nonprofit executive director

The Nonprofit President/CEO–How Much Board-CEO Trust Is Involved?

The Nonprofit President/CEO–How Much Board-CEO Trust Is Involved?

By; Eugene Fram

Viewer Favorite–Revised & Updated

The title, president/CEO for the operating head of a nonprofit, clearly signals to the public who has the final authority in all operating matters and can speak for the organization.* It is not an ambiguous set of titles. However, the terms “manager” or “executive director” can be quite ambiguous and do not generate the same external understanding or respect. An executive director can be the administrator in a small church or the operational head of a large arts organization. The public and some corporate directors often view managers and executive directors (because of the organizational history of nonprofit) as “hired hands,” not as professionals who, with strategic vision, are able to manage all operational activities. (more…)

The Enron Debacle, 14 years Ago—2015 Lessons for Nonprofit Boards?

The Enron Debacle, 14 years Ago—2015 Lessons for Nonprofit Boards?

By: Eugene Fram

In 2001 Enron Energy collapsed due to financial manipulations and a moribund board. It was the seventh-largest company in the United States. Andrew Fastow, the former CFO and architect of the manipulations served more than five years in prison for securities fraud. He recently offered the following comments to business board members that, in my opinion, are currently relevant to nonprofit boards. (http://bit.ly/1JFGQ6T) Quotations from the article are italicized. (more…)

How Can Nonprofits Accommodate To External Influences? Some Field Observations

How Can Nonprofits Accommodate To External Influences? Some Field Observations

By: Eugene H. Fram

Ruth McCambridge, editor of Nonprofit Quarterly, points out “Our organizational management, (board) styles and structures are affected by the four external influences.” See bolded items below. (http://bit.ly/1HSwrZY) Following are some specific field observations I have encountered that, over several decades, support her model relating to external influences.

The fields in which we work: McCambridge points out that arts organizations have dual have leadership models—artistic and business. However, unless specified which has final authority, the system can lead to continual conflict between the two; the artistic leader wanting the most authentic productions and the business leader concerned with budget realities. The final authority is often determined by which leader has the CEO title.

Human services boards and staffs often operate at a much higher emotional level than other types of nonprofits. Examples: Some of these board members consider themselves “families,” frequently fail to make the hard choices when board members are ineffective directors. Even the least productive board chair is venerated. Staff members similarly can be emotionally bonded, failing to realistically acknowledge the strengths and weaknesses of others.

On the other hand, board members of trade or professional associations often look to the staff as “servants” who should closely follow board directions. Example: One association CEO I encountered creativity developed a million dollar reserve for the group. Yet he was only allowed to spend up to $5K of a multimillion-dollar budget without formal board approval.

The regulatory environment in which we function: It can be argued that nonprofit organizations are much more regulated than their for-profit counterparts. In addition to traditional state and Federal corporation laws, all nonprofits must abide by the Federal Intermediate Sanctions Act that prohibits them from providing excess benefits to anybody in a position to influence actions—internally a management or staff person and externally a vendor, donor or volunteer, etc. Charitable and public benefit nonprofits must annually file an IRS Form 990 that has, in addition to financial data, 38 questions related to corporate governance. Health care nonprofits face a multitude of regulations related to staff certification and relationships with patients. Example: A psychiatrist employed by a counseling agency resigned and took patient records with him. The employing organization had to sue for return of the records because agency, not the psychiatrist, was responsible for confidentiality.

Our communities’ spoken belief systems: Having worked with nonprofits on both US coasts, I have generally observed that CEOs on the east coast are given much more managerial latitude once a nonprofit start-up moves beyond its early stages. Example: I have consulted with two west coast nonprofits both well beyond the startup stage—one with a budget of $6 million and he other with a budget of $10 million. A community model that required significant number of board interventions covered both. If they were on the east coast, both would likely have had CEOs with the title “President /CEO” with much more operating flexibility than the CEOs I observed on the west coast.

Our communities’ cultural norms and dynamics: Peter Drucker, the noted management expert, is said to have remarked, “Culture eats strategy for breakfast every morning.” He meant that strategy needs to be in line with culture to succeed. Nonprofit boards frequently align with this comments. Example: If a nonprofit board is a conservative one and content with a “mind the store CEO culture,” one or two board members can’t do much to drive change, until the CEO retires or leaves.

Suggestion for action

With the assistance of an independent moderator, many boards could benefit from an in-depth discussion of these four issues every couple of years. It may open discussion on some internal issues that need corrective action.

When Will Nonprofit Boards Learn to Plan for Succession?

When Will Nonprofit Boards Learn to Plan for Succession?

By: Eugene Fram

Revised & Updated Viewer Favorite

The CEO has resigned with two weeks notice. Whatever the scenario, the pace of the organization will likely slow. Some senior managers may vie for the position or, in self-interest begin to look for new positions, as insurance. Staff members begin to speculate about the future of their department and their positions.

A search committee is cobbled together to explore possibilities for a replacement. According to a recent study, such turmoil is not unusual among nonprofits in transition periods. (more…)

Carnegie Hall Board Dissonance–What Lessons For Nonprofits?

Carnegie Hall Board Dissonance–What Lessons For Nonprofits?

By: Eugene H. Fram

Ronald O. Perelman (Carnegie Hall Board Chair) …was critical of trustees for placing “a premium on avoiding tensions and disagreement” and said he will leave (the board) in a month. The Problem: Clive Gillinson (Executive Director & Artistic Director) signed a $100,000 contract that might include a conflict of interest…to which Perelman (and two other directors) objected. The board agreed to engage an independent lawyer to investigate the situation, but Perelman, in apparent anger, reported progress has been too slow. *

Ronald Perelman’s abrupt resignation sounds a “clarion call” for all nonprofit board members. When an executive director appears to overstep his/h authority and/or when the board has not vetted a significant contract, nonprofit board members need to take proactive stands. Although the Carnegie Hall board is about 78 strong and tends to glitter with “star quality,” there are obvious parallels with nonprofit reactions to similar disruptions. How should directors of smaller nonprofits react to morale crises of this nature? (more…)

Nonprofit Boardroom Elephants and the ‘Nice Guy’ Syndrome: A Complex Problem

Nonprofit Boardroom Elephants and the ‘Nice Guy’ Syndrome: A Complex Problem

By: Eugene Fram

An updated and revised viewer favorite post

At coffee recently a friend serving on a nonprofit board reported plans to resign from the board shortly. His complaints centered on the board’s unwillingness to take critical actions necessary to help the organization grow.

In specific, the board failed to take any action to remove a director who wasn’t attending meetings, but he refused to resign. His term had another year to go, and the board had a bylaws obligation to summarily remove him from the board. However, a majority of directors decided such action would hurt the director’s feelings. They were unwittingly accepting the “nice-guy” approach in place of taking professional action.

In another instance the board refused to sue a local contractor who did not perform as agreed. The “elephant” was that the board didn’t think that legally challenging a local person was appropriate, an issue raised by an influential director. However, nobody informed the group that in being “nice guys,” they could become legally liable, if somebody became injured as a result of their inaction.

Over the years, I have observed many boards with elephants around that have caused significant problems to a nonprofit organization. (more…)

Does the Nonprofit CEO Need to Go?

Does the Nonprofit CEO Need to Go?

By: Eugene Fram

Viewer Favorite– Revised & Updated

Recognizing and acknowledging that the current CEO is no longer helpful to the nonprofit organization is never easy to come by. Beyond malfeasance and under-performance, obvious reasons for initiating such a discussion, there are often other indicators: his/her modest leadership skills, ineffective discussions between the CEO and the board chair, criticism from external stakeholders, overemphasis on tactics unbalanced by a focus on strategies, etc. (more…)

Can Small Experiments Test Nonprofit Strategic Validity?

Can Small Experiments Test Nonprofit Strategic Validity?

By: Eugene H. Fram

When given a series of potential mission changes, modifications or opportunities, most nonprofit boards take the following steps: (1) Discuss alternatives (2) Develop working plans, board/staff presentations and funding proposals (3) All three usually are packaged into a three or five year strategic plan for implementation. Typically the process can take about six months to “get all stakeholders on board.” When something new is suggested, the conservative board and nonprofit management immediately respond, “Great idea, let’s consider it in the new strategic plan.” Results: It can take three to five years to implement the idea, assuming the plan actually gets off the shelf, not an unusual occurrence for nonprofit organizations!
(more…)

Must Nonprofits Develop Employee Benefits That Substitute For Annual Raises?

Must Nonprofits Develop Employee Benefits That Substitute For Annual Raises?

By: Eugene Fram

A recent analysis in the Washington Post reports that a tsunami-style change is talking place in the manner in which United States’ employees are being paid—benefits are being offered in place of annual salary increases. (http://wapo.st/1MwoIBZ) Driving the change are the needs of substantial portion of millennials who appreciate immediate gratifications in terms of bonuses and perks, such as extra time off and tuition reimbursement. Employers like the arrangement because they can immediately reward their best performers without increasing compensation costs. Example: One sales employee spent weeks reviewing dull paper work, was very diligent in the process and was given three extra days of paid leave. She said, “I think everybody would like to make more, but what I liked about it was the flexibility.” (more…)

Can Nonprofits Boards Build Peer-To-Peer Relationships?

Can Nonprofits Boards Build Peer-To-Peer Relationships?

By: Eugene H. Fram

There have not been any nonprofit authoritarian-visionary leaders like Apple’s Steve Jobs. Successful nonprofits are built by developing peer-to-peer relationships between the board and management, with the latter group representing operational leadership of the staff.

But building peer-to-peer relationships continue to be an Achilles heel for nonprofits for the following reasons.

Internally Boards Have
• Agendas that tend to be packed with operational reports and items.
• A continual parade of new board members entering the board scene to meet rotation requirements.
• Responsibilities that are secondary to directors’ primary vocations interests.
• Officers who are constantly changing. Many volunteer presidents and board chairs only have one-year terms.
• Many directors who live time-compressed lifestyles, and may face significant challenges in fulfilling their board obligations. (more…)