that process and forgot one important consideration. The CEO serves at the behest of the board. It is correct the CEO runs the business; rather than the Board. At the same time the CEO is a servant of the board and should choose to seek guidance, or ask, rather than assume and tell.

In the second instance, the CEO of another non-profit made a decision to purchase another business. This intention had been flagged during earlier discussions but no information had been provided to the board. When the opportunity came to make the purchase, which was in line with the strategic direction of the organisation, the CEO provided the board with a one paragraph email and a rudimentary set of figures. The issue for some board members was the inadequate level of information and insufficient time for informed debate. The decision was eventually discussed and endorsed by the required minimum votes. The outcome was a division of board members and the eventual resignation of some. Boards are there to hold the CEO accountable. CEO's need to consider that if they expect volunteer board members to put their name to the activities of an organisation then those board members deserve to be provided with an adequate level of information and sufficient time for debate.

Looming labour shortage

2008-08-08T16:56:00.003-05:00

Over the next 3-4 decades, throughout the developed world, 26% of the adult population will enter retirement age. Simply becoming 65 years old doesn't mean automatic retirement, for some the option of retiring simply is not there. However employer agencies will face a number of issues related to our ageing society.

The community sector will be particularly hard hit by this emerging scenario. Why? The community sector is the poor cousin when it comes to remunerating its people. As a sector it recruits a range of professionals including psychologists, counsellers and social workers. These same people are in high demand in our public sector, health sector, education sector and the private sector. Where upon in recent years there has been a surplus of people entering these professions, there will be less people doing so within the next generation of people and those that are currently in the workplace are rapidly heading towards retirement age.

To add to the complexity of the equation, many professionals in our field are female. In many instances, females are more suited to many of the roles and in the past many of these roles have been part-time, again suiting the need amongst working mums for flexible work hours. For many of the baby boomer group, both parents have been working for a number of years now, they have invested and saved towards their retirement and they don't share the viewpoint of their parents that they should work themselves to death. While employers would prefer phased retirement, it is possible the bulk of those turning 60+ over the next few years will simply choose to take their money and relax to the best of their abilities.

From 2021 the baby boomers will begin to enter the retirement stage of their lives, in fact the first of that group will begin to enter aged care. This will likely create shortages of staff in our sector. The community sector is a people business - outcomes are achieved by people interacting one on one with other people - when there is a shortage of labour, our service sector organisations will be unable to effectively deliver services.

As service providers what can we do to minimise the impact of this trend? Firstly, we cannot reverse the trend. We need to look at our recruitment and retention processes. We will need to look, critcally, at our workplace practices and at how we deliver our services and we will need to look at our funding strategies as we will likely need to pay higher levels of remuneration than Government funding would allow for. One thing is for certain we will need to be proactive rather than wait for Government guidance. While Governments are aware of the looming issues, they are incapable of proactive action and will only react to public pressure for change after the cost has been incurred.

First step is some long term strategic planning. While it is difficult to predict labour needs beyond the short term; it is possible to make some projections and undertake scenario planning. More importantly the process focuses the governance team and management on the emerging environment and begins to shape future planning.

Predicted labour shortages are likely to cause a great deal of heartache amongst governance teams of community organisations, in particular those that have paid employees. The traditional approach within the sector is to wait till a problem impacts, then to complain loudly about the lack of support from Government. This approach will little effect in regards to labour shortages. Government everywhere cannot change the population statistics. They cannot build factories to clone and create the numbers of workers needed worldwide over the next 40 years. If those people are not born now, then it is to late.

Governance teams will be forced to grapple with a number of strategic issues. Top of the list will be how to fund their organisation. Look for exponential development of hybrid non-profits, those that have a commercial arm to the operation, as they seek to develop a revenue source independent of Government. For many governance groups this strategy is an anathema. Similarly, as organisations look to their operational processes and their ability to deliver services, governance groups will have to grapple with questions of merger and shared service delivery. Fighting over a limited pool of people is counterproductive. It will generate a self-feeding cycle of remuneration increases thus directly impacting upon service delivery.

In a strange way, pending labour shortages will likely impact more upon smaller service providers than the large providers. The large providers have greater resources and financial reserves, the will likely be able to be more strategic in their offerings to employees, they can share resources across centres and minimise costs.

In the past non-profits have relied upon 'social conscience', a vague term used to describe why someone would work hard for little remuneration in a sector that provides little in the way of personal recognition. Look at today's Gen Y, do they have a social conscience? Yes they do, however it is one that is tailored to meet their own personal needs, not those of society in general or any specific sector of the community. They also clearly understand the need to earn sufficient money to fund their needs. They will not work for nothing as many of the current generation do in the community sector.

One benefit an ageing population may offer is a growing pool of potential volunteers. Twenty six percent of the population will be seeking ways to utilise their time during their retirement. Many will also seek to implement a phased retirement process, therefore a pool of part time workers will be available. Will they work for peanuts? Only in so much as Government policy forces them to. On the flip side a larger pool of people will be available to draw board and committee members from. This may lead to more proactive governance.

A downside of an ageing population will be an increased need for service delivery by community organisations, from aged care to medical services, to support and advice, the list of needed services will continue to grow. At a time of the greatest need our service providers will face the greatest shortage of labour!

Front line managers are the key

2008-08-04T05:32:00.003-05:00

Let me share with you the results of a piece of management research conducted in 2007 amongst health providers in the USA. View summary and white paper here. I originally posted this on my health management blog and though the research focuses on health management I believe the findings are applicable to management of the non-profit sector.

The research was conducted over five years and involved 500 healthcare organisations and 200,000 healthcare professionals. The study aimed to study, job satisfaction, organisational loyalty and degree of professional engagement. What was the main finding? Here it is. Leadership capability at the front-line level influences overall performance more than any other contributing factor. Rankings of leadership capability showed positive correlations with -

Job Satisfaction
Organisational Loyalty
Professional Engagement
Willingness to continue employment
Voluntary Turnover
Patient Satisfaction
Performance to projected budget
Employee productivity
Financial success (profitability)

I welcome feedback on this topic. Why not share your stories of how your organisation has utilised the strengths of its front line managers and supervisors?

Serving on the Board

2008-07-21T05:00:00.002-05:00

Serving on the Board or Committee of Management for a non-profit can sometimes be exhilerating and other times damned frustrating. One thing is guaranteed it will likely always be interesting.

Unless your being asked to serve on the Board of a biggie such as Red Cross or the Salvation Army or something similar then it is unlikely you will be faced with issues of global significance. You will, however, be served a wide variety of regional or local issues to work upon. You will also likely be asked to give up far more time than the minimal one meeting per month; especially those with skills and experience in areas such as strategic planning, financial management and human resources - areas where small non-profits are particularly deficit.

Everyone knows the boardroom of your average non-profit is a hot-bed of conflicting interests and petty politics. These are people with passion. They are there because they believe. This passion does not always lead to logical decision making. For those of us that are more logic-driven than emotion-driven, the process can be frustrating. Despite the best intentions of those more anal creatures who actually believe logic overrules emotions, there will always be people on your board that will never follow logic. At least not your perspective and definition of logic.

Logic-driven people need patience. Lot's of patience. They also need well developed communication skills, the ability to sell a big picture. This helps to counter the narrow interests (and vision) of those on the board due to their passion. It's a complimentary process as those committee members with a global perspective often do not have a good understanding of local issues. This is the challenge faced by various chairpersons as they seek to bring together various perspectives. The chairperson needs to have a well balanced personality and be respected by all board members for his or her ability to blend the various perspectives.

Repore between the Chairperson and the organisations Executive Officer is critical. When relationships break down between these two people the potential for conflict and personal lose is great. The Executive Officer heads the organisation at the request of the board and reports directly to the board. While it requires extreme dislocation for a board to remove an executive officer from office; it is a brave, or foolish, executive officer that goes head to head with the governance group. Far better to spend time discussing and understanding the needs of all board members and using that understanding to help create healthy debate and informed decision making.

In theory the governance group are there to help the Executive Officer to establish policy and strategy and to provide advice when sought. It is also a role of the board to hold the Executive Officer accountable for the implementation of strategy. In practice, the theory isn't always applied. The low level of suitable candidates to serve on boards, particularly in rural areas, can lead to a form of in-built nepotism, where board members become 'yes' people and serve to simply rubber stamp the ideas of the executive officer. The risk here is that mediocrity can set in and the best qualified people end up leaving the board. The key strategy is to have in place a robust process for recruiting new board members and rotating existing members, rather than just making a 'mates appointment' when a vacancy occurs.

Membership of many non-profit boards is membership driven. You become a member and then become eligible for board membership. Given the shortage of suitable candidates for board duty, the selection process is often superficial. Very little consideration is given to required levels of expertise or skill. It is important for boards to conduct an analysis of the expertise required by the organisation they serve and proactively seek out potential board members with that experience.

Sustainability is created through meeting community needs

2008-07-20T06:50:00.005-05:00

The bottom line for community organisations is sustainability - the ability to effectively deliver services, as funded, to those in need; and where possible, to also add value through the creation of community programs designed to meet the needs of those that fall outside funding body guidelines.

An organisation can only effectively deliver services if it has in place three things. One, effective systems and processes, including quality financial management systems. Two, management and administrative support and three, a team of experienced people to deliver services. These three form the legs of a triangle. Remove one of the three legs and the ability of the organisation to remain effective will be severely compromised.

Sustainability is created by ongoing funding. This can only be ensured by achieving outcomes. Funding bodies are overwhelmed by submissions for funding. To be considered your organisation must be seen to be able to achieve the outcomes it committed to achieving. Your ability to do this is enhanced by having in place appropriate systems and support.

The key to achieving outcomes is for all involved with the organisation to remember the reason for their existance; that being to help those in need within the community. All the funding, all the systems and all the people should be in place to achieve just that. Your organisation will be judged by funding bodies based upon your ability to implement programs and achieve agreed upon outcomes or service standards. Ongoing funding is dependent upon your ability to meet agreed upon outcomes.

One of the risks of being a recipient of funding grants can be that the focus is entirely on service delivery in line with funding requirements. The ease of accessing mainstream funding can often remove the need to understand the needs of the community; instead the funding guidelines become accepted as the indicative community need.

Sustainability is enhanced by understanding community need and being in a position to meet as much of that need as practical. Don't become reliant upon the guidelines of funding bodies. Become familiar with the needs of your community and with the capacity of both your organisation and others in the community sector to meet that need. The greater your understanding of community need the better your ability to attract greater levels of funding from multiple sources. In that way your organisation will achieve sustainability and the community will benefit.

A corporate focus

2008-06-26T17:35:00.002-05:00

At a recent conference held by the New Zealand Council of Christian Social Services, Lin Hatfield Dodds, (Press Releases NZCCSS, Monday April 14th), was reported as saying it is time for the community sector to stop referring to itself as being 'not for profit'. I absolutely agree with this statement. It is time the sector grew up and realised that to effectively deliver services beyond the basics demanded by Government funding bodies it is necessary to earn more than we spend. Every organisation in the community sector that generates funds is first and foremost a business. If it generates revenue and spends that revenue then it is a business and it should be operated in a business-like manner.

Dodd's suggests the call to mimic the corporate world is a challenge to the core identity of community sector organisations. On this point I disagree. If we fail to operate in a structured manner our community organisations will remain ineffective, be unable to deliver any more than a basic service, continue to operate under restrictive funding models, be unable to attract quality key staff in an era of looming staff shortages, be unable to provide existing staff with an enjoyable work environment and the list goes on. The best outcomes can only be achieved if firstly the organisation is operated along established business practices.

It is not a given that a corporate approach ignores or somehow jeopardises our ability to meet the needs of people. Such thinking is a state of mind. The key factor that enables a community organisation to help those in need is money - good, old fashioned, dirty old lucre - without it your community organisation can achieve very little. It is true that a corporate-like approach to service delivery enhances our ability to maximise the benefits to the widest possible group of people. People deliver services not corporations, however these people need behind them systems and processes that enable them to deliver their service in an effortless manner. This support costs money.

I am not denigrating the thousands of small volunteer run community organisations when I say that there is a limit to what can be achieved by each individual community organisation that chooses to be run entirely by volunteers. I fully comprehend the value many of these organisations add to our community. I believe also they could contribute a lot more if they moved away from protecting their own little kingdom and looked at the options for improved service delivery.

Dodd's and others suggest the community sector should be a 'people sector'. One that puts people ahead of profits. Agreed, we are in the people sector. More to the point it is not about making a profit; it is about generating sufficient revenue. Government funding options will never be sufficient to meet a need. Additional funding has to be obtained from a variety of sectors, each which demands a degree of accountability. I would suggest the reason a service is curtailed or not made available is because the provider has insufficient 'revenue' to do so.

The mentality in many community organisations is to tailor their service delivery to match the level of current funding. Instinctively this suggests costs will be cut to match operational funding and to avoid any use of reserves. This approach is self defeating. It limits the ability of the organisation to be truly effective. It creates fear at all levels within the organisation, it discourages creativity and initiative and it stifles innovation. Worse still it ensures we only attract people to our organisations that are completely risk averse.

I would suggest that instead of focussing on cutting expenses to the level of revenue, your organisation would be well served by identifying the level of service it believes is needed and can effectively be delivered, the appropriate systems and process and the resources and people needed to deliver that service. Having done that, go out and source the amount of funding from a variety of sources, that enables your service to be delivered, that enables the maximum number of people to benefit. Don't tailoring the service to the revenue, instead maximise revenue to maximise service delivery.

The Gap Between Big and Small nfp's

2008-06-18T07:08:00.002-05:00

A glance through any directory off not for profit organisations will quickly illustrate a single statistic. That is the gap between the large not-for-profit organisations and the small not-for-profit organisations. This gap is measured is gross operating revenue - much in the same way as we would measure those organisations in the for profit sector!

In Australia it is estimated there are around 700,000 nfp organisations, which around 30,000 employ staff, the remainder are operated mainly by corps of volunteers. In New Zealand it is estimated there are around 30,000 nfp organisations. The vast majority of not for profit organisations are small, have only a handful of paid staff, if any, and survive (just) on meagre resources. For the majority their revenue comes from small time sources such membership fees, fundraising activities and donations.

At the 'big end' of town, again to borrow terminology from our colleagues in the for-profit sector, we have those non-Government, not-for-profits primarily funded by Government to deliver services on behalf of the Government. In total, these nfp's number few yet they have access to the vast majority of funding and resources. Let us not forget also, the nfp's at the big end of town are also significant employers of staff.

This dichotomy clearly disadvantages the majority of not-for-profit organisations, yet it is a natural process. Tirrana Surhood labelled this larger group Small Non-Government Organisations (SNGO's) in a paper she presented to the Partnerships and Activism conference at the University of Western Sydney in 2000 when she called for SNGO's to create a 'voice' for themselves - so that they may be heard. Tirrana's call may have been ahead of its time, or maybe no one was listening back then. I believe the rationale that Tirrana applied then remains relevant today - maybe even more so.

The emerging environment of the nfp sector favours those larger, better resourced, more coordinated organisations, in particular those able to distribute services into multiple communities. I stated earlier that the division of organisations based upon size is a natural process - to a degree - yet i do not believe it needs to be an inevitable process. I also believe it is unhealthy for any market, whether it be in the commercial sector or the nfp sector, to be dominated by a small number of suppliers. The ultimate losers will be those the organisation is supposed to help.

Divisions in the corporate sector occur as a result of competition. Some organisations are better at doing the job than others therefore they garner a greater share of the market. The not for profit sector is not a competitive sector, at least not in the sense that the sector 'sells' its services. The pricing mechanism within the not for profit sector is not used as a competitive tool. Divisions in the not-for-profit sector are created by funding bodies being selective in their distribution of funds. In their desire to make life easy for themselves funding bodies prefer to deal with one larger provider than several smaller organisations. While this is understandable it is debatable as to whether such selective practices actually create efficiencies in service delivery.

The reality is this. The division between large and small already exists and it will continue to exist into the future. Those SNGO's can elect to sit on their bums and await the inevitable grim reaper or they can elect to become proactive in controlling their own destiny. Tirranna Surhood was right, the smaller nfp's need a voice, a coordinated peak body that will speak and act for them, that will advocate and attempt to influence funding decisions. Tirranna even suggested in her paper that the 'voice' may not need to be a national one; that a combining of resources at a community level may be even more effective. But even more is needed. the larger nfp's should recognise the inherent benefits of a diverse group of providers. They have the resources, courtesy of inequitable funding distributions, and they are in the business of helping others - it is time to extend some of that help to the smaller not for profit organisations that work along side them. There are many ways in which this could be achieved, from seconding key staff to sharing resources to providing back office support in the form of human resources and many, many others.

In turn the SNGO's need to become more proactive, they in turn need to explore how they might latch onto the resources and expertise that exist within larger organisations. Near to where I live a large nfp aged care provider prepares the payroll for a much smaller nfp aged care provider. They compete for customers yet they collaborate and they cooperate and both survive in a market that is much richer for the diversity and choice that is then available to the customer.

Nurturing those middle managers

2008-05-29T16:10:00.000-05:00

It has been stated that middle managers are the glue that holds an organisation together. Well okay, we will live with the generalisation. It is also possible that were there much better collaborative and participative management processes in place then there would be less requirement for middle managers, and for many senior managers for that matter!

Regardless of whether your organisation is the traditional command and control model or whether it operates within a flattened hierarcy , you will have some middle managers, or supervisory staff. They are important. They form the link between management and staff. They are the implementers of strategy. Executives design strategy but they rely upon the skills of their middle managers to build collaborative relationships with staff, to sell the benefits, to negotiate the change process and to provide feedback that enables adaptation. Without middle managers, the traditional organisation would grind to a standstill.

Yet this group of managers remain the most maligned and mistreated individuals in an organisation. They are between a rock and a hard place. Neither management nor staff. Unable to be loyal to any faction other than themselves. Some 20 percent of middle managers will eventually progress into an executive role. Another 20 percent will drop back into a staff role. This leaves 60 percent that will remain in a middle management role; for better or for worse. It is in the interest of the organisation to ensure those 60 percent are effective.

Just as there are numerous examples of ineffective senior executives creating blockages to progress, there are also examples of middle managers doing the same. The difference is that a senior executive will likely be found wanting when they are monitored for their ability to plan and implement strategy far quicker than a middle manager who is often protected by a senior executive. Of course, the removal of a senior executive that has been shielding a middle manager can result in the middle manager becoming exposed to the scrutiny of an incoming manager. It is doubtful an ineffective middle manager would survive such scrutiny.

The problem for organisations with middle managers is that only a small percentage of supervisors will progress into an executive role. In some organisations it will be less than the suggested 20 percent. This can lead to either a high turnover of middle managers or stagnation fueled by frustration, which in turn, leads to mediocrity. Those middle managers on the bottom of the heap, the blindingly obvious bad managers will out themselves and slide back into the ranks of general staff. The challenge for organisation is this. How can they get the best out of their middle managers?

It is recommended all middle managers have a mentor, or two, or three. Different mentors serve best at different times or in different circumstances. The benefit of mentoring is widely understood, however it is a relationship the middle manager needs to instigate. Mentors rarely present themselves to a manager. You have to approach them with the idea. Mentoring relationships are build upon mutual respect, the mentors understanding of your workplace environment and a willingness by the manager to be open and honest.

Management coaching can be expensive and has traditionally been reserved for the ranks of senior executives or up and coming middle managers on a fast track to the corner office. This needs to change. Our experience of providing coaching to middle managers has always been positive. Traditional practice suggests executive managers benefit most from coaching. Our experience is that many senior executives have become entrenched in their behaviors and find it difficult to acknowledge their faults after they have gained higher office. Middle managers, on the other hand, still have progress available to them, they have more to gain from coaching and are likely to offer more back to the organisation as a result. Effective organisations will remove ineffective middle managers and provide coaching to those in this role; simply because good management behavior developed during middle management years transfers to good executive behaviour in later years.

We persist with the belief that managers are born not made - well at least we do when it comes to providing management training. It appears that we believe any manager worth their salt will develop competencies by osmosis. This is partially true, much management competency is the result of accumulated experience. In the past, when managers took many years to work their way up through the system, this was very true. In today's workplace we promote the majority of managers on demonstrated competency rather than longevity. The result is many managers are younger and have not had the opportunity to accumulate experience. So what do we do? We send them away to residential management courses to learn the theory. Yes while there they engage in role places and situational game play, but these are no substitute for practical experience. Dont misunderstand. Management training, and ongoing training is essential, some would even suggest critical. The key is to apply critical analysis to those providing the training. Look for trainers with practical experience to back up the theory. Look for trainers with practical experience rather than just case studies. Look for trainers able to blend theory, case studies and their practical experience. Look for trainers that follow up their training with coaching, so as to increase the potential for implementation of concepts and methods.

Do organisations need middle managers? Yes they do. Do they need a lot of middle managers? No they should minimise the number of middle managers by creating more collaborative and participatory workplaces at all levels (very scary for senior executives). The outcome of this will be more effective middle managers and more effective senior executives and this will lead to more effective organisations.

Hybrid nfp organisations

2008-05-29T07:47:00.002-05:00

Should not for profit organisations seek to implement a hybrid model? On the surface this question would be answered with an emphatic yes; the hybrid model where a not for profit seeks to generate a surplus through commercial activities makes economic sense. Under the surface is another matter. NFP's operate on a set of values. These values underpin the ethos and operations of the organisation. They do not operate on a commercial basis where making money for the sake of doing so is considered normal behavior. NFP's have a focus upon service delivery, often to a captive audience. Not only does this philosophy shape their operational structure it also shapes their strategic thinking process. Making money requires a different mindset to one where the focus is entirely upon service delivery. Many governance teams struggle with the concept of making a profit from commercial operations, especially those that have been weaned on Government funding.

The obvious benefit of the hybrid model is the ability to generate funds that in turn can fund programs which would not otherwise be funded by mainstream funding. A greater percentage of self-generated income reduces reliance upon Government funding and can enable the organisation to operate independently and without fear of upsetting funding bodies.

Despite these advantages, overcoming the in-built and traditional fears of committee members, employees, volunteers and clients can prove to be challenge that is to great for even the most imaginative executive officer. The process of changing cultures on such a scale, even for a modest sized organisation is long, convoluted, time consuming and fraught with personal risk.

Seminar - Practical Project Management

2008-05-16T00:15:00.003-05:00

You gotta go to this seminar! Why? Cause I designed it and I deliver it and I can promise that you will learn a helluva lot about practical aspects of project management, including practical strategies for common issues, practical easy to use tools to assist with project planning, strategies to improve stakeholder communications and improve teamwork - all this will contribute to you achieving a successful outcome for your project. Who should attend? There is stuff in this seminar for Executive Officers, CEO's, Operations Managers, Project leaders and supervisors.

The first was held yesterday (May 15th) in Adelaide. The feedback from participants was fantastic and all positive. Everyone learned something helpful, many learned many helpful things. Just listening to the input and feedback from participants was energising. Next week we deliver this seminar in Auckland - this session is already fully subscribed and a further event has been scheduled for Auckland on August 19th. Registrations are rolling in fast for all scheduled events throughout Australia and New Zealand. Register now. Email john@johncoxon.com.au to reserve your place and to request a comprehensive information kit - it contains all the details - so go for it, do it NOW.

Seminars are scheduled for -

May 15th - Adelaide (completed)
May 22nd - Auckland (fully subscribed)
June 19th - Hobart
June 24th - Melbourne
July 10th - Perth
July 17th - Sydney
August 19th - Auckland
August 21st - Christchurch
September 18th - Brisbane
October 23rd - Wellington
November 13th - Canberra

How well does governance of your not-for-profit rate?

2008-02-15T15:15:00.000-05:00

What is the purpose of having a governance group? There is only one answer to this question. The purpose of the governance group is to set strategy and hold the management team accountable for implementing that strategy.

Governance is a planning process. Governance is about bringing together all the elements required to ensure an organisation is moving in the desired direction. Governance is about monitoring.

Does your governance team have a dedicated time allocated at each meeting to review progress against its strategic plan? Does it even have a strategic plan? If you answer no to the second question then you are probably already in trouble. If you answered no to the first question then you will likely get into trouble at some point in the future.

For strategy to be implemented there firstly must be a strategic plan. It doesn’t matter if it is a single page document or a 100 page document; the plan must exist. Creating the strategic plan is a major function of the governance group.

Someone has to take responsibility for implementing the strategic plan. This is a function of the executive team, not the governance group. It is a function of the governance group to review progress, by the organisation, against the performance indicators contained within the strategic plan. Time should be allocated for this purpose at every governance meeting.

If your organisation has a complex strategic plan it is recommended the governance group discuss with the executive team a structure for review of the strategic plan. For example, it might be agreed that one key outcome will be discussed at each governance meeting. This is important to ensure all outcomes are monitored in a timely manner and to enable the executive team to prepare relevant information.

Holding the executive team accountable for implementation of strategy is a key performance indicator of the governance group. When an executive team falls down and fails to achieve the desired outcomes it is as a result of failure by both the governance group and the executive team. Before the governance group seeks to make changes to the executive team, the governance group should look at themselves first and ask what changes they might need to make within their own group and their own processes.

Effective management

2008-01-19T19:20:00.000-05:00

The not-for-profit sector differs from the commercial, for-profit, sector. For a start, organisations in the nfp sector do not have to 'sell' something to earn revenue. In the majority of instances the revenue is donated from one source or another. Fee for service within the nfp sector is growing however still represents only a small amount of total revenue.

What are the management implications of the difference between the two sectors? In the commercial sector managers will be judged upon indicators such as revenue, profitability and growth. Some might suggest such indicators are not relevant for the majority of the not for profit sector. Is that true? Surely not for profit organisations are businesses, regardless of where they obtain their revenue from? Were that the case then managers within not for profits should be judged on similar indicators to those in the for-profit sector.

A possible outcome of managers not viewing their nfp organisation as a business might be that they focus on the wrong indicators, insufficient indicators or in some instances, no indicators at all. Not for profit organisations need to spend less than they earn - financial management. They need to make a surplus to remain viable - financial management. They need the right people in the right place to do the right job - people management. They need to tell consumers about themselves and how to access programs - marketing management. They need to satisfy the needs of those consumers - customer service. They need direction and strategy - governance. They share all these attributes with organisations in the for-profit sector.

Not for profit organisations have one attribute their counterparts in the commercial sector do not have. Not for profits are dependent upon the vagaries of political cycles and decision making. Unlike their commercial counterparts the not for profit organisation cannot easily change direction, implement a new strategy or introduce a new product or service - unless it does so by using its own resources - a powerful argument for making a surplus and having a mixture of funded programs and fee-for-service programs.

Not for profit organisations cannot manipulate their margins in the same manner commercial operators might. This places a greater emphasis on financial management within the not for profit, especially if the strategy is to create surpluses.

The one attribute not for profits share with those in the commercial sector is the use of people to deliver services. This is also the one attribute the not for profit has full control over. People are the key to an effective organisation. People implement strategy.

The board or governance group within not for profits are ultimately responsible for the ongoing viablity of the organisation. Their responsibility extends beyond simply setting visions and ensuring activities fit that vision. They have a responsibility to regularly review the activities and outcomes of the management team. Some of the issues the governance team might look for include; a lack of clear direction from themselves; signs the organisation is able to cope with its growth, complacency within the organisation, acceptance of poor performance, autocratic management or a lack of delegation, seemingly chaotic activity by management and poor communication.

Indicators that all or some of these issues may exist in your organisation include; a lot of activity with little in the form of clear outcomes, frustration by staff at barriers or a lack of clear understanding by management as to what it is they should be doing, an insistence on doing things they way they have always been done, people not challenging the status quo, high turnover of staff, low moral, criticism of the organisation, a lack of new ideas or new services, those patently unable to achieve the desired outcomes being protected by management, lack of trust, 'silo' mentality between departments or service areas, lack of information sharing, staff not knowing what is actually happening in their organisation or not being valued for their contribution.

Management failure is not terminal; often it can be an evolutionary process. Many managers are good at specific areas of management, for example, growth or change, and may become bored or complacent once the desired outcomes have been achieved. A good governance team would have understood this possibility when they recruited and looked to the future when a replacement might be needed.

The governance team is responsible for setting direction and strategy and they are responsible for holding the management team accountable. Effective implementation of strategy equals effective management.

Understand the stage of development for your organisation and plan ahead. In this way the resources are available and the transition will be smooth.

The management team must display leadership. Conduct an audit of your organisation, its needs and the gap between what it has and what it needs. Cut out the deadwood. Build an organisational structure that is designed to deliver the desired outcomes. Never try to make the outcomes fit the structure, that is a recipe for mediocrity.

Finally, foster and nurture the human resource. People are the key. The single most important characteristic of an effective manager is the ability to work with and get the best out of people. If your managers cannot do this then they are the wrong person in the job and they should be replaced with someone with those skills.

Rudd Government to remove gagging clauses

2008-01-14T04:44:00.000-05:00

For the past decade the Australian Federal Government has inserted gagging clauses into service delivery contracts with the not for profit sectors. These clauses were designed to prevent service delivery organisations from speaking out on the state of their sector. The impact is muted advocacy. A Government that does not wish to hear off the problems does not have to work towards solving those problems.

The recently elected Rudd Government has moved quickly to indicate that such clauses will be removed from future contracts - a brief window of opportunity for meaningful dialogue - at least until the next authoritarian government is elected - or the current government begins to find the truth a tad unpalatable!

On the surface the removal of gagging clauses is a relatively easy political decision and it appears to have little downside. However the removal of gagging clauses is much more than a political stunt. It opens the door to dialogue between from the three sides of the social service triangle; those that fund service delivery, those that deliver the services and those consumers that actually need the services. It is important the channels of communication are open, in both directions and that the feedback to fed, unfiltered, to Government ministers.

The challenge for the not for profit and community sectors is to work with both the Government and their consumers to develop effective channels of communication. Government ministers are a long way from the coalface, there are a lot of layers of people in between those that dispense the funds and those that need the services. Many of those people in the middle are bureaucrats and many of them have their own agenda. Sector peak bodies, lobbyists and influencial organisations within the sector have a responsibility to gather information and present it to Ministers in a clear and truthful manner. There is little difference between a Government that gags sector representatives and a sector that tries to use information to manipulate for mislead Government; the outcome will be the same, poor information, lack of trust and poor political decision making.

The removal of gagging clauses opens up the potential for increased civil advocacy. Opportunities will be created for increased dialogue. Ministers can be made more aware of the real issues. The Rudd Government is to be congratulated for its moves in this direction, exposing themselves to the truth may from time to time be an unpleasant experience and there will be those amongst their adviser that will from time to time advocate a return to a more restrictive regime. It is a fundamental tenant of a fair and just society that all groups and all peoples are enabled to speak out and to be able to do so without fear of retribution.

Draft code of Governance

2008-01-13T20:08:00.000-05:00

Our Community, an Australian community sector online clearing house, has released a draft Governance Code for discussion. A copy of the draft document may be downloaded from here.

Public comment is welcomed. Those making submissions should do so prior to Tuesday 15th April 2008. Fax (03) 9326 6859. Our Community is particularly interested in feedback on areas such as -

the underlying principals of the code
the specific detail of the draft
the difficulties your organisation might face if implementing the code

Damning report by Perpetual Trust

2007-12-05T04:28:00.000-05:00

This report is a 'doosy', an absolute ripper. 1300 survey respondents and more than 50 focus group discussions and guess what the outcome was? Members of governance committees and Boards of Australian not-for-profits were described in the following words - inferior in strategic planning and financial management, self-interested, poorly skilled, involved in petty issues, interfering in management, didnt add value, didnt involve themselves in professional development, had bad relationships with CEO's . . . and the list went on.

As I read over the report and its summary my mind wandered over the activities of the various boards that I have worked with as a consultant and some that I serve on - and I found myself squirming in my seat at the memories.

This report deserves to be circulated to every not for profit board in Australia. It needs to be dissected, discussed, understood and acted upon. I plan to do my bit. I have downloaded the report and will be emailing to board members I serve with. If you would like a copy please email me on john@johncoxon.com.au

Technology use within not-for-profits

2007-07-31T16:31:00.000-05:00

A number of small, seemingly, unconnected events have occurred in the past few weeks that have caused me to think a little more about this issue. A week or so back I received an email from Bill Wallace. Bill had found this blog through a Google search (which alone gave me the warm and fuzzies). Bill writes a blog on just about everything and I have found some of his comments interesting and thought provoking. Bill was seeking feedback on how not for profit organisations used technology such as blogging. You may see Bill's blog at www.billwallaceonline.com. Following my exchange of emails with Bill, I had a conversation with a client of mine, a not-for-profit, and it quickly became obvious they had absolutely no idea of the value and benefits that might be accrued from the use of online tools. The yesterday i received the monthly newsletter from Our Community. Within the newsletter was an article on trends impacting upon not for profit organisations. In that article was an piece about how the world is becoming more engaged through the use of online tools.

Now as you know I am no Luddite when it comes to technology but there is a limit to my knowledge and understanding. I have been using blogs and wiki's as marketing and communication tools for the past twelve months, I have had an online presence through websites for the past eight years, I was one of the original users of online banking when it was introduced. Yet my understanding of online space and online communication is restricted to ICQ and msn, neither of which I have used in years. Do they still exist? Since then I have heard about the likes of MySpace and a handful of others similar online places however I have never used them. Recently I graduated to an IMate phone which is effectively a mini-computer on steroids and the trouble I had setting this beast up so that it would do a small portion of the things I am paying for lead me to believe that I had reached saturation point in my ability to absorb any more technology. Unlike my 15 year old son who has been online in one form or another since he was five and knows nothing else, I, in my 50 years have had to shift from having a black ceramic box on the wall that routed all calls through a switchboard to todays situation where I have clients suggesting I install Skype and VoIP.

My point here is this. I am semi-computer literate, with perhaps an above average understanding of what is occuring within the online space, yet I am struggling to keep in touch with all the changes, never mind having a full understanding of how I may benefit from using this technology. Now I look at the not for profit organisations I have as clients and only one of them stands out as having the capacity to capitalise on this technology - yet they do not - that means there is little chance those that are smaller and even more limited capacity will do so.

Why are they missing out on these benefits? Simple. The information available is partisan, fragmented and confusing. What do they need? Someone to present them with a clear, concise overview of the various online options, an outline of the main benefits, some ideas on how to use this technology in a strategic manner and a step-by-step set of instructions on how to implement the technlogy in a low cost manner. When someone does this, and creates a white paper with this information, please send it to me and I, in turn, will place it on this blog and make sure every one of my clients recieves a copy.

Management information aids effective governance

2007-07-07T05:03:00.000-05:00

The vast majority of not-for-profit organisations in both Australia and New Zealand are small. a minority are sufficiently large to have a need for an executive management team, yet every not for profit organisation requires some form of governance. The issue for many is that those making up the governance are community volunteers; many of whom have become involved in the governance due to some form of past contact with the organisation and empathy with what the organisation seeks to achieve. Having such empathy is good for the organisation, it helps those in governance to remain concious at all times that the organisation exists due to people; both those that work within it and those it seeks to help. The converse situation would be to have governance groups comprising people with little or no empathy that went about making decisions based upon very narrow criteria and without any consideration for the impact or consequences of their decisions.

Just as it is clearly undesirable to have governance groups making decisions without taking into consideration the impacts and consequences; it is equally as undesirable to have governance groups making decisions, or failing to make decisions, based upon personal feelings rather than effective governance.

A contributing factor to poor decision making by not for profit governance groups can be the lack of clear and concise information provided to them. Poor, unclear and confusing information leads to uncertainty. In the minds of those within the governance group this leads to higher risk. The majority of governance groups are adverse to risk and they will make decisions aimed at reducing their exposure to risk rather than aimed at increasing their exposure. The key is for the management team to conduct research into the benefits and to present evidence to the governance group in a manner designed to minimise fear of the unknown.

Governance groups require the management team, in particular the CEO or Executive Director, to have researched the question before it is bought to the table for discussion. They require the information to be presented as evidence rather than as opinion. They do not need to know what is to be done, or even how it will be done, rather they need to understand how the planned activities will benefit the core business of the organisation. And as many governance groups do have a high level of empathy with both staff and consumers they want to know how both of those groups will benefit from any planned activity. Often if the CEO or ED is seeking approval from the governance group to proceed in a certain direction then that person should take the time to elaborate on the consequences of not doing so; just as much as the benefits of doing so.

It is important for governance groups to focus upon the future and not upon historical events from the past. Yes, an understanding of history is helpful in explaining the context within which an organisation formed and evolved but it is of little relevance with strategic decision making for the future. When the focus is on the past the risk is the governance group will miss opportunities for the future. In doing so, they are being negligent in their duty to all stakeholder groups and they may well condemn the organisation to extinction.

The role of governance is not easy, neither is it simple or straightforward. Increasingly, funding bodies and other stakeholders are holding governance groups more accountable for their activities and for the outcomes. Increasingly, legislation is being directed at the operations of those in the not-for-profit sector. Increasingly, the environment is becoming more dynamic. The level of competition for funding is increasing. Not for profit organisations are becoming more diverse in some instances and even larger, or both, in other instances. The level of predictability is decreasing. The level of governance discomfort is increasing. It is time for governance groups to focus on effective governance.

The basic premise is that governance groups focus upon setting the strategic direction of an organisation. I believe this should apply regardless of organisational structure or of size. Yet the smaller the organisation or the more localised the organisation the more inclined members of the governance group are to become involved in (meddle) the daily operation of the organisation. This should be avoided at all costs.

Who will replace the baby boomers?

2007-03-15T17:39:00.000-05:00

A recent report from the Fieldstone Alliance - www.fieldstonealliance.org - commenting on trends that impact upon not for profits in the foreseeable future pointed out that Baby Boomers were the generation that drove the establishing of the nfp sector, at least in countries such as America, United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand, and that over the next fifteen or so years these people will be moving into retirement. Who will take over? Will it be the so-called Gen X and Gen Y, those generations typified by my twenty-one year old daughter - young, impulsive, in-your-face, whats-in-it-for-me, i'm in a hurry, don't get in my way, I want to live life my way? This is a generation that grew up knowing that if they wanted something then they had to depend upon their own abilities to achieve it. As such they have developed a 'me-me' attitude. Will this be conducive to providing effective social services? This is a generation that has grown up knowing and believing that they can create their own work, design their own job, move on when and if they feel the urge. Will they be able to put aside their concerns for themselves and provide for the concerns of others? Contribute your thoughts and comments here.