What do Elizabeth Taylor and ABC’s “Secret Millionaire” teach nonprofits?

What is the lesson to be learned from Elizabeth Taylor and ABC’s “Secret Millionaire”?  If I tell you now you won’t read on…

Liz Taylor was instrumental in raising of funds for AIDS and giving voice to a cause, in the 1980s, that had been muffled by fear and prejudice.  Many feel that, because of her, the fight against AIDS made huge advances and, more importantly, other funding and other voices were brought forward to help in the cause.

ABC’s new show, “Secret Millionaire” is about rich individuals who go out into impoverished communities and learn about the nonprofits that are “doing good,” giving out money to various organizations.  I’ve seen an episode and I can tell you that it is not at all condescending towards the causes or the individuals.  Instead, it raises them all up to heroic status and, as one would expect from network television, tugs at the emotions. 

What both teach us about major donors is that is it all about passion.  Both Elizabeth Taylor and the Secret Millionaires are (or become) passionate about their causes.  And that passion comes from first-hand experience - or being touched personally by the cause.  In the case of Elizabeth Taylor, much has been made of her friendship with co-star Rock Hudson, who had AIDS himself, as well as others she was close to in the entertainment world.  The secret millionaires witness and share the experiences and struggles of leaders in the nonprofit world.  This experience grows into a profound respect and admiration for their cause(s).  It is because of the dedication and the giving they witness that they become so passionate. 

Nonprofits must always remember this lesson: that (a) personal involvement and (b) passion are key for engaging major donors and supporters.

  

Nonprofit Leadership for Disasters

The events that have taken place – and are still unfolding – in Japan certainly give pause when it comes to thinking about nonprofits.  There are many different types of nonprofit organizations and sometimes I think that, while our hearts pour out to the ones in desperate need, it’s important to think about disaster relief organizations and how the dollars that rush are being amassed and allocated.

I searched for writing on this subject and here’s just a sampling of what’s out there.

On Monday, the Chronicle of Philanthropy totaled up the donations and published them, noting that the American Red Cross had amassed the most, at over $19 million, and Save the Children had raised $2.5 million.  Many others, ranging from the Salvation Army ($980K) to Catholic Relief Services ($450K) were also collecting for the cause.

Bloggers like Joanne Fritz on About.com has some good nuggets of advice on how not to run a campaign based on her experience – advising the relief organizations on how not to frustrate their well meaning donors. But perhaps the most thoughtful was from Stephanie Strom, from the New York Times:

Disasters, particularly those epic enough to earn round-the-clock news coverage, are a fast way to get donors to open their wallets. So it was no surprise when nonprofit groups, starting with the American Red Cross and moving down to small charities, scrambled to raise money to help the victims of the Japanese earthquake and tsunami.  But wealthy Japan is not impoverished Haiti.  And many groups are raising money without really knowing how it will be spent – or even if it will be needed. The Japanese Red Cross, for example,has said repeatedly since the day after the earthquake that it does not want or need outside assistance. But that has not stopped the American Red Cross from raising $34 million through Tuesday afternoon in the name of Japan’s disaster victims.

As Stephanie asks, what is the best path for us as generous American donors to take?  Or, indeed, what direction should nonprofits take when it comes to helping in a world where some countries need more assistance than others?

Clearly, there are leadership roles that need to be asserted here.  Being true to the missions and goals of an organization are key.   Allocating resources (amassing resources) where they are most needed is another issue.  Perhaps more thought, and reasoning logic, behind what programs are most worthy – even in crisis - would best show how these agencies are “good stewards” of their donor dollars. 

Indeed, it is something to consider when opening your wallet to be generous and good, in the face of disaster. 

Empathy for those you want to influence

I’m a bit late to the party but I want to share an interesting article, Influence Without Authority, by Jenka Soderberg from the Stanford Social Innovation Review.  She writes about an experience she had role-playing in a class which she didn’t particularly like but which made her reflect on her own experience at a nonprofit.  While she helps people daily, she also took time out to work in New Orleans in the post-flooded days of Hurricane Katrina.  Here, she reflects on the class exercise as it related to her “office” reality: 

Despite my initial misgivings… {the experience} got me re-thinking the interactions I have with one particular co-worker that borders on adversarial. Having empathy with someone trying to exert control within the workplace is a bit more difficult than helping people stranded in a flooded city. But it’s definitely possible. And I think being able to look at any situation from another person’s perspective is always a good tool to have in my toolbox.

Too often I believe we think about leadership and influence in terms of what’s “out there” in public.  We consider leadership in our profession, our community, our greater network or society.  We forget that sometimes the hardest type of leadership happens every day, in the grind of working with the same people in an office or even at home, in our family environment. 

Perhaps it’s hardest to be a leader when you’re tired and worn out on a Friday afternoon.  Or early Monday morning.  Perhaps that’s where true leaders shine.   

Leadership and influence in these types of environments is partly about empathy, as Soderberg points out.  It starts with putting one’s self in the shoes of another and rising up.  Perhaps we should work hardest on this with the people we see every day. 

How do you measure influence in the nonprofit world?

I’ve become intrigued with the concept of influence  - perhaps because of the “buzz” about influence on Twitter with Klout, PeerIndex, as well as other measurements.  Or perhaps because of what’s going on in the Middle East.  Or perhaps it’s because I’m just compelled by the idea that nonprofits can be influential in their communities.

But what is influence and how does one measure it?   

Beth Kanter, someone who’s thought a lot about the issue of influence on Twitter and other social media networks, was one of the first to shout that numbers – the following of the masses – does not equal influence.  In a blog from back in 2009 she states: “…there’s more to influence besides numbers, there is also affinity.”  She summarizes her argument, advising: “don't get distracted by meaningless metrics like the number of followers, and value the relationships.”  And I agree with her – it’s about relationships and value.

If influence is about relationships – how does one measure these?  I suggest thinking beyond the communities served by an organization and including the communities in which nonprofits operate, as well as other communities, such as funders, donors, and businesses or the public at large. 

I would argue that the most influential nonprofits are those whose reach far exceeds their “designated” constituency.  For national examples, I’m thinking of the Susan G. Komen Foundation "For the Cure", which has spawned fabulous pink-glove videos as well as walks and events all over the U.S., touching well beyond its “designated” constituency. 

I’m thinking, for example, of the Special Olympics, which offers inspiration to many more than just the athletes who compete, or their families.  I'm thinking of UNICEF, which not only helps those whose funds it serves but which also taught a generation how to ask for donations (remember those orange boxes of change at Halloween?). 

There are many others that have pierced the national culture in ways we all recognize.  And there are those that have similarly pierced their local communities.  

How would you measure influence in the nonprofit world?  

Teaching Nonprofit Leaders is Big Business... Show me the Money!

Have you noticed how many organizations promise to “teach leadership skills” to nonprofits?  They’re jumping on a great trend.  Nonprofits are losing their babyboomer leaders to retirement in droves – now and in the next ten years.  So there’s a real, a perceived, and a future “gap” in leadership for the social sector.

How do we fill the leadership “gap?”  Since there wasn’t funding, planning, or vision to do much in the way of succession-planning in this sector, there’s a scramble going on to either recruit older “for-profit” leaders to try their hand in nonprofits. Or there’s the idea that newer, younger professionals can be taught the skills they need.

That’s where the business of “teaching nonprofit leaders” comes in.  There’s quite a few of them – just google it.  HBS has jumped in with both feet.  Peter Drucker has joined in.  Others, especially in D.C., where nonprofits are prolific, are in the fray.

What I want to know is – where are the results?  Who are the successful graduates?  What are the “benchmarks” for these great schools and leadership programs?  Show me the money! 

What have these leaders gone off and done after these training sessions?  What successes can be attributed to what they learned?  Skills they picked up?  Networking they did or learned to do? 

Don’t get me wrong – as someone with more education than I ever needed I’m all for training and believe in it fervently.  I even do it myself!  I’d just like to have some of these “schools” and programs tracking the success of their graduates – the way other institutions do. 

The Sunny Side of the Tax Law

A recent New York Times article, Tax Cut Deal Could Benefit Charities, illustrates how nonprofits can benefit from recent changes to the tax law.  Though the changes have been called “tax cuts for the rich,” there are some gift-and-estate tax advantages that personal wealth advisors see as a way to direct more funds to nonprofits. 

With regard to gift and estate taxes, the new law exempts donations of $5 million per person.  As the article points out, this means a couple is now able to give or bequeath up to $10 million in any combination of assets “tax-free.” 

Why is this good news? Because estate planning and donations made through wills is strong.  Statistics have shown that while 8% of those individuals who die every year leave funds to nonprofits, double that number - 16% - who do estate planning, plan to leave funds for their favorite charities.

The math of the interest stream from these assets can often add up to significant amounts.  In addition, for assets held long-term for a nonprofit, to provide an ongoing asset stream for others (perhaps an older living relative), the final capital amount can also be substantial.  

What can nonprofits do to be proactive about this?  Reach out to their wealthier donors and talk to them about estate planning.  Show how they are currently good stewards of the dollars they are receiving.  Illustrate how they are thinking about and planning for the future, also.  Give donors a reason to be passionate about their future, too. 

One Toolkit for 14 Different Flavors

The Center for What Works has joined forces with The Urban Institute to “provide the first sector-wide framework for nonprofit program outcomes and indicators for success.”  This framework, they say, is to help nonprofit users to “identify and measure common program outcomes to benchmark and improve.”  

It’s called the “Nonprofit Effectiveness Toolkit” (details at www.whatworks.org).  And although it’s not all that elegant – kind of kludgy, actually, because it is customized and therefore not one-size-fits-all – it looks as though they’re onto something here. 

They’ve come up with 14 different program areas you, as a nonprofit, can categorize yourself into, ranging from Adult Education to Emergency Shelters to Performing Arts to Youth Mentoring and Tutoring.  Makes sense – since there are so many nonprofits with such varying missions.

The “toolkit” consists of webinars, phone consultations, and an action plan that they help you to create (through the phone consults).  Custom-tailoring, so to speak. 

It’s a good idea – part standardization and benchmarking, part customized buckets and missions.  We look forward to seeing how successfully it works for the participants.  Does it help them with funders?  Does it help them stay on-task with their missions?  Keep us in the loop!