Dysfunctional Fundraising Teams

Over the past few weeks I had a few conversations with leaders I know about dysfunction on teams.  Sadly, this dysfunction is a common occurrence that, in my experience, often arises from a fundamental fear of conflict.

It's a theme that arises frequently in my coaching work with leaders.  Especially fundraising leaders.  The fear of conflict is often initiated and promulgated by an insidious saboteur known as the "Pleaser."


I previously described the Pleaser Saboteur in a post entitled "The One Skill Every Fundraiser Must Cultivate."  It's an automatic and habitual mind pattern that frequently afflicts fundraising leaders by indirectly attempting to gain acceptance by helping, pleasing, or flattering others.  The impact of the Pleaser on fundraising teams is an avoidance of conflict which creates an environment of artificial harmony.  Pat Lencioni in is excellent book The Five Dysfunctions of a Team rightly points out that true harmony on teams can be beneficial, leading to cooperation, collaboration, and synergy.  On the other hand, fear of conflict that induces artificial harmony often leads to discord, contention, and ultimate team dysfunction.

I recognize that many folks are deeply uncomfortable about discussing a difference of opinion, or disagreement for fear that they might offend the other person, injure the relationship, or otherwise create an unpleasant circumstance.  In order to have a productive, well-functioning team this fear must be faced and overcome.  Lencioni's research clearly demonstrates that teams which engage in healthy, productive conflict (that is, conflict focused on ideas rather than personalities) enjoy superior performance over those that do not engage in healthy conflict.  

One way for a leader to create an environment where team members feel free to bring crucial, yet potentially sensitive, topics to meetings for discussion is to actually "mine for conflict".  That's right.  It is incumbent for the leader of the team to use his or her intuition to draw out disagreement, and to grant full permission to other teammates to air their differences without fear of reprisal.  Of course, it is essential that everyone on the team to commit to saying what is true for them, and to be persons to whom others can express themselves with candor.  It also helps when individuals make a commit to no gossip, that is, to speak their minds in team meetings and not behind closed doors after the meeting is over.  Teams where individuals make commitments to each other of speaking with candor and ending gossip possess higher levels of trust, and have less fear that potential conflict will destroy relationships.

As fundraising leaders begin to tame their Pleaser Saboteur in order to create and sustain a culture where healthy debate is encouraged, there is another helpful tool that can be used to navigate conflict.  This tool is used as part of the Co-Active Leadership Model which was introduced by the Coaches Training Institute.  In the Co-Active Leadership Model, conflict is transformed from a process that often has a starting point where individuals quickly seek agreement in order to gain acceptance.  This is often achieved through tactics like convincing, manipulation, authority, and so on.  In the Co-Active model of conflict management we typically start by seeking alignment, which leads to understanding, and finally agreement.  The former mode of conflict frequently results in contention and compliance.  The latter process, if allowed to unfold in an environment where individuals seek (as Stephen Covey put it) "first to understand," often leads to rich dialogue where members of the team align on something more important than the issue in conflict.  They then go ahead and have the disagreement and create solutions that everyone can accept.

In high functioning teams, conflict is transformed from a process that is feared to one that is embraced.  Especially when it is approached using some of the principles outlined in this post.  I suggest you to start with baby steps by creating an atmosphere where candor is encouraged, and gossip is eliminated.  Once those commitments are established, go ahead and try the Co-Active model for conflict management, and watch your team thrive.

Crappy [or Happy] New Year? You Decide.

Got your attention?  Good.   Because, whether we have a "Crappy" or "Happy" 2016 is completely in our control.  That's right.  Even if we face significant adversity.  Importantly, it's how we respond to the challenges of the coming year (and there will be challenges) that makes the difference.

I was exploring this very topic (albeit from a somewhat different angle) during a gathering of a special group of leaders over the past weekend.  Part of our discussion addressed the question: "what do we want to strip off (or leave behind), and what to we want to step into" at the start of the new year.  It was a heartfelt, vulnerable conversation that left us invigorated for the possibilities of 2016.  

The content that I found most useful was the exploration of subtraction.  This is counter-intuitive, since our tendency at the start of a new year is to consider all we want to achieve in the coming 12 months.  We work on our action plans, goals, objectives, strategies, tactics, etc.  I'm not making that process wrong.  I actually believe it is quite helpful, especially if it is coupled with the question: "What do I intend to subtract this year?" That's right--SUBTRACT.  More often that not, in order for us to advance confidently in the direction of our dreams we need to unburden ourselves and let go of relationships, stories, practices, habits, and even material goods that no longer serve us on our path forward.

Many of you who follow my posts know that I am an avid non-fiction reader, hungrily devouring books from antiquity to the present.  In the search for truth and wisdom I enjoy learning from multiple masters--no matter what their angle (spiritual, psychological, physical, mystical, meta physical, new age, etc.).  The counter-intuitive (and difficult) subtraction for me this year was to delete a significant number of books from my Audible and Amazon wish lists. Through this act of subtraction, I am honoring an intention to focus my studies in 2016 on those works of literature with a spiritual angle.  That was a difficult and conscious choice (considering my addiction), which I hope will open up some new perspectives in the coming year.

I offer this short, personal story of subtraction as a pointer toward greater happiness.  I am convinced (as are many wisdom teachers) that happiness is not derived from adding more material or intellectual stuff to our lives.  

So as you ponder 2016, I ask: what crap will you flush down the toilet so that you may open up space in 2016 and be free to fly into a very happy new year?

Fundraising is NOT a Data Driven Profession

I know some among us would like to believe that it is, especially with the advent of data tools available today (and the consultants who pitch them).

So, if not data driven, then what?  Wait for it...

Relationship driven!  (did you hear the crescendo?)

Seems obvious enough.  And, like most truths, the obvious ones are often overlook.  Remembering that fundraising is fundamentally a relationship driven profession can be especially helpful when  recruiting.  I recently shared my thoughts on Hiring Great Fundraisers in a separate post.  One characteristic that I neglected to mention as a possible screen is what we might call "relationship orientation, or capacity".  My bad.  I had completely taken that for granted (again, so easy to overlook the obvious), and I strongly encourage you not to.

So, how do we screen for relationship orientation/capacity.  One way is through the reference checking process.  In addition to asking prospective new hires for previous supervisors, colleagues, and direct reports (in the case of managers), I suggest you also ask the finalist candidate for a small number of donors (including board members) with whom they've worked.  Yes, I know that adds to your workload.  And yes, I believe it's worth it.  In the past, I've interviewed at least six to eight references before making an offer.  (P.S.--This is not an activity you want to outsource to HR)

Another way of getting at the heart of the matter either for a candidate or for an existing team member who is struggling in a front-line role is to ask them to take the HBDI Assessment.  While no assessment is definitive, the HBDI does help get a handle on preferences for quantitative/analytical work versus relational/intuitive roles.  I recently took the assessment and scored strongly in the relational quadrant.  When under stress I go there even more strongly.  Not surprising for a professional coach with a fundraising background.

I bring this topic to the forefront because our culture is becoming obsessed with data (especially in university advancement/development organizations).  While I believe data analysis can be helpful in identifying prospective donors and their philanthropic inclinations, I assert there is no substitute for face-to-face conversations that deepen relationships between donors and the causes/institutions they care about.  AND, when hiring fundraisers to have those conversations, it is essential that leaders select for individuals with strong relationship orientation/capacity.

Hey, Fundraisers--Shift Happens!

This past weekend I was part of a leadership team that facilitated a workshop aimed at helping professionals identify and shift perspectives around the way they see issues/topics/problems.  I love this work, because as a coach and fundraiser I often interact with individuals who get "stuck" in a particular way of looking at a situation.

Let's say you're working with a donor whose husband recently passed away from a brain tumor.  The donor may believe that medical center where her husband was treated receives sufficient funding for research from government sources.  As a fundraiser, you know better, and you ask the donor if she is willing to explore other perspectives.  She's open (after all, the two of you have a good relationship), and you proceed to share that a youthful member medical team is exploring the use of viruses to reverse the growth of brain tumor cells.  The research is in it's early stages and the scientist could use $100k to gather enough preliminary data to write a grant proposal for significant funds that could advance the work into animal and human testing.  She's intrigued.  She knows the team, she trusts you, and she asks to meet the researcher to discuss what is needed.  Wham!  Perspective shifted.

Yes, sometimes it is that easy to move folks from "stuck" to "action".

In coaching we use this technique to help clients explore various perspectives around a topic in their personal or professional lives in order to make powerful commitments about what they really want to say YES to, and what they absolutely need to say NO to (see: The One Skill Every Fundraiser Must Cultivate).  And, this work can have powerful as well as long-lasting effects.  Nearly two and a half years ago after being on the receiving end of some good coaching, I made a commitment to loosening up (a state of being) and dressing more casually (an action that reflects the state of being).  I can share that to this day, I am much more peaceful (loose), and my dress code reflects the sub-tropical climate in which I now currently reside (flip-flops, and all).

Twerps, Jerks, and Other Petty Tyrants

Growing up my father used the expression "twerp" as a pejorative slur for any leader not meeting his high standards for character.  As a man with a strong moral compass and a rock-solid ethical foundation who is held in high regard by his family, friends, students, and colleagues, I can assure you that any leader decried as a twerp by my father was summarily dismissed as not worthy of further consideration.

Yes, that's a bit harsh.  Yes, that's judgmental.  Yes, that's dismissive.  And, yes, there is wisdom in making such assessments of leaders (sooner, rather than later).  After all, the world is not yet replete with saints who step into leadership roles.  While I was blessed to have worked with some wonderful leaders in the corporate and non-profit sectors over 30 years, I can also report that I had my fair share of encounters with twerps, jerks, and other petty tyrants.  And, need I comment on similar "characters" we observe on the modern politic stage at the local, regional, national, and global level?

This is nothing new.  Recorded history gives us innumerable examples of leaders to emulate (or not) from Hammurabi to Hitler.  My own inclination is to follow the path of the "Bodhisattva", or one who is motivated by great compassion to achieve enlightenment not only for my own benefit, but for the benefit of all sentient beings.

I recognize that the Bodhisattva path is tall order, and it's not for everyone.   So, if you are drawn to leadership (or, already a leader) and at a point where you are unsure how to proceed, I recommend consideration of the following inquiry:

Who am I?

And....

What impact do I want to have in the world?

Simple, but not easy.  I believe that if you ask yourself these two questions over and over again until the answers become more clear, you'll be well on your way.

The One Skill Every Fundraiser Must Cultivate

Learning to say NO!

That's right.  For a profession consisting of tens of thousands of individuals trained in the art of inspiring folks to say YES, the most important skill fundraisers (especially fundraising leaders) can cultivate is saying NO.

You may ask: "How can that be?", and you may be thinking: "I've been conditioned much of my professional life to say yes."  And therein lies the rub.  Many of the fundraising leaders with whom I work as a professional coach have a very strong "Pleaser Saboteur".  A saboteur as defined by Shizard Chamine in his NY Times bestselling book Positive Intelligence is an automatic and habitual mind pattern with its own voice, beliefs, and assumptions that works against our best interests.  And, by definition a saboteur is insidious.  It works in the shadows in a gradual, subtle way with harmful effects.

In particular, the Pleaser Saboteur indirectly tries to gain acceptance by helping, pleasing, or flattering others.  The negative impact of the Pleaser is often one of burnout, as I observe fundraising leaders saying yes to far too many unimportant (although perhaps urgent) tasks that come their way.

So what is a leader to do?  Just say no?  As simple as it seems, that would be a very good start.  I've previously written about my own less is more philosophy.  In that post, I offered an inquiry: "Can we simplify our lives, and thereby make them more meaningful?"  I believe we can, and Greg McKeown is his excellent book Essentialism: The Disciplined Pursuit of Less  eloquently expands on the inquiry.

McKeown, a writer, speaker and Harvard Business Review blogger, offers concrete advice on how to deliberately focus on the vital few priorities that really count and dispense with the rest.  McKeown observes (as I have) that many professionals are over-busy and over-committed.  They continue to say yes to ever more commitments and deadlines without asking the following questions:

Is this truly essential?
How important is this to me?
What do I really want here?
Is this really how I want to choose to spend my time?
How is this aligned with my values and purpose?

I believe if you are truly honest with yourself (and ignore the voice of your Pleaser) when answering these questions, you will say NO to upwards of 90% of the requests and opportunities that come your way.  And by doing so you will have a much more powerful impact as a leader on your world, and with the people around you

I highly recommend McKeown's book, and I encourage you to incorporate more NO into your life.

Retaining Fundraisers (Hint: It's NOT All About The Money)

In the marketplace for fundraiser talent it is well known that demand currently outstrips supply. As a consequence, advancement and development leaders with whom I interact often describe one of the most (if not the most) significant challenges they face as the recruiting and retaining of frontliners and managers.  While the economic forces of supply and demand are certainly putting upward pressure on salaries, a common misconception about fundraiser retention is that it's "all about the money". 

That's a management and leadership cop-out because we know from multiple published annual employee satisfaction surveys that while compensation is a factor, the other four primary aspects that affect employee engagement retention include opportunities to use skills/abilities, job security, communication with management, and relationship with immediate supervisory (see, for example, the Job Satisfaction and Engagement Survey by the Society for Human Resource Management).

So in addition to economic forces which do play a part, what are some of the other real reasons people leave.  According to employee retention expert Leigh Branham, author of The 7 Hidden Reasons Employees Leave: How to Recognize the Subtle Signs and Act Before It’s Too Late , while most people indicate that they are leaving for more money or a better opportunity, 88% change jobs because of negative factors in their current workplace, ranging from subpar people management to cultural misfit. Branham explains: “Citing increased pay and more opportunity is a convenient thing to say, and managers are all too willing to accept these reasons.”   Branham goes on to identify the top seven reasons people leave as follows:

1) The job or workplace was not as expected.

2) The mismatch between job and person.

3) Too little coaching and feedback.

4) Too few growth and advancement opportunities.

5) Feeling devalued and unrecognized.

6) Stress from overwork and work-life imbalance.

7) Loss of trust and confidence in supervisor or senior leaders.

 

So what is an advancement/development manager or leader to do?  I've written previously about the process of Hiring Great Fundrasiers which addresses reasons 1 and 2.  Providing continuous coaching and feedback is an obligation that managers must take on with gusto.  And let's be clear: feedback is about performance or the "how am I doing?", and coaching is about "where am I going?".  The latter question is related to growth and learning.  Fundraisers are an ambitious group (bordering on hyper-achieving). Nothing is more frustrating for an employee than discovering he or she is out of runway.  In today's environment it is incumbent upon the senior leadership team in larger advancement/development organizations to have a process that reviews all employees in the organization and their opportunities for growth. Branham advises organizations to provide easily accessible information on career paths and competency requirements that spell out how employees can progress.

Reasons 5 and 6 point toward environment and culture.  Fundraising in larger, complex institutions can be stressful and thankless work.  The demands to raise more money are never-ending, and while the donors are thanked for their generosity, fundraisers are frequently overlooked.  Creating an environment of appreciation, recognition, and gratitude not only for donors but also for the fundraisers who work with them goes a very long way on the path of retention.  And while having a culture of appreciation helps folks feel good about the work they are doing, it does address stress and the work/life imbalance that often accompanies the fundraising profession.  Dealing with this factor is among the top reasons mid-career advancement/development leaders hire me as a coach.  One of the ways we work together to reduce stress and overwhelm for them and their teams is to encourage a culture where everyone commits to a culture of play, improvisation, and laughter.  In honoring this commitment, individual look to maximize energy (not manage time), while getting sufficient rest and renewal.

Finally, at the most basic level, fundraisers want to know that they can be successful in their roles and they want to work with leadership that has integrity, and whom they can trust.   All too often (especially with development professionals assigned to an academic unit led by a Dean) I see confusion, competing priorities, lack of vision, and poor alignment/communication.  That, my friends, is a ready-made formula for turnover.  In this regard, Branham (and I) recommends that leaders inspire confidence with a clear vision, a workable plan, and a belief in employees’ competence to achieve it.