Created for the Minnesota Council of Nonprofits’ Annual conference - October, 2010
Innovative Governance Models Staying flat, staying thin, staying effective! Jamie Schumacher
Before we begin... a few questions!
Today
✤ Issues with the traditional model
✤ Characteristics of an effective board
✤ Dissolving Myths
✤ Case Study 1: the Northeast Community Development Corporation
✤ Case Study 2: Altered Esthetics
✤ Takeaways
The Traditional Model
Pros:
✤Efficient (“Scientific Management”)
✤Order/Structure
✤Understood
The Traditional Model
Cons:
✤Lack of flexibility
✤Not built to incorporate change
✤Assumed benefit
✤“Key Man” weakness
About Hierarchies
Rigid hierarchies tend to have authoritarian leaders
+
Authoritarian leaders can make subordinates feel vulnerable, helpless
=
Emotionally charged, stressful, potential negative environment.
(Goleman 2007, Wilkinson 1996, Gabriel 1998, Lynch 1979)
Modern Organizations
Instead of rigid, need to be:
✤More connected
✤More flexible
✤More adaptive to change
Nonprofit Organizations
✤ Charged with serving the needs of their communities
✤ Greatly utilize volunteers
✤ Fulfill a different bottom line
✤ Boards are stewards of the community
✤ Need something better than the traditional hierarchical model
Flat, shared-power structures with clear expectations...
a better model for nonprofit management.
Role-Based Boards
Role-Based Boards (Structure)
✤ Non hierarchical (one member, one vote)
✤ Specific roles for EACH board member (no warm bodies)
✤ Board chair = project manager (not a default boss)
✤ Annual board reviews compulsory
✤ 2-3 year term commitments
✤ Built to transition, built to change
Role-Based Boards (Structure)
Strong, Role-Based Boards
✤ Are able to do more with less
✤ Are more effective
✤ Can better engage volunteers
✤ Can flexibly respond to changing needs
✤ Can retain, sustain, or grow an organization
MYTHS!
✤ You need an Executive Director to get things done
MYTH #1
✤ You need paid staff to be accountable
MYTH #2
✤ Hierarchy is the best way to organize
MYTH #3
✤ Nobody wants to actually work on a board
MYTH #4
✤ The collaborative process sounds great, but you can’t really get anything done
MYTH #5
✤ Consistency is better than change
MYTH #6
✤ Prior board membership = valuable experience and knowledge
MYTH #7
Northeast Community Development Corporation
A story of preservation.
About the NE CDC
The mission:
The Northeast Community Development Corporation works to promote the economic development of Northeast Minneapolis in a manner that furthers the interest of both businesses and residents
The Role of CDCs
✤ Varies from region to region
✤ Economic development
✤ Neighborhood organizing
✤ Small business services
✤ Retail recruitment and commercial corridor work
✤ Housing
✤ and more...
NE CDC’s History
✤ Created to represent 13 neighborhood organizations
✤ Jackson Street artist housing
✤ NE Futures - community conversations
✤ Small business planning and economic development
✤ Central Avenue Special Services District
✤ 20+ year history in the community
Changing Environment
✤ Between 2005-present, big changes for neighborhood orgs & CDCs
✤ Previous strategic planning not effective
✤ From 6 FTE to 1 part time staff person in two years time
✤ Energy, resources, at a minimum
The Situation
✤ Pending projects (1.3 million invested)
✤ Minimal staff
✤ Limited resources
✤ Little opportunity for immediate funding
✤ Urgent need for organizational refocusing
The Resolution
✤ Board decided to go into a restructuring period
✤ Preserves resources
✤ Allows for reflection and restructuring
✤ Maintains accountability for pending projects
✤ Retains history and networks
The Model
The Results
✤ Preservation of organization
✤ Re-engaged board
✤ Preservation of resources
Altered Esthetics
A story of growth and sustainability.
About Ae
The mission:
Altered Esthetics works to preserve the historical role of artists as a voice of society through our exhibitions, events, services, workshops and programs.
Ae’s History
✤ Founded in 2004 in Northeast Minneapolis
✤ Community arts organization
✤ Over 60 group exhibitions
✤ Publications, music compilations, and more
✤ Brought the work of over 1500 artists to public view
✤ Began hands-on curatorial and gallery director internship programs
✤ Beginning solo exhibitions programs and workshops 2010/2011
The situation
Key issues for Ae :
✤Sustainability
✤Delegation of duties
✤Clarity of roles
✤Engagement of board members
✤The value of being volunteer-driven
Our Solution
This model:
✤Shares power and responsibility
✤Is more flexible and adaptive to change
✤Requires greater communication
✤Grows organically using committees, systems and networks
✤Works well for a learning organization
The Model
The Role of Information Technology
✤ Telecommuting
✤ E-communication
✤ Wiki
Altered Esthetics - The Results
✤ Board members are more engaged
✤ Organization is more innovative
✤ Creativity has increased
✤ Organization is more flexible
✤ Communication has increased
✤ The organization is sustainable
✤ Organization = growing!
✤ Shared-power board structures are better model for small orgs
✤ Sustainable
✤ Preserves resources
✤ Clear expectations
✤ Helps curb “Agenda”
✤ Aids board reviews and individual assessments
✤ Requires a greater contribution/commitment
Role Based Boards - Possibilities!
✤ Every board can grow and improve (large or small, old or new)
✤ Creating an environment hospitable to change can have many positive repercussions
✤ Financial resources do not dictate an organization’s ability to make a lasting impact in the community
✤ Volunteer driven orgs can do more with less!
Takeaways...
✤ Board service can be simultaneously engaging, rewarding & effective
But mostly...
Thank you!contact information: [email protected]
