We Have Always Done It That Way

In taking a thorough look at today’s corporate and government sectors, it has become very clear to me that associations must make the significant leap from simply educating our members to managing our trade or profession’s human capital. Why make the leap, do you ask? My first response is simply, if you don’t do it, someone else will. While true, there is more to it than that. The world of human capital management is broad and all-encompassing and deals with all things related to the recruitment, retention, professional development, training, and certification of individuals and how those systems impact the individual as well as the organization. It is even bigger than that as well. It looks at entire systems (a division or department, a company, an industry or profession) and assesses the impact that people have on those systems.

In the association space most of us in the education arena are very focused on one thing, education. And that tends to be defined in terms of conferences, seminars, and perhaps online education. A smaller population of educators focuses on certification or accreditation of professionals. This education focus is simply one very small piece of the overall human capital arena.

Human Capital cuts across every single traditional division or department within an association. It impacts IT, marketing, communications/PR, government relations, education/certification, meeting planning, finance, and research…every department or specialty. I have been touting for years the need for associations to start thinking about the shift from Education Director to Chief Learning Officer, and some organizations have made that leap. But the next evolution is a focus not just on learning, but on Human Capital.

The WHADITW might go something like this… It is time for associations to think in much grander strategic terms about how Human Capital is organized across the association’s entire trade or profession. Not simply themed conferences or seminars, but in the broadest, most global sense. Here are some questions to ponder.

How is your organization…

• Managing human capital across your entire trade or profession? Is it a cross-functional area (as it should be) or is it in a silo within the organization?
• Identifying and managing knowledge creation within your organization but outside of conferences and seminars? How about managing knowledge creation outside of your organization?
• Addressing the need to really know each specific job function within your trade or profession? Can you even identify them clearly? Can you map knowledge, skills and abilities (KSAs) to each job function? Do you even have the KSA’s identified?

Tags: Leadership, Professional Development, Staff Issues by Amy
No Comments »

In a survey of full-time employees in the U.S., Katzenbach partners found that the group was split 50/50 in their assessment of their own organization’s ability to “change the way things are done.” In the group that said it was easy to change things, 51% described their work environment as positive (and 67% of them enjoy their work). In the group where it was hard to change things, only 21% described it as positive (and only 48% enjoy their work).

Hmmmm. Which side are you on?

Tags: Staff Issues, We've Always Done It That Way by Jamie
2 Comments »

The success of associations in the 21st century will depend, in large measure, on whether the leaders of our organizations choose to set aside their self-aggrandizing agendas, petty personality conflicts and micro-managing tendencies to embrace the real responsibilities of stewardship that come with the staff and volunteer roles they occupy. It’s clear to just about everybody in our community that current governance approaches aren’t working for many organizations. So, if we’re really ever going to extract the “we have always done it that way” DNA from associations, those legacy systems must be among the first challenges we tackle.

To make it simpler and more attractive for boards, CEOs and other stakeholders to adopt a new mindset, I have articulated a set of ideas around what I call “innovation ungovernance.” Ungovernance offers an alternative perspective on what association stewardship can be and what it can achieve if we’re willing to let go of old ways of thinking, acting and being, and embrace the necessity of innovation. It is a framework for driving organizational success that is more consonant with the world in which associations operate today, and it certainly can be a catalyst for a renewal in the critical role associations have always played in the fabric of our democratic society.

Below are five ways that ungovernance thinking enables innovation in our organizations. I hope you will share your reactions, thoughts and ideas as comments. Also, I invite you to join a virtual dialogue on innovation governance where you can help shape this conversation for our community.

1. Ungovernance questions existing assumptions and beliefs—Associations face daunting challenges in the years ahead, and chief among them is the need to complete the transition of our organizations from the last century into this one. Unfortunately, the outdated core beliefs that guide association governance practices interfere with this process. Ungovernance seeks to challenge such orthodoxies by asking different questions, posing fresh and perhaps unpopular perspectives and demanding more original responses from leaders. Associations are long overdue to eradicate the toxic influence of denial and nostalgia in their organizations, and it must begin with a radical shift in the way we think about association stewardship going forward.

2. Ungovernance focuses on the association’s business model—Associations don’t exist to be governed, but to create value for stakeholders. Indeed, the future growth and advancement of associations depends on their ability to create distinctive new value in a time when the traditional economic framework for such value creation is rapidly eroding. Organizations in our community—not to mention the community as a whole—face a competitive landscape that has changed dramatically in the last decade, and will continue to morph in the next one. In this new context, association leaders must cultivate both the freedom to discover and develop inventive new strategies and the discipline necessary to execute them intelligently. As the Ungovernance Doctrine states, the definitive responsibility of association boards and CEOs is the capable stewardship of sustainable business models powered by innovation.

3. Ungovernance distributes responsibility—Current approaches to association governance embody the concept of centralized control. The future of associations, however, lives at or very near the edge, with contributors who are already deeply involved with—or are actually creating—what’s next. Ungovernance recognizes that sharing real responsibility for long-term success with all stakeholders supports the kind of robust and energetic collaboration necessary to achieve it. Contributors must be invited to engage with the association on their terms, but within a coherent and sustainable strategic framework that capitalizes on everyone’s unique talents and capabilities and inspires them to innovate consistently. In short, ungovernance is about creating an ecology of stewardship.

4. Ungovernance builds trust—At best, legacy governance practices create a kind of “synthetic trust” that must be enforced through bureaucratic structures, burdensome management mechanisms and restrictive policies. At worst, association governance actively undermines trust by creating a culture of risk aversion and fear. In contrast, authentic trust is organic, and emerges only through an unswerving commitment to build it everyday. Ungovernance enables innovation by inviting leaders to adopt the notion of “trust first” as their new default position, while working hard to earn the trust of those they serve by “walking the walk” of innovation in their own work.

5. Ungovernance inspires creativity and unleashes passion—Associations desperately need creative, passionate contributors who are willing to advance the work of innovation by experimenting with powerful ideas. Ungovernance is all about removing onerous constraints that impede the freedom to think expansively and act with confidence, while applying “generative constraints” that help ignite new thinking around difficult problems. Ungovernance embraces possibilities that fuel the passion of contributors who will drive the association’s long-term success. At the same time, ungovernance requires clarity around which possibilities have the greatest potential to become worthwhile strategic opportunities.

Tags: Innovation, Leadership, Staff Issues, Strategy, Technology, The Way We Think, We've Always Done It That Way by Jeff De Cagna
5 Comments »

I’ve been thinking about this difficult question for quite some time now, but I’ve been reluctant to write about it out of a genuine concern that the question itself might sound like an unprovoked attack on hard-working association staff and volunteers. This is definitely not my intention. Rather, I’m hoping we can make our colleagues’ lives a bit easier by creating a more favorable climate in which they can always bring their imagination to bear on the work of their organizations.

Albert Einstein suggested that “imagination is more important than knowledge,” and who am I to disagree with him. In a time of paradigm shift, what we think we know is increasingly less useful than what we can learn, imagine and create. In a recent post, Micropersuasion blogger Steve Rubel suggested that “the most important ‘tool’ you can have today in business is insatiable curiosity. The minute you lose it, you’re dead.” I think Steve is right on target and, from my perspective, curiosity and imagination go hand in hand: our curiosity feeds our imagination, and our imagination drives our curiosity.

Which brings me back to my inquiry about the possible imagination deficit in our community. I suppose what I’m really wondering is whether the work environment in associations today cultivates and nurtures the curiosity and imagination of staff and volunteers. One specific source of concern in this regard is the recent emphasis placed on so-called “data-driven strategies,” as advocated by ASAE & The Center’s 7 Measures of Success report. Without a doubt, there is a need to infuse the strategic decision-making process with useful data. But we must also recognize there are limits to what data can tell us, and there is good reason to challenge the notion that backward-looking information will always illuminate the wisest course of action for the future of our organizations. Associations definitely need clear, simple and focused strategy, but it should be “driven” by the value it will create for members, customers and stakeholders. Identifying and implementing that potential value necessarily will involve some combination of what we know, what we can learn, what we can imagine and what we can create together.

The powerful forces of paradigm shift are reshaping our society, and associations are going along for that very bumpy ride. But in the midst of this uncertainty, association professionals and volunteers have an extraordinary opportunity to envision a very different and more vibrant future for the organizations to which they have committed themselves. I challenge you to do just that by remaining curious and using your imagination everyday. If you’re able to do that, then in time the more important question won’t be whether there once was an imagination deficit, but what we did to eliminate it for the benefit of our community.

Tags: Innovation, Leadership, Membership, Professional Development, Staff Issues, Strategy, Technology, The Way We Execute, The Way We Involve Others, The Way We Lead, The Way We Manage, The Way We Think, The Way We Work Together, We've Always Done It That Way by Jeff De Cagna
4 Comments »

This story in the Washington Post provides a tragic and inspiring example of change: A Crash’s Improbable Impact. The story is about how the crash of Air Florida on a DC bridge in 1982 illuminated how communicating as they always had in the cockpit decreased the safety of the flights. It then led to dramatic change in how pilots, ship captains and even surgeons interact with their crews. Here is an excerpt:

As experts and airline executives digested the safety board’s report, they began to more closely scrutinize other problems in the cockpit that day. It emerged that Pettit and Wheaton were emblematic of aviation’s lingering cowboy culture, a residue of an era when fighter jocks from World War II and Korea flew for the airlines. In that gung-ho environment, captains were always right. They did not need advice, and co-pilots and other crew members often were afraid to assert themselves.

“It was a more romantic time frame when aviation, wasn’t just a transportation system, but that needed to change,” said Larry Rockliff, vice president of training for Airbus North America.

Tags: Staff Issues, The Way We Execute, The Way We Involve Others, The Way We Lead, The Way We Manage, The Way We Work Together, We've Always Done It That Way by David
1 Comment »

“Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.” (Leonardo da Vinci)

We need to make our organizations easier, clearer and simpler for everyone involved. We need to consistently, carefully and firmly identify everything we do that isn’t fundamental to advancing the larger purposes of our existence and get rid of those things as quickly as possible. This is what I mean by “radical simplicity.” In today’s world, less is not only more, much less is much more.

In recent months, I have come to view radical simplicity as a major strategic opportunity for associations that touches all aspects of what we do from governance to products and services to volunteer engagement. In far too many organizations in our community, the complexity we create ourselves interferes with our ability to achieve what we say we care about most, including supporting learning, building vibrant communities and delivering value to those we serve. We live in a complicated world to be sure, and there isn’t much we’re going to do to change that, except to the extent we are able to change both our organizations and ourselves.

“As simple as possible, but no simpler.” (Albert Einstein)

By suggesting we make radical simplicity a priority, I do not mean to imply we should “dumb down” our organizations. On the contrary, our organizations should be the hottest of hothouses, in which we plant the seeds of many new innovations, nurture them and allow them to grow in all kinds of surprising and unexpected directions. There is an important difference between the organic evolution of complexity in our thinking and the creation of synthetic complexity that so often occurs in our organizations. The former is a natural cycle of growth and change that systematically builds our capacity, while the latter involves the unnatural and unnecessary introduction of hierarchical and bureaucratic constraints into places and spaces where, if we took the initiative to cultivate them, trust, reciprocity and the capacity for self-organization could do the job quite well.

Radical simplicity isn’t about avoiding complexity altogether. It is about creating a markedly more intuitive and straightforward interface between our organizations and our members that enables us to make sense of the complexity we need and drastically reduces (if not eliminates altogether) the complexity we don’t.

“What is the simplest thing that could possibly work?” (Ward Cunningham, inventor of the wiki.)

On a very practical level, embracing radical simplicity in our work might make the difference between robust growth and anemic performance in key metrics. At the very minimum, a radically simpler organization should make for happier and more satisfied staff and members. For me, a focus on radical simplicity is itself a form of genuine innovation, and one that definitely can make a meaningful impact along multiple dimensions quickly.

To set your organization down the path of radical simplicity, consider raising the following five questions for discussion:

* What factors create complexity in your association’s work?
* How much of the complexity in your association is self-inflicted?
* How do “tried-and-true” solutions actually increase complexity in your organization?
* Why does your association have difficulty letting go of just about anything?
* What are the elements of a new business model that will allow your association to fully embrace radical simplicity?

To put your strategic thinking into action, consider one final inquiry: what three things about your association can you radically simplify in the next three months? If you can initiate these critical conversations, you will go a long way toward creating the right conditions for enduring success in your association.

Tags: Innovation, Leadership, Membership, Professional Development, Staff Issues, Strategy, Technology, We've Always Done It That Way by Jeff De Cagna
3 Comments »

I’m pretty sure I don’t need to write too much here, but in case you’re wondering why, here are my three simple, one-sentence answers:

1. It can’t be done–can you think of an organization of any kind that does “all things” equally well?
2. It shouldn’t be done–can you think of a good reason to pursue a strategy that sets up everyone in the organization for frustration and failure?
3. It doesn’t work anyway–can you think of a good reason why anyone would want to be member of an association that doesn’t get the first two?

Instead of being everything to everyone, consider being a single thing for most people, and let the others figure out where and how they want to play. I can’t tell you what that “thing” is, because it is going to be different for every organization. There are no ready-made answers. Figuring out what your association’s one thing should be is the whole point of strategy, but we tend to overlook this basic fact while we’re busy administering the thousand-and-one details contained in our multi-year, multi-page, multi-goal, multi-objective, multi-tactic and largely non-strategic strategic plans.

Why are we making it so hard, when we could be making it easier on ourselves and our members? Give up the illusion that being all things to all people is either desirable or achievable, and, instead, focus on the genuine strategic opportunities that will emerge as soon as you begin looking at the world in a new way.

Tags: Innovation, Leadership, Membership, Professional Development, Staff Issues, Strategy, Technology, We've Always Done It That Way by Jeff De Cagna
No Comments »

One thing that any organization should curtail are memos to all staff that are in response to one person violating a policy or procedure.

I am sure you have recently encountered, if not authored, one of these beastly things. Bashing all staff about the dress code, length of lunch break, or other policy violation when the issue is in response to the acts of a single person is cowardice, plain and simple. Have frank conversations with staff members who are out of line. If you can’t bring yourself to speak with them individually and provide appropriate feedback, at least avoid the temptation to memo the whole staff.

These type of memos to all hurt employee morale and are usually quite transparent to staff as to who they are really about. Either have the courage to actually manage your individual staff or the wisdom to not slam your entire office over an individual’s problems.

Tags: Leadership, Staff Issues, We've Always Done It That Way by David
No Comments »

The rule of thumb in our community is that an association should have an amount in reserves equal to 50% of its budget, just in case the organization’s financial position begins to deteriorate. So, for example, if I am the CEO of a $10 million association, I’m looking to accumulate $5 million in my reserve fund as expeditiously as possible. It makes complete sense, right?

Of course it does, and that’s why I can’t resist mucking things up by proposing a minor edit: let’s make 45% instead. And with the other 5%, let’s invest in the work of innovation for the future. After all, it’s a rule of thumb, not a rule, regulation or law, so we can make it whatever we want it to be. And just imagine the extraordinary impact that 5% of your reserves would have on the pursuit of innovation in the community your association serves!

There are great reasons to pursue this alternative. First and foremost, by investing 5% in innovation, you will be making a powerful statement that you value the creativity, energy and passion of the people who make up your association more than markets or financial instruments. Second, building a deep capacity for innovation creates tangible and intangible benefits for your association that will never come about from even the most successful portfolio of investments, including new ideas, new capabilities, brand equity, member engagement and new revenue streams. And finally, if your innovation efforts produces a winner, the financial upside to your future reserve fund investments could be quite considerable. Surely these attractive opportunities are worth an investment of 5%?

Well, I know what you’re going to say…we don’t like to take risks. You don’t think you’re taking risks in the market? Yes, I know you’re carefully managing your portfolio and doing the other stuff all smart investors do. That really isn’t the point, however. Risk is an element of today’s operating environment and present in every choice that leaders make. No amount of careful planning, smart implementation or wishful thinking will eliminate it altogether, nor do we want to eliminate it. (It would be incredibly boring and routine to run an organization in an environment of zero risk, wouldn’t it?) So, the issue isn’t whether your organization “likes” to take risks, but how much risk you’re willing to accept. And if you’re investing any of your reserves in the market, you’ve already decided that you will tolerate some risk in exchange for a certain level of reward.

Unfortunately, you exercise absolutely no control over the rewards the market will bring you. But you do have levers you can pull when it comes to innovation. By taking a strategic approach to innovation, your organization can invest its 5% in ways that minimize and manage risk by limiting uncertainty and controlling financial exposure, while maximizing whatever upside a given idea may produce. You can’t get away from risk, but you can take steps to make it work for you.

So, I’m thinking that just about every organization around could make do with 45% in reserves instead of 50%. I’m also thinking that the 5% your association invests in innovation will be, in the long run, the best investment it ever made.

Tags: Innovation, Leadership, Membership, Professional Development, Staff Issues, Strategy, Technology, We've Always Done It That Way by Jeff De Cagna
No Comments »

Let’s try a thought experiment….

After numerous complaints from members over a three-year period, your board concludes the association’s dues are simply too high. They are so high, in fact, they have become the number one reason why even very good prospects don’t join. After extensive deliberation and discussion of the issue, the board votes to get rid of dues permanently, even though these payments represent at least 20% (and sometimes more) of your association’s revenue each fiscal year.

If confronted with this situation, what would you do differently?

If you don’t know, why? If you do, why aren’t you already doing it?

Tags: Innovation, Leadership, Membership, Professional Development, Staff Issues, Strategy, Technology, We've Always Done It That Way by Jeff De Cagna
2 Comments »

Associations love to copy the work of other individuals and organizations. Best practices are a big thing in our community, probably because the scarcity and constraints culture of associations leads us to conclude that best practices will be easier to implement and more cost effective over time. Unfortunately for us, there is overwhelming evidence that you cannot and will not build a truly great and successful organization simply by copying others. True success and true greatness come from daring to do what others can’t do or won’t try.

Personally, I loathe best practices, but I do recognize that some people like them, so I’ll hold off on further critique for now. But I still would like to challenge those association leaders enamored with best practices to consider the truly radical and counterintuitive notion of not duplicating what others do before first. Instead, be original. Rather than constantly “tweaking” someone else’s existing solutions to your context, open yourself up to fresh, different and even plainly absurd ways of thinking. (In this vein, remember the words of Albert Einstein, “If at first the idea is not absurd, then there is no hope for it.”) Take the time to consider the unique and creative contribution you, your team and your organization can make to addressing both new and long-standing challenges in surprising ways.

Best practices stifle meaningful innovation and embrace status quo thinking. (Oh, did I write that out loud?…;>)) But I know I’m not telling you anything you don’t already know. Leadership isn’t about driving our associations down toward the lowest common denominator. Haven’t we had enough of that? Genuine leadership values and demands authenticity, creativity and originality in the work of every contributor and from the organization as a whole. Seize the opportunity to become a true pioneer, and let the laggards copy you. Before long, they will be eating your dust!

Tags: Innovation, Leadership, Membership, Professional Development, Staff Issues, Strategy, Technology, We've Always Done It That Way by Jeff De Cagna
3 Comments »

The association community needs a credible advanced degree that offers association professionals an educational pathway other than the CAE. An even more important reason to create such a degree program is the dearth of executive-level learning and development that actually helps association leaders operate effectively in a time of profound, accelerating and intensifying disruption and discontinuity. Let me put it another way: there is good reason to question whether today’s association leaders are adequately prepared to deal with the realities of the genuine paradigm shift that is already taking place in our society. Can we really afford to do nothing to address this issue?

To initiate a dialogue on this topic, let me offer the following specific thoughts about how I would design an executive master of science in association leadership (EMSAL) degree program:

+EMSAL would be a 20-month, cohort-based program organized into five four-month learning modules with intensive course sessions conducted once per month on Friday and Saturday.

+Each cohort would include no more than 25 participants, but multiple cohorts could be in the program at once, with groups entering in September, January and May if necessary.

+During each module, cohort members would be organized into five different project teams, so that each participant would have the opportunity to collaborate with everyone else in the cohort. Each module would conclude with a team project.

+The five module topics would be (1) The Historical Evolution of Associations, (2) The Role of Associations in a Global Society, (3) The Role of Associations in Industry and the Professions (4) The Role of the Individual in Associations and (5) Leadership of Associations in the 21st Century.

+The global society module would include a study mission of some length (perhaps 10-14 days) outside of North America.

+The course curriculum would be multidisciplinary, drawing on a variety of fields including anthropology, business and management, economics, education, future studies, history, leadership, natural and physical sciences, political science, psychology, sociology and technology.

+Both individual and team assessment would be a part of determining whether a participant successfully completes the program, including individual learning portfolios, peer evaluations and team projects.

+Learning facilitation would be conducted by both faculty from the university partner and senior leaders in the association community.

I realize this is an ambitious program design, and that is entirely intentional. Some in our community appear believe that what we do in associations isn’t important enough to merit the most forward-looking and intensive learning and leadership development opportunity possible. I strenuously disagree. We need to give association leaders today and tomorrow every opportunity to build their understanding of the forces of paradigm shift so they can elevate the quality of their leadership going forward. We have a deep responsibility to these leaders, their organizations and members, the professions, industries and fields their associations serve and to society as whole to make this kind of innovation a priority. I hope we will soon be prepared to act on making it real.

Note: A version of this post originally appeared on the Principled Innovation Blog.

Tags: Innovation, Leadership, Professional Development, Staff Issues, Strategy, We've Always Done It That Way by Jeff De Cagna
2 Comments »

When confronted with a problem, human beings instinctively want to solve it. Most of the time, that instinct serves us well, especially when it comes to both routine difficulties and matters of life and death. But more often than we might suspect, there are golden opportunities not to follow our instincts and, instead, let the problems we face “solve us.”

Solve us you ask? It is an insight that I took away from my graduate work with Professor Robert Kegan in the late 1990s. As Professor Kegan says, “Each of us does the best we can coping within the world of our assumptive design.” To put it another way, the assumptions we make everyday about every aspect of our life experience shape the way we make sense of and interact with the world. In effect, our assumptions allow us to design the world in which we want to live, one that is often at odds with the “realities” experienced by others. We cope by resolving this dissonance, which is why we are very intent on solving problems.

But what if we had sufficient awareness to recognize that our problems might not be the actual problem? What if we could see that sometimes the problem is simply an indicator of flawed or, at least, untested assumptions? What if we could step outside of the problem and look at our relationship to it so that we might understand it in a new way? Without a doubt, it is easier to ask these questions than it is to do what they ask. Nevertheless, I believe what I am writing about here is an absolutely critical capability that both staff and volunteer association leaders must develop going forward.

Let’s think briefly about how letting problems solve us might influence our work on strategy. Strategic planning is clear-cut method for solving the problems we have with ambiguity, complexity and uncertainty. In strategic planning, we identify mostly what we know we know today, and we do a little bit of elaboration on it to give it a future feel. Then, we pre-determine the outcomes we want to achieve and work fastidiously toward reaching them. No mess, no fuss. This approach may be clean and neat, but it is neither authentic nor pragmatic, given what we know is true about the current strategic landscape. In contrast, letting the problem solve us challenges our assumptions along multiple dimensions, especially our commitment to knowing all the answers even before the questions are asked. Letting the problem solve us focuses instead on learning as we go, exercising judgment and constantly testing our assumptions. From this process, not only will we achieve different results, but our approach to strategic leadership also will be different.

So, the next time you confront a problem in your work, consider stepping back from trying to solve it immediately. Instead, see if the problem can solve you.

Tags: Innovation, Leadership, Membership, Professional Development, Staff Issues, Strategy, Technology, We've Always Done It That Way by Jeff De Cagna
2 Comments »

The June 6th issue of Associations Now offers an interesting glimpse into salary equity (or inequity) for association staff. The article entitled, “Determining Your Present Value” is a summary of the recently published Association Executive Compensation & Benefits Study, 1st Edition - published earlier this year by ASAE/The Center. While most of the statistics do not seem to surprise me at all, Figure 3 seems to really annoy me. This is the CEO Median Total Compensation by Gender. It compares total compensation by staff size and by male/female gender. It also provides comparative information based on the 2004 study.

The figure shows that for an association with an average staff size of 21-50, male CEOs make an average of $243,000 annually compared to $181,000 for their female counterparts. Maybe not so surprising to you, but what is appalling is that in the 2004 study the report indicates the following male/female amounts $231,000/$173,000 respectively.

The 2004 difference is $58,000. You would expect that the gap is closing, but based on this article, it is, in fact widening. The difference in 2006 is $62,000.

So why in the world is this happening? One might suggest that male CEOs report more experience, but in fact, in this study both males and females reported a median of six years experience in the position.

I think this article begs several questions – but here is a kicker — What up-and-coming female executive wants to run an organization and get paid less than her male counterparts? If she is coming from GenX or the Millennials, the quick answer is – no one.

Our generations view our male counterparts as equals – no better than we are. We fully expect gender pay equity. What will happen to those GenX and Millennial women who aspire to be association CEOs one day, who view this study and rethink their professional choice? Maybe they will jump to the “dark side” and become consultants as each of us has.

Tags: Leadership, Staff Issues, We've Always Done It That Way by Amy
2 Comments »

(Note: the idea for this post was generated by Ben Martin over at the CAE Blog. Thanks Ben! Is this what you had in mind?)

Association executives are understandably results-focused (pardon the jargon). The CEO of an association answers to the Board””a group of people who are not expected to be experienced in running nonprofit organizations, and are expected to change positions or rotate off the board every year. If you want to keep your job in this context, then you had better produce visible results.

With this focus on results, however, comes a tendency to ignore the very powerful impact of the means used to produce those results. There are always several paths to the results we seek, and the choices we make along those paths have real consequences for staff, volunteers, and other stakeholders as well. While the attitude of “I don’t care what it takes, let’s just get it done” is in fact admired in our culture, it can get you into trouble.

For example, several researchers in the area of emotional intelligence in the workplace have noted that the “pacesetter” style of leadership is only effective in the short term. Leaders that drive people hard””and in the process run roughshod over emotions and relationships””may produce results in the short term, but over the long-term the negative impact of that behavior on other people in the office takes its toll. Systems cannot sustain themselves in that kind of environment, and long-term results are better supported by environments marked by understanding, compassion and empowerment.

It doesn’t need to be a harsh, pace-setting environment, however, for the focus on results to become a problem. Too many associations, for example, end up putting too much pressure on their senior staff to get things done (and done “right”). Out of a desire to get things done, senior staff in associations often end up hoarding work to themselves. It’s easier to just do it themselves, they argue, than to include other staff in the process or delegate parts of the work to others in the organization. While it is true that when they do it themselves they generate good results, they also create an environment where talented younger staff learn that they are not trusted to do substantive work. This will sap initiative from these younger workers and likely lead to higher turnover. The time saved and the decreased risk of quality problems are often offset by overall productivity and turnover costs.

Even at the Board level, the means are just as important as the ends. Too many associations hire consultants to deliver complex strategic planning processes that focus almost exclusively on the ends: an elegant and detailed strategic plan. In most cases, they are successful in generating those results (the plans are quite nice!), but in the process they have failed to develop the capacity of the Board or the staff to think or act strategically on an ongoing basis. How you develop the plan is as important (if not more important) than the plan that emerges. With increased attention to the means, you can still generate a clear strategy, but you can do it in a way that will actually increase the chances of an organization being able to leverage the strategy for long-term results.

In the long run, knowing that the means to an end is an end in itself is a far more efficient and effective management principle than the ends justify the means.

Tags: Staff Issues, Strategy, The Way We Execute, We've Always Done It That Way by Jamie
2 Comments »

The concept of emotional intelligence was popularized in the last decade primarily by psychologist and author, Daniel Goleman. He and other researchers challenged our traditional definition of “smart” (people who did well in school and scored well on tests””tests like the IQ test that measured our reason, logic, memorization, and analytical capacity). According to the research of Goleman and others, however, measures of “emotional intelligence” (being able to manage and express feelings, having empathy for others, understanding and managing social relationships, etc.) are a better predictor of success than traditional measures of intelligence.

So why aren’t associations listening? We may invite Goleman to speak at our conferences, but typically we ignore much of what he says in the way we run our associations, at both the staff and volunteer levels. As human systems, our organizations by definition include an emotional component. There is an emotional side of decision making and strategy. There are emotions flowing among staff or among Board members””whether we like it or not. Remember, the emotional center of your brain sends its electric signals out much faster than the rational center. People will have their emotional reactions to things before they have a chance to rationalize them away. But if emotion is expressed or an emotional issue is raised, it is quickly skirted, ignored or actively suppressed. Many consider emotional expression “unprofessional.”

Yet there are ways to accept emotions as a part of the workplace and still uphold standards of professionalism. In terms of emotional expression, this simply requires clarification of ground rules. Outlawing all emotional expression is counterproductive, and although few associations explicitly state this as a norm, they often operate as if it were. This generates problems, however, because it encourages people to bottle up emotions as they arise. Over time, this creates pressure, so when emotion is expressed, it is usually quite intense (reinforcing the norm that you should not express emotion).

The alternative is to create an explicit ground rule that basic emotional expression is permitted. There are limits (no temper tantrums during staff meetings!), but if you can support people in accepting simple emotional expression, it will actually facilitate people’s ability to deal with issues as they arise, making for a more professional workplace in the end. This can also facilitate more productive meetings and interactions at the Board level.

In addition to expression, of course, you must also pay attention to the internal management of emotions. Expressions of emotion are usually greatly outnumbered by the number of times our “buttons” get pushed in the office, triggering an internal emotional reaction that tends to get in the way with us successfully doing our work. Simply being aware of this and developing techniques for managing this internally can also support a more productive and professional expression of emotion.

Tags: Staff Issues, The Way We Work Together, We've Always Done It That Way by Jamie
No Comments »

Diversity is given a lot of lip service in associations. We see diversity initiatives, diversity committees, diversity scholarships, and more. However, diversity is most often viewed as a necessary evil at worst and a numbers game at best. Members of diverse groups (of a different nationality, gender, age, etc., than the “average” member) are purposefully placed on boards and committees to meet diversity goals and/or to be politically correct.

Diversity is usually not seen for what it really is: a business strategy. As Frans Johansson is most famous for expressing, diversity brings greater potential for a wider range of perspectives and ideas which can lead to new and improved products and services. A great strategy for getting out of the “we’ve always done it that way” mentality would be to truly embrace diversity and the value it could bring to your association.

And, contrary to popular belief, probably the first clue that an association hasn’t fully embraced diversity is that it still has a diversity committee.

Tags: Innovation, Leadership, Staff Issues, We've Always Done It That Way by Mickie
3 Comments »

“Treat people the way you would want to be treated” is an adage that we hear a lot and on the surface it seems to make sense, but the problem is that it doesn’t often work when applied to staff or volunteer motivation/recognition. It assumes that all people want to be treated the same, and that just isn’t true. You might find a staff lunch a nice treat, but your staff might find a Starbucks gift certificate and keeping lunch to themselves a better treat. You might find being “employee of the month” a great reward, but your staff might find it embarrassing. You might find a Waterford crystal desk clock an extra-special gift; your past president might consider it next year’s number one re-gift.

You should treat people the way THEY want to be treated. The challenge is that this takes some effort. You need to get to know your staff and volunteers and discover what makes each of them tick. In the end, it will be well worth the time invested.

Tags: Staff Issues, We've Always Done It That Way by Mickie
No Comments »

“Everything would be fine if it weren’t for [fill in the blank].”

How often have you heard such a statement in an association? This person could be a rank-and-file member, someone on the Board, or a staff person at any level. Whoever they are, they are definitely a problem. Too often, they are defined as the problem.

As such, the solutions associations develop in response tend to be focused on that individual “problem person,” but this too often makes matters worse. While it is true that there are individuals whose behavior or attitude can negatively impact the performance of an organization, it is rarely a case of simple cause and effect. Organizations are complex systems, and looking only at the problem person leaves out too many other important factors, so solutions that focus on the problem person usually fall short. As quality guru W. Edwards Deming said, “defects are always a sign of system failure.”

Consider three typical responses to problem people.

Termination
The obvious solution to a problem is to get rid of it. For staff, this means termination. If they are volunteers, it’s a bit trickier, but let’s be honest””there are ways to leverage the volunteer system to ensure that certain people do not volunteer any more. While in some cases, termination takes care of the problem behavior, in too many cases it does not””the problem behavior pops up in the form of a new individual. Problem people are often reflecting a frustration in the system. While it seems like it is one person’s personality (and that certainly would play a role), as long as the root frustration in the system is not addressed, new problem people are bound to emerge.

Write a policy
If you are afraid to get rid of the problem person, then the next means of control to which you can turn is policy. If you don’t like the behavior of someone, then write (or enforce) a policy that outlaws that behavior. A common example of this is when one or two staff people are perceived to be abusing flex time or not putting in enough hours, and suddenly the entire staff is then forced to punch in using a time clock. While that policy may convince your problem person to put in more hours, it also generates many new problems from the people who now feel like they are not trusted or have to waste time on bureaucratic details instead of getting their work done.

Train everyone
Similar to the policy solution, providing training to everyone in the areas where the “problem person” is perceived to be deficient is also a common solution. If people have trouble communicating with the problem person, then provide the Board with communication skills training. While this solution probably won’t hurt (who couldn’t use a brush up on communication skills?), it rarely solves the problem. The problem person usually sees through the ploy and gets defensive about the whole training, and the others often see it as a waste of time (“I already know how to communicate””the problem is him!”). The real value of the communication training is often lost.

So what’s the solution? First of all, the solution is not simple. These three typical solutions oversimplify the situation. There is nothing wrong with firing people, writing and enforcing policies, or providing training, but do not fall into the trap of using blunt instruments like these to solve complex and delicate problems. Second, problems require direct attention, and all three of these solutions involve avoidance. Even the seemingly direct answer of termination implies a long period of avoiding the problem person as the behaviors were developing. Confronting and dealing directly with both the problems (and the problem people) on a continuous basis will often resolve the problems before they escalate.

Tags: Staff Issues, The Way We Work Together, We've Always Done It That Way by Jamie
5 Comments »

“We’ve tried it before and it didn’t work.” You have no doubt heard that conversation-ending, idea-busting statement before by association colleagues. You may have even muttered it yourself (but don’t admit it, please).

Of course there is great value in staff and volunteer leaders with a historical perspective of association activities. However, if you’re one of them, it’s important for you to realize that just as “we’ve always done it that way” is not a valid reason for continuing an approach, “we’ve tried it before and it didn’t work” is not a valid reason for abandoning an idea.

There may be situational or contextual reasons for past failures. Perhaps the timing was off. Perhaps the positioning was ineffective. Perhaps the target was inappropriate. Perhaps the implementation was weak.

The next time you are presented with an idea that you know has been attempted and failed in the past, don’t assume it will fail again. Describe the past attempt to the idea proposer and ask him or her what about the current circumstances is different leading him or her to feel the idea could succeed in the present situation. Give the individual time to investigate the idea, given this new (to them) information.

In the end, perhaps you will decide the idea really does stink or maybe you’ll discover it has great potential. The important point is that you don’t discount its consideration simply because it’s been done before.

Tags: Innovation, Staff Issues, We've Always Done It That Way by Mickie
No Comments »

Let’s be clear about something really important: the members don’t really own the association. The overwhelming majority of associations are structured as non-profit organizations and there can be neither individual nor group ownership of such entities. Non-profit organizations exist for the public good, and not for personal or private aggrandizement.

I think all association professionals should keep this in mind the next time they are asked to defer their day-to-day experience, marketplace insight and strategic judgment to the myopic decision-making of volunteers who, more and more, lack the time, energy and attention to properly attend to the business of their organizations. I am deeply concerned that if we continue to buy into the old saw that it is “the members’ association,” we will be complicit in driving our organizations down the pathways of extinction.

I’m not suggesting that the members don’t have a say or a critical role to play in what occurs within the organizations to which they belong. Not at all. The active involvement of members is crucial to long-term success. But just as important is the active and direct involvement of staff, partners and other stakeholders on a co-equal basis. Associations are not manufacturers of widgets, but creators of knowledge, experiences and context. These typically intangible resources cannot be effectively cultivated and nurtured in command-and-control hierarchies in which some lead and others follow. Instead, they demand highly diverse and collaborative environments in which leadership and followership are shared by all in equal measure.

No one owns the association, but everyone involved in its work takes ownership of its success or failure everyday. Our community is long overdue in recognizing this fundamental fact.

Tags: Leadership, Membership, Staff Issues, Strategy, We've Always Done It That Way by Jeff De Cagna
3 Comments »

Every association divides its work into departments. This is not unique to associations, of course, but associations seem particularly good at it. There are associations with less than ten staff people that are able to maintain six or seven departments! Division of labor is a rational thing to do, of course, and the department structure is not evil, but it does tend to generate a serious morale-buster: silo wars.

Even with one- and two-person departments, you will find people complaining about how the other departments are not pulling their weight, or are getting too much of the budget, or lack professionalism, etc. Nearly everyone complains about the “other” departments, and the complaints come from every level in the hierarchy. People waste time complaining about the silos, and they often end up constricting information flow because of unnecessary competitiveness. We’re all on the same team, people, why can’t we just get along?

Unfortunately, it is not just about getting along. No matter how strongly you urge your employees to cooperate and work cross-functionally, if you don’t take care of some important issues at the top of your organization, the silo wars will continue. It sounds counterintuitive, but working on issues among the senior management team is the best way to get the complaining at the staff level to stop. There are three key areas that require attention, all of which are areas that associations typically undervalue.

Focus your strategy
Silos will cooperate when they get clear messages about priorities. Association strategic plans typically break down by department, allowing each department to focus on their own goals, but also generating unending debates about whose goals are more important. All departments have importance, but your strategy still must have a focused rallying cry to guide the short- to medium-term. Everyone is important, but right now we’re focusing on this. When that is communicated clearly and consistently, people will more readily work together towards that goal.

Tighten your senior team
You must include accountability around silo competitiveness as a component of senior team effectiveness. Many associations do not. They overemphasize technical expertise (after all, government relations and meeting planning are fundamentally different things), allowing Vice Presidents to focus primarily on their own department. Issues of competition between departments then become “personal” (which means they are ignored, and fester). This dynamic needs to be nipped in the bud. Issues that generate competition need to be identified and resolved quickly and visibly at the very top of the organization. Without that behavior modeled, it will be too easy to start a campaign of justified complaining at the lower levels. When members of the senior team fail to do this, there must be consequences.

Make the time to do things together
You do not have to restructure into a “matrix” organization or send your people to an off-site to get them to work more cross-functionally. What they need most is a better understanding of what the other departments really do. To learn that, they need to spend time with their colleagues in other departments, working with them, talking to them, asking questions. This takes them away from their own work, and that is perfectly fine. The time you save in inter-departmental cooperation will more than make up for it. But the leadership must support this time investment and manage workflow accordingly. That might even involve modifying deadlines within your own department, if necessary. You must demonstrate your commitment to supporting cross-department cooperation if that is what you really want.

Tags: Staff Issues, Strategy, The Way We Manage, We've Always Done It That Way by Jamie
1 Comment »

How many times have you kept a position open while looking for that someone with just the right experience and/or expertise for your association job? Well I think experience and expertise are over-rated. And, credentials, well it’s almost blasphemy for me to say so as a certification consultant, but they are trumped too. Let’s face it, there are many jobs within an association for which attitude is WAY more important.

Dealing with member requests all day can be challenging. I used to work for a certifying agency and sometimes took call after call from individuals who’d failed a certification exam (including a few members of the Board of Directors). It takes a person with a special attitudinal gift to handle calls like those with grace (and frankly, that person likely isn’t me).

I understand the desire to hire staff with association experience since association work is often quite different from the corporate world. But honestly, have you EVER hired a genuinely nice person that wasn’t able to “get” the member focus?

In many association jobs, experience means little if your staff member has a lousy attitude. I’m confident you can train an inexperienced person how to do most (although not all) association jobs, but can you teach a rude or disgruntled person how to “delight” the members?

Next time you’re hiring, look for experience, expertise, credentials, AND attitude…but don’t settle for the former three without the latter.

Tags: Staff Issues, We've Always Done It That Way by Mickie
No Comments »

Marcus Buckingham has written extensively about how leveraging the strengths of your employees delivers dramatically better results than remediating their weaknesses. However, part of what comes with that power is finding a strength in your staff that they are passionate about. Here are a few questions, including a few follow-ups, that you can ask to get at that passion:

• If you could do anything you wanted here, what would you do?
• What do you want to be doing in five years?
• What would keep you here three more years?

These follow-up questions will work for any of the above to help you dig a little deeper and then tie it back to how you can leverage that passion:

• What are the steps you need to take to get there?
• Let’s talk about how we can work some of those things into your job and help you to reach your goal.

The key is that you have to be earnestly interested in helping them to achieve these things and be frank when you can’t. Staff will immediately sense lip service, so don’t bother if you don’t mean it.

Tags: Leadership, Professional Development, Staff Issues, We've Always Done It That Way by David
No Comments »

Email is a wonderful tool, particularly for associations who need to manage communication with members and volunteers who are often spread out across the country, or even the world. Even among staff in the same building, it enables a higher volume and higher speed of communication. Without email, you couldn’t keep up with the communication demands of your association job.

Like any tool, however, email is not right for every job. Take, for example, that time when you were angry with a colleague or had a conflict with a volunteer about how to manage a project. You got an email from this person that you feel went one step too far. You then sat down at your computer and shot off an email response, laced with frustration and indignation (known in some associations as a “nasty-gram”). Of course, you made sure to copy a few dozen colleagues and/or supervisors, so everyone could see how “correct” your point was. It’s only a few keystrokes to keep these people in the loop. Isn’t email great?

The problem is, the email response you then get from your colleague is even nastier, and includes a now expanded list of cc’s. You’ll be frustrated because for some reason your colleague did not address the rational points you made in your email””he brought in new points that are only distractions to the issue at hand! You’d better get started on that reply email. Is there any way you can copy the entire staff and board?

Stop.

Stop using email to communicate in conflict situations. It never works, and it usually makes things worse. All conflict situations are complex. If they were very simple, they would be resolved by now. Communication in a complex conflict is not merely a literal exchange of words. It requires back and forth, clarification of positions, examination of assumptions, and communication at the level of logic and emotion at the same time.

It is impossible to do that by email, because in email, there is no tone. When two people talk to each other, most of the meaning is conveyed in nonverbal communication, particularly the use of tone. Which words you emphasize and the pattern of raising or lowering tone as you speak is absolutely critical for people to know what you really mean. Consider the following point you made in your email:

“Things were going great, and then Bob came into the room.”

The reader of the email has to figure out what you mean. On one hand, you might have felt that things were actually going poorly (you were being sarcastic by saying they were great), and you wanted to make a point about how relieved you were that Bob came in the room to save the day. On the other hand, you might have meant that things really were going great””until the moment Bob came in, and it clearly it went downhill from there. The only way the email recipient would know which of these two drastically different meanings is accurate would be through your tone (which does not exist on email), or by context. That is, if they already know that you don’t like Bob, they will guess that you were implying that things were going downhill.

So not only do emails rob communication of tone, making the communication inherently more confusing, they also force the recipient to determine what you mean based on their previous knowledge of who you are and what you think. In conflict situations, that is not likely to be an accurate (or pretty) picture, so they are even more likely to interpret what you are saying in the worst possible way. Clicking the “send” button on an email in a conflict situation is like clicking on an automatic “escalate” button.

The answer, of course, is to not send the email. Walk down the hall. Pick up the phone. Make it the norm in your association to de-escalate the conflict when you get that frustrating email by responding directly, instead of through a nasty-gram. It may take a bit more time in the short term (and you will need to brush up on your conflict resolution and communication skills), but saves volumes of time in the long run by enabling quicker and more direct resolution of conflict.

Tags: Staff Issues, The Way We Work Together, We've Always Done It That Way by Jamie
3 Comments »

It is easy to jump on the “culture” bandwagon. You hear it everywhere: management books, keynote speeches””even your own intuition is telling you that organizational culture matters. If you want to succeed, you need to have (choose from the following platitudes and insert here): a strong culture, a healthy culture, a progressive culture, an innovative culture, a proud culture, “¦the list goes on.

Culture does matter, but too many associations end their exploration of culture once they have settled on one of the platitudes above. They choose a feel-good label for their culture and then command from on-high that such a culture is the priority of the organization. This is a path to disappointment, because organizational culture does not work that way.

Organizational culture is simply a collection of tacit assumptions and patterns of behavior that provide a subtext of “how things are done” at your organization. It has been developing and changing constantly since the organization was founded. It develops and changes whether or not leaders pay it any attention. So if you have a problem in the organization and you want to solve it, you had better understand your culture””beyond the platitudes.

Look beyond the language in your mission and vision statements. Look beyond the posters on the walls with inspirational quotes about teamwork. Look at the physical layout of your office. Look at who eats lunch together. Ask people what it takes to get things done, and when they answer, read between the lines to get at the core assumptions underlying your culture. This will provide outstanding guidance as you try to solve problems in the office.

You will likely find that sometimes the culture itself is part of the problem you are trying to solve. You’ll know this when all of your very excellent problem-solving activities strangely fail. In that case, it is the culture that is defeating you, and you’ll need to work on changing your culture. Changing culture is typically more evolutionary than revolutionary (although it does depend on where your organization is in the “life cycle”). If the solution you are trying to implement is starkly different than your current culture, give it plenty of time to take hold. Develop a program of small steps, giving each innovation time to take hold (and establish new patterns) before introducing additional changes.

In the end, jumping on the culture bandwagon is a good idea for associations, but only if they take culture more seriously and recognize that creating a positive culture will come from a collection of actions throughout the organization””actions that must be cultivated and cannot be demanded or commanded.

Tags: Staff Issues, The Way We Manage by Jamie
1 Comment »

Anyone managing associations knows that when groups of people work more smoothly together, the organization’s results are bound to improve. Everyone agrees that a high-functioning team is a good thing.

The typical response, however, when an association has a team or a staff that does not seem to be performing at its best, is to do some “team building” with the team in question. This often means paying a large sum of money to a trainer or consultant who will bring the team to an interesting location for a one- or two-day off-site meeting where the team can get to know each other better, play some fun games, learn some interesting concepts about trust or communication, and head back to the office refreshed and “built” as a team.

Unfortunately, that is all a lie. While the team will have fun and will learn interesting and useful concepts, it is highly unlikely that the team will be any more “built” than it was before the retreat. How many times have you gone on a team building retreat, and when you get back to the office the team is more effective together for a period of approximately three months before it reverts back to its old, dysfunctional patterns? Teams are “built” only when they can consistently perform better than they were before. It is unlikely you can achieve that after one retreat.

Real team effectiveness is based on deeply rooted patterns of interaction that do not emerge simply because team members “get along” well or have fun together. Building teams is best accomplished by helping teams to actually identify and work through real work-based problems. This may include some skill building or discussion of new concepts, but it must always be done in the very real context of getting work done. Associations need to take team building more seriously by making it a part of ongoing management concerns. Build team performance into management performance reviews. Provide ongoing internal and external resources to support teams in identifying and building more successful work patterns. Allow teams the space to tackle the tougher issues like conflict and accountability, rather than encouraging them to merely get along better.

If you want to bring your senior management team to a resort for a weekend and have them do trust falls with each other, more power to you. But don’t pretend this is teambuilding. It may be a nice reward for the hard work your people have put in””they will likely emerge refreshed and relaxed. But keep the teambuilding real and make it an ongoing part of the work of your association.

Tags: Staff Issues, The Way We Manage, We've Always Done It That Way by Jamie
4 Comments »

Why is everyone afraid of conflict? Board, members, committees, staff groups, leaders, followers””the one thing they all have in common is that they are afraid to confront each other with conflicts or significant differences in opinions.

For example, an association executive recently asked advice from colleagues on a listserver about what to do about a committee co-chair who had “done a lot of work”¦but stepped on lots of toes and caused extra work for staff.” The incoming president was suggesting not reappointing this person as co-chair.

Instead of dealing with the conflict, the first response is to end the relationship. Unfortunately, this response is typical. At all levels of associations people bury conflict. They hide it. They ignore it. They pretend it isn’t conflict. They lie about it. If it gets really bad, they raise the stakes and take actions that simply remove the possibility of the conflict emerging again (e.g., ending the relationship). Anything but confronting it head on (like, for example, having a candid conversation with a volunteer about how his behavior is upsetting other volunteers or staff).

It is true, of course, that everyone has had experiences of being in conflict where the situation got uncomfortable, tense, maybe even painful and frustrating. That’s why we run the other way. But remember””just because conflict has been unpleasant, doesn’t mean it always will be. Conflict is a natural part of every single human system, so instead of trying to avoid it (which is impossible), how about learning how to deal with it more effectively?

It isn’t rocket science. It takes a little bit of knowledge and perhaps some skill development, but mostly it takes the courage to simply try a new approach. Start small on the less “important” conflicts, and as you make progress you can tackle the bigger issues. But above all, start. The cost of ignoring conflict can be overwhelming.

When conflict is avoided, the real issues never get out on the table. A pattern will then emerge in your association where the “norm” is to hide what you really think (or at best vent about it at the water cooler). So at meetings, people talk around the difficult issues, retiring to their offices without a clear sense of what was agreed to or what they should do next. In fact, in cultures where conflict is routinely avoided, being “accountable” becomes quite difficult, and results suffer””all because we were afraid to deal with conflict.

So it may feel like it would be less painful to avoid that conflict, but don’t be fooled. In the long run you will suffer more by avoiding it. Start paying attention to the conflict in your association. Notice where it happens and notice when you and others avoid it. Then start the work of changing the pattern, and prepare yourself because the first step in changing the pattern will be for you to try dealing with your conflict differently.

Tags: Leadership, Staff Issues, The Way We Work Together, We've Always Done It That Way by Jamie
2 Comments »

We sometimes hear leaders in associations from both the staff side and the volunteer side debating the pros and cons of being “member driven” versus “staff driven.” We have yet to hear a compelling argument that rules definitively in favor of one over the other. It seems to vary by context, with the bottom line containing an unsurprising mix of responsibilities for driving divided between staff and members.

The debate over staff versus member driven, however, is really just a reframing of the more basic question: who is in charge? And while we agree that there is no singular or simple answer to that question at the macro level (the macro answer is “it depends”), this should not provide association leaders with an excuse for avoiding this question within their own, specific, micro-level situations.

To be successful, association leaders must clarify and pinpoint a specific answer to that question within their own context, and that is not just at the Board meetings, where the staff versus member paradigm would expect the topic to come up. Confusion about who is in charge appears elsewhere in the association’s business as well:

Staff
Association leaders often espouse “flat” organizations, valuing input from everyone, even suggesting “consensus” decision making. At the same time, however, they structure their organizations hierarchically, where reporting relationships define authority in a clear and vertical fashion. You must confront this contradiction so staff will understand when they have input and when they do not. There is room for broad input, but do not hide the fact that a very few actually have the decision making power on major questions. You need not concentrate all control in the hands of the managers, but be truthful and clear about areas where control is not shared, and everyone will work more effectively.

Related Organizations
When associations create related organizations (often driven by benefits of a different tax status), they too often create independent Boards and structures of organizations that they intend to be literally “subsidiaries” of the association. It is easy to focus on the purpose of the new organization, its mission, and empowering the new Board that is set up to lead effectively, and in doing so avoid the “who’s in charge” question entirely. The two Boards then operate for years, even decades, without confronting huge contradictions in expectations and purpose. Each Board feels it is in charge, yet it never confronts the issue head on.

It takes courage to confront these “who is in charge” conversations, but remember: while the conversations may be difficult, they won’t kill you, and the longer you put off having them, the more difficult they will be.

Tags: Leadership, Membership, Staff Issues, The Way We Involve Others, We've Always Done It That Way by Jamie
2 Comments »

Performance evaluations certainly sound better in theory than they do in practice. From an organizational perspective, it makes perfect sense, in theory, to monitor and evaluate the performance of employees. Those who do not perform well could be corrected or terminated, thus improving the overall performance of the system. Those who perform exceptionally well could be rewarded, providing incentives for others to increase their performance. The process, in theory, seems straightforward: sit the employee down with the supervisor, perhaps with the assistance of a written form, and identify a set of goals and objectives, or standards at the beginning of the year, and then meet again at the end of the year to measure results against those standards.

That’s a nice fantasy, isn’t it? This “theory” of performance evaluation is unfortunately riddled with questionable assumptions and an incomplete understanding of human systems and how they work. Conventional wisdom has told us for years why we need to do what we have been doing, and it is time we start challenging this wisdom based on wisdom we have gained from our actual experiences in organizations.

Conventional wisdom: when employees know their performance will be monitored and evaluated, it will motivate them to perform better.

Experiential wisdom: performance evaluations do not motivate people””they only scare them, and fear is never a good motivator in organizations. At the end of the day, people are afraid of getting “dinged” in their evaluation. It is psychologically uncomfortable to have a “superior” give you a bad grade, so your focus turns to things that will cause you to get a good grade (not necessarily things that will help you develop or help your organization’s performance). With your attention on avoiding a reprimand, you end up actually lowering your sights to the level just above that mark.

Conventional wisdom: we need the performance evaluation system to document poor performance as legal cover to our terminations.

Experiential wisdom: yes, you need to document poor performance, but no, you do not need to do it through the performance evaluation system. Try creating a separate system specifically for documenting poor performance and keep your performance evaluation system focused wholly on employee development and organizational performance. Once people know that their evaluations can be held against them, trust disappears, and with trust goes open expression and communication. Without open communication, the performance evaluation system cannot work.

So take a look at what your experience in your organization is telling you, and use that to redesign the performance evaluation system. Clarify the intent of the system, and revise the structure accordingly. Allow for more frequent evaluations of performance. Allow for feedback to flow in all directions (yes, bosses, it is useful to be evaluated by your subordinates). Give people the time they need to implement the system effectively. And when you are done, use your newly acquired experiential wisdom (not conventional) to make the necessary modifications.

Tags: Staff Issues, The Way We Manage, We've Always Done It That Way by Jamie
No Comments »

When is the last time you heard anyone in your association say, “Oh boy, it’s time for staff meeting!” In fact, most people hate staff meetings, but for some reason we treat it like going to the dentist: we hate being there, but we know we’re better off in the long term by going.

It doesn’t have to be that way (at least for staff meetings). It is true that staff meetings serve a purpose in the long term. We need to be aware of what others in the organization are doing. We need to know how what we are doing connects to the organization’s strategy.

But staff meetings do not need to be painful and boring. In fact, with the pressures on association staff to do more with less, we really cannot afford to spend as many as two hours per week wasting time. We need new solutions that allow staff to communicate and act strategically, without boring them to tears.

For example, you can make staff meetings more engaging and focused by distinguishing between big-picture discussions of strategy from the more simple sharing of implementation details. Patrick Lencioni, in his book, Death by Meeting, recommends that “strategic meetings” occur only monthly, cover one or two topics, and require staff to do homework and intense preparation before they convene. In the weekly tactical staff meetings, however, the agenda is created mid-way through the meeting, based on issues identified in the initial go-round. By creating a clearer context for discussion, the meetings can actually be more engaging and productive.

There are also ways to leverage technology in solving this problem. What about creating an internal staff meeting blog? Individuals or department heads can post reports on what they are doing. Other staff can comment with questions and get responses to areas that are specifically relevant to them, skipping over the parts that are not as important. And people can do this on their own time during the week. This way when you do actually convene a meeting, people have more information when they start, and the conversation is more focused and effective.

Those are simply two ideas for changing the way you do staff meetings. You will have to experiment with alternatives. Try them out””at least for a month or two””and then evaluate their effectiveness as a staff. When people are genuinely excited about coming to the meetings, you will know you have it right.

Tags: Staff Issues, The Way We Manage, We've Always Done It That Way by Jamie
3 Comments »

Generational differences receive a lot of attention these days, particularly in the association community, but too often in comments about these differences fall into the “sky is falling” category:

“¢ All the baby boomers are retiring!
“¢ Generation X are not “joiners!”
“¢ Millennials only want to play video games!

As researchers begin to identify trends in attitudes and behavior that vary from generation to generation, association executives struggle with how to apply that information to the actual running of their business. I actually heard an association executive suggest that the best strategy to deal with generation X is to simply wait them out. Millennials, he suggested, are joiners, so we just need to wait for them to take over the leadership positions in the association!

Get a hold of yourself, Chicken Little. The first step in dealing with generational shifts is to look beyond the stereotypes that have been generated over the last few years. Some of them are quite accurate, but some of them do not tell the whole story. For example, you may have noticed that there are fewer Generation X members entering your volunteer “pipeline.” While they may have different attitudes about “joining” and volunteering than their predecessors, the Baby Boomers, the fact is this drop in numbers is to be expected. Generation X was the baby “bust” after the boom. The Department of Labor predicts a net decline in the middle management workforce in this country by 10% between 2000 and 2010.

Sometimes, of course, the stereotypes are accurate: yes, generations are different. Knowledge of those differences, however, can only help you manage your association more effectively if it is paired with a critical organizational discipline that is too often neglected: the discipline of conversation. How do you manage the ongoing conversation with your members to uncover the relevance of generational differences? You know that there are generational differences, but it is only through a careful and respectful conversation with your membership that you will uncover the relevance. If younger members aren’t volunteering as much, don’t rely on an article to tell you why””ask them yourself. All that background information you got on Generation X will help guide the conversation, but the conclusions about what to do differently will only emerge from the conversation itself.

Have you actually examined your own organization’s capacity for conversations? How do you engage your staff in conversations about strategy and implementation? What is the quality of conversation during performance reviews? To what standard do you hold your Board in their conversations? And at the most basic level, how do you conduct meetings? Are people focused on the topic and listening to one another?

Take the answers to these questions and apply them to generational differences. Try intentionally starting some new conversations across different generations, and see where it leads. Remember, the goal is not to find the static answers; the goal is to find dynamic strategies for ongoing renewal.

Tags: Leadership, Membership, Staff Issues, Strategy, The Way We Work Together, We've Always Done It That Way by Jamie
1 Comment »