Finding Your Voice

Preparing today for a presentation I'm making next week, I ran across this. Somehow, it spoke to me, because in many respects, it echoes what I'm striving to do with my new business:

Once you've found your own voice, the choice to expand your influence, to increase your contribution, is the choice to inspire others to find their voice. -- Stephen Covey

Change and Transition - Part II

(In Part I, I introduced William Bridges and his Managing Transitions: Making the Most of Change.)

Years ago, I heard someone else speak about this (and for the life of me I can't remember who), and they compared the change/transition process with jumping out a one-story window. You know you can probably do so pretty safely. You're just not going to do it until you have good reason to leave the space you're in. And, as you teeter on the window sill, trying to take action, the hard part, the pain of change, is the leap itself. Once you're committed and airborne, you reach the ground in a few moments. And then ... everything is all right!

Bridges calls the period of the leap -- the time between deciding to end the "old" and the beginning of the "new" -- the "neutral zone." On this, I disagree with him. It's more like the "chaos zone," during which all the rules are unclear for the time being.

All organizations -- especially community benefit organizations -- are well served to compress major changes into as brief a period as possible. Sure, think it through before doing it. Make everything as clear as possible in announcing changes. But once you've decided, go.

Nothing's worse than the memo that reads: "Effective six months from today ...." As the leader, it will not serve you to hold on to the window sill with your fingertips, desperately hanging on to the old. For one thing, it serves as a bad example for all of your followers.

Take the leap. Then, not wanting to confuse the change with the transition, take a look around you to see if anyone else joined you.

Problem is, everyone responds to change differently. Not everyone jumps out the window at the same time. You need to make sure everyone else joins you in the leap.

Faced with the uncertainty of what it will be like "after the leap," some of your people will make up stuff -- especially if things are unclear and especially if they don't feel they had any control or part in the decision. If the future is unclear, they'll invent one to justify their behavior. They'll "grieve" -- with all the associated phases of denial, anger, depression, bargaining, and (finally) acceptance. At nearly every point, there are unproductive side effects.

Bridges would define the leader's work as making four things clear:

1. What’s the purpose of this change?

2. What’s the picture of how things will be when we achieve that purpose?

3. What’s the plan for creating the picture?

4. What’s my part and your part in the plan?

How clear are you on those questions? How clear is your organization? What can you do to raise the level of clarity that will move people through crazy time and onto the new beginning?

The failure to identify and prepare for the inevitable human psychological adjustments that change produces is the largest single problem that organizations encounter when they implement major change initiatives.

Unfortunately, many managers, when confronted with predictable change-induced resistance by those charged with implementing a change, respond in punitive and inappropriate ways that only serve to undermine the change effort. Due to their lack of understanding of transition, they do not possess the skills to facilitate it effectively.

Leaders and managers often assume that when necessary changes are decided upon and well planned, they will just happen. Unless the transition process is handled successfully by management, all that careful decision making and detailed planning will matter little. Instead, the President will publish the memo, and the staff won't actually alter their behavior.

Change and Transition - Part I

The biggest challenge facing community benefit leaders today is moving their organizations toward a new reality.

"It isn't the changes that do you in, it's the transitions."

That's the first line of Managing Transitions: Making the Most of Change, first published in 1995 by William Bridges (he released a second edition in 2003). [I recommend getting a copy if you want to know more.]

Bridges is an expert in managing the human side of change. In the late 1970s, he introduced the notion of "transition" in his first book, Transitions: Making Sense of Life's Changes. During that "I'm OK/You're OK" era, he laid out how to cope with life changes of the personal kind.

In Managing Transitions, he applied the concept of transition within the context of organizational change.

Bridges asserts that transition is not synonymous with "change."

A change occurs when something in the external environment is altered. In an organizational setting this would include changes in leadership, structure, job description, systems, or processes. The process of deciding to do something different is pretty straight-forward. And then the "change" can be announced (usually with some fanfare in a memo from the President that starts with "Effective immediately ...")

It’s the transition that can do you in, and that’s the part that requires mindful and intentional leadership.

The changes you announced in your memo trigger an internal psychological reorientation process in those who are expected to carry out or respond to the change. Transition is this internal process that people must go through in order to come to terms with a new situation. Unless transition occurs, change won't work. And that's when the organization's President wonders, "Didn't they get the memo? Didn't they read it?"

Two things conspire to make this so: The Past and The Should Be.

The Past
Sometimes, people get stuck in the organizational "way we've done things around here." Often, no one can remember WHY we do things that way. But it's the way we do them. And so it literally hurts to change, even if everyone rationally understands why it's important to change. Organizational culture is profoundly persistent, so even newcomers to the organization get co-opted incredibly quickly.

The Should Be
Sometimes, people get stuck on what they feel their present reality "should be" instead of facing what is. For example, they "should" still have the net worth they had "before October 2008." And, even though they KNOW things have changed, they want to pretend and cling to the old mindset.

It's like those cars with bumper stickers: "I'D RATHER BE ... skiing, golfing, shopping, whatever." But the thing is, you're NOT (skiiing/golfing/shopping/whatever). You're driving a car on the freeway. And the sooner you deal with the reality of that fact, the better.

Next: How to provide the clarity that will move you through the transition ASAP.

Women Play Prominent Role in Philanthropic Decisions

The Fidelity® Charitable Gift Fund today announced the results of a study of charitable givers in America showing that women play a prominent role in their households and communities when it comes to philanthropy. While this probably doesn't surprise anyone, there are some kernels of useful information in the study.

Almost half of women (46 percent) surveyed say they have the primary or sole decision-making role in their households for both how much money to donate to charity and which charities to support. Likewise, most men say they defer to their spouses on which charities to support (81 percent) and how much money to donate (83 percent).

Men overwhelmingly (92 percent) name their spouses as their primary influencer in charitable giving. Women are much more likely to name a wide range of influencers. While 84 percent name their spouse as an influencer, women also rely on extended family (24 percent), friends (23 percent) and co-workers (17 percent).

Hopefully, we're long past the time when causes planned their gift-seeking approaches primarily to the husband, almost totally excluding the wife. But even when the wife is present, even savvy solicitors can speak more to him than to her.

In my experience, in modern day, most couples have rules -- either stated or inferred -- for charitable decision making. Usually, each has a limit. Below the limit, he can say "yes" unilaterally. Below the limit, she can decide alone. But above the limit, both need to be a part of the decision.

Especially when we're asking for significant amounts, the lesson is that our visits should, whenever possible, be with both wife and husband. And while we're with them, we must listen to both parties. Deferring to the man is not only disrespectful to the woman, it ignores the fact that she's mostly in charge of making these decisions.

Four Categories
The study also classified four profiles of givers in America today that illustrate distinctly different approaches to philanthropy.

Mainstream Contributors
The majority of those surveyed (52 percent) fell into the "mainstream contributor" category. This group is the least likely to give more in challenging economic times because of greater need. When decreasing giving year over year, they are the most likely to keep the same number of charities and just decrease the amount they give. They are the most likely to know in advance which charities to give to. Their average total donations in 2008 were $6,842.

Empathetic Givers
One third (29 percent) of the survey participants fell into the "empathetic giver" group. These people give the most in challenging economic times because of need. They are the most interested in creating a family tradition of charitable giving by engaging their children and spouse. They are the most likely to respond to a cause when personally touched by a disease, illness or tragedy. Their total donations in 2008 averaged $7,287.

Reactive Contributors
Just 15 percent of survey participants are "reactive contributors." This group gives the smallest donations as a percentage of income. They are the most likely to cut back on charitable giving in challenging economic times. They are the least likely to think of charitable giving as part of their overall financial plan. Their total donations in 2008 averaged $3,687.

Pioneering Givers
The Gift Fund found that only 4 percent of its survey participants are "pioneering givers." They are the most likely to contribute to organizations that are lesser known or to support new causes. They give away the most money as a percentage of their income. They use credit cards and securities for donations more than any other group. They are more likely to be influenced by a philanthropist in the news and the most likely to want guidance from a financial advisor regarding charitable giving. Their total donations in 2008 averaged $7,347.

When strategizing your approach to a prospective investor, it might be useful to predict which of these archtypes apply.

Click here to read the news release.

Click here to read a six-page executive summary.

Saying "No" to people you can't say "No" to

We seldom have the flexibility to bluntly say no to many people. Like a boss. Or a key client. Or a family member. Yesterday, I was on a call getting some advice from a guy named Michael Bungay Stanier; he runs a company called Box of Crayons that works with organizations to help them do less Good Work and more Great Work. I really like his philosophy and his stuff.

When dealing with people you can't say "No" to, Michael's advice which I'm broadly paraphrasing here, is: Say "yes" more slowly.

What gets us in trouble is how quickly we relent and say yes. That often means we say yes to something that's not aligned with our own plans, leaving no time for us to say yes to things that are aligned. We deprive ourselves of giving ourselves the time, space, and focus to do what matters for us. And then we're angry that we said yes (or felt like we couldn't say no).

So, you might ask: How do you do say yes more slowly? Basically, it's by asking lots of questions.

"Thanks for asking me to do that, but ...

"Can I ask why you asked me?"

"When you say it's urgent, what does that mean for you?"

"What does success look like for this?"

"If I had to do this at an adequate level instead of an excellent level, what would that be?"

"If I could only do part of this, and not the whole of it, what part would you want me to focus on?"

"If I were take this on, what other things that I've agreed to do for you could be stopped, so that I have the time and space to do what you're asking me now?"

Of course, you can't do this all the time. But when you go through questioning like this, one of several things happens:

1. When you do actually say yes, you've said yes to something more clear, defined, and specific. So, you don't have to overwork it or do the wrong thing or do it faster than necessary.

2. Sometimes, the questioning results in negotiation, so you end up doing something far different than what was originally asked.

3. Sometimes, the person asking says, "You know what? I don't know the answers to those questions. Let me go away and figure that out. And then I'll come back to you." And then, often as not, they don't come back.

4. Sometimes, they say, to them selves, "This questioning is too much like hard work. I'm going to go find someone who will say yes more quickly."

5. Sometimes, in future, the person will be more careful about asking you to do things, and will come better prepared to articulate what they really want.

It won't work all the time, of course, but it's worth a try! Isn't that great advice? Thanks Michael.

Who Cares?

Well, it happened again yesterday. An organization sent me a solicitation. And they told less than half the story. As it happens, I know quite a bit about this organization. I've done some work for them (but either not enough yet or not with the right people!)

They have a story to tell, for sure. But they have the same blindspot many organizations have. It comes from assuming that, because you care passionately about your cause, because you eat-breathe-and-live your mission 24/7, others will automatically "get it." And from there, you're just one step away from feeling that the importance of your work is self-evident, even universally embraced. In fact -- everyone "should" know and appreciate our work.

So, copywriters get a little lazy in writing. In old marketing-speak terms, they write all the features but leave out the benefits.

In this case, the communication was blaring news: "We've just funded $xx million in research!" They went on to point out that this amount funded a certain number of scientists, and they listed the names and institutional affiliations of them. And I'm sure they're very proud of this accomplishment.

But unless I really understand your organization and how it conducts its work, this factoid will not pierce my consciousness. It will be almost impossible for me not to tune out before deciphering for myself why your work matters.

In an exercise I conduct in some trainings, I'll have participants name their most significant mission outcome of the past year. They'll say something like "We held our first health symposium and reached x,000 professionals by launching our RIP initiative." {And notice that the first reference almost always includes an internal acronym.}

When I ask, "So what?" the participant looks wounded or angry, as though I've questioned the sanctity of motherhood. But once they think and try to answer, they'll say, "Well, those health professionals will now present classes in workplace programs."

"So what?" I'll insist on asking. "Well, those trainers will each reach over x00 others, and they'll now know what to do in an emergency." And they'll be pleased with themselves.

Until I ask, "So what?" again. Sometimes it takes four or five iterations before they'll get to the benefit, which might be something like: "Our community is a safer place to live in!! Now that xx,000 people have been trained to know what to do in an emergency through our Really Important Program initiative, the chance that you'll be near help when you need it is increased dramatically, more than 100 fold than before the program."

This simple exercise can help you understand how others view your program and impact. When you challenge statements in your appeals with the "So what?" query, especially statements with metrics, you'll dig down to the core benefit that gives people the real reason to care.

It really gets down to reminding yourself of WHY you're doing the program (its purpose) and focusing less on HOW you're doing it or HOW MANY you've reached (at the tactical level of your plan).

End note: This advice is similar to the old saw, "Answer the question: What's in it for me." I find this a bit jaded, because it prejudges people as having no ability to appreciate a cause unless it personally serves them. The "So What?" alternative allows people to understand why your work matters -- why it counts -- even if they aren't personally affected.

Are you a Development Professional? Find out here ...

I read lots of blogs. As a life-long learner, I just love soaking up lots of information from many sources. Sometimes, a tidbit inspires a blog posting here.

So far, since starting this blog, I've not directed readers to another blog to read a post, but I'm about to start. And there's no better blogger to start with than Tom Suddes at For Impact.

His nugget for today is power-packed truth. It requires no elaboration. It can't be made shorter, because his every word counts. I can't pull out and distill one idea to highlight before I send you there -- that would minimize the importance of the rest. And I don't disagree with any of it. That's just about the highest praise I can bestow on a blog post (not that Tom Suddes has been waiting for such a dubious honor).

So, without further comment, go, now, and read this post.

As we head out of the dark toward better times

So, there's some indication that better times are ahead. The prognosticators are seeing light at the end of the tunnel; the news isn't as bleak as we've grown accustomed to.

If you've read my previous blog postings on doom-and-gloom, then you know I've never advocated pulling back. But, people being human, many have been startled by the last six months, frozen into lethargic inaction or an unfocused milling around, wandering and waiting.

If that's you, latch onto the hope-filled indicators and use them to declare an end to your organizational funk. It's over. Finished. As of this moment. Make a note of the date and time. This is when the recovery begins. Let's move on.

So what shall we do now?

Job one: Strengthen your existing donor relationships to enhance loyalty, foster strong relationships and encourage word-of-mouth referrals.

Regardless of the state of the economy, Pareto's principle dictates that 80 percent of your revenue will come from 20 percent of your donors. In fact the updated take on this rule is that the ratio is more like 90/10 or even 97/3.

Thus, it is more important than ever to know who that 20% (10%? 3%?) of top donors are, and shower them with love and attention.

Use this time to re-connect (or connect for the first time?) with your best donors. Not by direct mail. Not with an email. Not with an event invitation. Not by phone. Go see them! Conduct visits, in person, elbow-to-elbow, eye-to-eye. Work even harder, listening to and understanding their needs while presenting opportunities to be involved that address the pressing interests they have in your cause.

At the end of the day, make a concerted effort to stay upbeat, optimistic and positive. Celebrate wins (even the small ones).

It could be easy -- forgivable, actually, given the battering many of us have endured -- to be somewhat skeptical, even pessimistic, about the future. But pessimism never attracted a new donor (or renewed an existing one, for that matter). Commend yourself and your staff for successfully enduring - and thriving - through some of the most challenging times in history. And then go out and TELL YOUR STORY!

Optimism, Competence, and Call Reluctance: 5 Suggestions

A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty. -- Winston Churchill


Optimism is the belief that things will work out for the best, that we'll generally experience good outcomes in life. I find that most people involved in community benefit work are, at their core, optimists.

I just finished doing some research on procrastination. (Been trying to get around to it for awhile now - ha ha.) Consulted an article from Psychology Today which talks about self-regulation as it relates to an optimistic outlook.

Point is: those who are generally optimistic are deterred less by implementation challenges over which there's a strong amount of personal control.

Stated another way: When the problem is "you," you can better overcome "you" if you are in an optimistic frame of mind.

During my consultation and coaching sessions -- whether one-on-one or in a group -- we always get to the planning of next steps. This generally translates to "Get out from behind my desk and make some visits with donors." And the issue of obstacles almost always arises.

Sometimes -- in anticipation that self-defeating behaviors will arise to block implementation of the plan -- I'll ask the client: "What's your typical defense that seems to defeat your pursuit of goals through procrastination?"

First responses include: my boss throws another urgent priority at me, my co-workers interrupt me, my phone rings.

If I dig deeper, and when the client is in a forthright mood, I'll hear: "I answer my email, check Facebook and Twitter, work on assignments that I enjoy more, chat with others in the office."

So, when led to reflect on it, the otherwise-well-intended staff person admits, at least to self, sometimes to the coach, "I know I said I was going to make this visit. But I just can't get started. I'm worried how it will turn out. Since this stuff is still new to me, I'm not sure I'm very good at it. And so, even though I KNOW I should, I don't complete the task."

That's the odd thing: most people know they are engaging in self-defeating behavior when they're doing it.

Five suggestions when you find yourself in that space:

1. Remind yourself that you are an optimist at heart; that you see the glass as half full, not half empty. (Research shows that optimistic mindsets help overcome implementation challenges.)

2. Break the task into piece-parts. "Make a visit" can become "call to arrange a time," "prepare for the visit," "go on the visit itself," and "follow-up on the visit." Then, rather than procrastinate on the whole, re-frame the task so that your accountability is to do just the first step.

3. Change how you state your implementation intention on your To Do list. Instead of "Call Mrs. Jones to arrange a time to visit," write "Do not check email until I've called Mrs. Jones."

4. Remember that practice is required before you'll feel more competent. In the meantime, write an affirmation about your competence at this task: "I am getting better and better at making donor visits. I already know WHAT to do, and can do WHAT IT TAKES to be successful. I love my time spent one-on-one with donors. I have every reason to believe I can effectively interact with our donor, who is, after all, a friend of our organization. I can expect this to go well."

5. Ahead of time, plan your response to the emotional anxiety that you know you'll encounter sometime during the task. "When I begin to feel overwhelmed, which I expect to feel just as I'm picking up the phone, I will simply take it one step at a time and keep my focus on the very first step of getting started."

Many of us are self-reflective and self-examining enough to be able to predict with some accuracy what avoidance techniques we'll use to postpone a task we don't feel comfortable with. Knowing this, it becomes a matter of building our own personal plan of attack in anticipation of the obstacles (rather than wait for them to arise).

Now, stop reading this blog and go do what you've been procrastinating about!

Two Stories About Reputation

Passed to me by my brother-in-law. For those of you who know me, you're aware of my Chicago roots, and I'd never heard these. So are they true or apocryphal? Not sure. Don't care.

STORY NUMBER ONE - "Easy" Eddie and Al Capone

Many years ago, Al Capone virtually owned Chicago. Capone wasn't famous for anything heroic. He was notorious for enmeshing the windy city in everything from bootlegged booze and prostitution to murder.

Capone had a lawyer nicknamed 'Easy Eddie.' He was Capone's lawyer for a good reason. Eddie was very good! In fact, Eddie's skill at legal maneuvering kept Big Al out of jail for a long time.

To show his appreciation, Capone paid him very well. Not only was the money big, but Eddie got special dividends, as well. For instance, he and his family occupied a fenced-in mansion with live-in help and all of the conveniences of the day. The estate was so large that it filled an entire Chicago City block.

Eddie lived the high life of the Chicago mob and gave little consideration to the atrocity that went on around him.

Eddie did have one soft spot, however. He had a son that he loved dearly. Eddie saw to it that his young son had clothes, cars, and a good education. Nothing was withheld. Price was no object.

And, despite his involvement with organized crime, Eddie even tried to teach him right from wrong. Eddie wanted his son to be a better man than he was.

Yet, despite all of his wealth and influence, there were two things he could not give to his son; he couldn't pass on a good name or a good example.

One day, Easy Eddie reached an extremely difficult decision. Easy Eddie wanted to rectify the wrongs he had knowledge of and had done.

He decided he would go to the authorities and tell the truth about Al 'Scarface' Capone, and attempt to clean up his tarnished name, and offer his son some semblance of integrity. To do this, he would have to testify against "The Mob", and he knew that by doing this the cost would be great. Anyhow, he testified.

Within the year, Easy Eddie's life ended in a blaze of gunfire on a lonely Chicago Street. But in his eyes, he had given his son the greatest gift he had to offer, at the greatest price he could ever pay. Police removed from his pockets a rosary, a crucifix, a religious medallion, and a poem clipped from a magazine.

The poem read:
'The clock of life is wound but once, and no man has the power to tell just when the hands will stop, at late or early hour. Now is the only time you own. Live, love, toil with a will. Place no faith in time. For the clock may soon be still.'

STORY NUMBER TWO - Butch O'Hare

World War II produced many heroes. One such man was Lieutenant Commander Butch O'Hare. He was a fighter pilot assigned to the Aircraft Carrier Lexington operating in the South Pacific.

One day his entire squadron was sent on a mission. After he was airborne, he looked at his fuel gauge and realized that someone had forgotten to top off his fuel tank.

He would not have enough fuel to complete his mission and return to his ship.

His flight leader told him to return to the carrier. Reluctantly, he dropped out of formation and headed back to the US fleet.

As he was returning to the mother ship, he saw something that turned his blood cold; a squadron of Japanese aircraft was speeding its way toward the American fleet.

The American fighters were gone on a sortie, and the fleet was all but defenseless. He couldn't reach his squadron and bring them back in time to save the fleet. Nor could he warn the fleet of the approaching danger. There was only one thing to do. He must somehow divert them from the fleet.

Laying aside all thoughts of personal safety, he dove into the formation of Japanese planes. Wing-mounted 50 caliber's blazed as he charged in, attacking one surprised enemy plane and then another. Butch wove in and out of the now broken formation and fired at as many planes as possible until all his ammunition was finally spent.

Undaunted, he continued the assault. He dove at the planes, trying to clip a wing or tail in hopes of damaging as many enemy planes as possible, rendering them unfit to fly.

Finally, the exasperated Japanese squadron took off in another direction.

Deeply relieved, Butch O'Hare and his tattered fighter limped back to the carrier.

Upon arrival, he reported in and related the event surrounding his return. The film from the gun-camera mounted on his plane told the tale . It showed the extent of Butch's daring attempt to protect his fleet. He had, in fact, destroyed five enemy aircraft. This took place on February 20, 1942, and for that action Butch became the Navy's first Ace of W.W.II, and the first Naval Aviator to win the Congressional Medal of Honor.

A year later Butch was killed in aerial combat at the age of 29. His home town would not allow the memory of this WW II pilot hero to fade, and today, O'Hare Airport near Chicago is named in tribute to the courage of this great airman.

So, the next time you find yourself at O'Hare International, give some thought to visiting Butch's memorial displaying his statue and his Medal of Honor. It's located between Terminals 1 and 2.


SO WHAT DO THESE TWO STORIES HAVE TO DO WITH EACH OTHER?

Butch O'Hare was Easy Eddie's son!

Cool? Cool!

Happy May Day!

April showers bring May flowers -- says the cliche. And it's now the merry month of May!

In Europe, today's the day they celebrate the onset of spring. It probably dates back to a pagan celebration. By the time of the Middle Ages, the Church had usurped the festival, and a virgin was selected as the May Queen. (Side note: One of the life highlights of my sister-in-law, Gail, was being the May Queen as young child in parochial school.) In the olden days (further back than when Gail was MQ) they'd carry the May Queen over the fields, trying to transfer her fertility to the soil.

Somehow or other, all of this morphed into the May pole dance that you might be familiar with.

And then there's other May Day references:

Of course, there's the pinko-commie connection. The socialist labor union declared May 1 as International Labor Day in Europe. This was in 1889. Seven years earlier (1882), our American labor movement had already decided Labor Day was the first Monday of September. We were ticked off that the foreigners had chosen a different day, so we retaliated. In 1894, our Congress made the September day a national holiday. Relations between socialists and red-blooded Americans haven't been the same since.

And then there's the May Day (or mayday) that is the distress signal for aircraft and ships. That one has nothing whatsoever to do with the others. My exhaustive research shows it is an adaptation of the French expression (venez) m'aider "(come) help me!"

I share these tidbits in order to demonstrate my ability to share information of dubious relevance. Can you tell it's Friday? Can you tell I'm avoiding real work?

Enjoy the flowers of May!