The Hard Questions We Need To Be Asking
“When asked to look at any organisation from an independent consultant perspective we often use the phrase of “flying in from Mars”. This helps to explain the approach that a good consulting professional will usually take and their absolute level of objectivity in looking at all aspects of an organisation. In other words, if I were flying in from Mars today and wanted to set up an organisation to address your particular cause with the most impact, would I set up your organisation? And would I set it up like you currently operate and are currently structured and organised?” The authors ask hard questions and challenge us all to reconsider our impact.
By Steven Moe and Craig Fisher
Photo: Phil Botha/Unsplash
The legacy of the past and our investment in the current can hold us back from achieving the future. When one is in the trenches consumed by how much needs to be done and the busyness of today we don’t always stop and reflect objectively on our organisation as we perhaps should.
When asked to look at any organisation from an independent consultant perspective we often use the phrase of “flying in from Mars”. This helps to explain the approach that a good consulting professional will usually take and their absolute level of objectivity in looking at all aspects of an organisation. In other words, if I were flying in from Mars today and wanted to set up an organisation to address your particular cause with the most impact, would I set up your organisation? And would I set it up like you currently operate and are currently structured and organised?
Unsurprisingly the answer is usually no. And this is understandable and explainable as new innovations continue to occur. Sometimes this can be a result of sunk costs or legacy ways of operating or thinking that came from a different paradigm when the situation was different.
Take cloud computing versus an organisation set up in the past that had to buy expensive computer servers and software to run on these in-house machines. Yet for the organisation that already has deeply invested in the legacy system it can then be harder to justify writing off that past investment to change to something new and possibly more efficient.
Likewise, the national federation of separate incorporated society branches of the same organisation. This structure probably made sense when transport and communications were not as easy as they are today, and more people had more time to take on board and committee roles in their spare time. However today that structure can curse a national organisation with duplicated costs, organisational sustainability issues, and unnecessary petty politics – all things which detract from whatever the good cause the organisation exists to address. We know of other organisations which have structure charts that stretch like an octopus across the full range of legal forms: companies, charitable trusts, incorporated societies. There are often valid historical reasons for why they exist that way: But is it the best way?
And if we were designing the most effective, efficient and impactful organisation today; would we design it like that?
So, here are some hard questions that we think all boards and senior management need to be asking. We appreciate that some of these questions may result in an instant reaction in many people in the sector that is likely to border on outrage.
1. What is our purpose?
Some organisations have forgotten what the original purpose was that they were set up to try and solve. Not perpetuate the provision of ambulances at the bottom of the cliff, but actually solve the issues with fences at the top. We often see organisations who are surprised when reading the actual purpose to realise how far mission drift has led them. The current leaders need to be clear on what the purpose actually is before anything else.
Organisations with laser like clarity on their purpose are those that generally tend to achieve it.
2. Do we have a right to exist?
Quite simply; does the positive impact of our organisation justify the cost and effort of all the things necessary to operate the organisation? i.e. are we delivering enough positive impact? Or are we just taking up sector oxygen?
While we have impressively low barriers to entry for NFPs and charities and community organisations in Aotearoa that doesn’t mean that all have an automatic right to exist.
The pass mark should not be simply an intention to do good – we need to ask these questions in order to work out if this organisation is actually being effective. In our view, a sufficient level of positive impact must be the lens through which this hard question needs to be answered.
Photo: Phil Botha/Unsplash
3. Do we still need to exist?
Many organisations have morphed over time in terms of what they do. Often to follow the available funding. Sometimes this has led organisations away from what they were really unique at and expert at, and into other areas where they may be competing with other better, more specialist organisations. And competing for the same limited funding and other resources pool.
Would the wider society be better served if resources were focused on those organisations that were really unique and expert in an area? Would a governing body and management be able to admit that? If it is a new organisation then is it trying to replicate what someone else already does – entrepreneurship is lifted up as a high value in our society, but even more admirable might be sacrificing your ego to get in behind and really support someone else’s dream which happens to match yours. And in doing this eliminate unnecessary administration duplication and resources being diverted from creating more impact.
4. Should we have an end date?
While this may not work for all charities – if you consider it deeply it should for many - if they are being truly honest and committed to their cause.
Arguably one of the most noble measures of success of any charity that exists to address a social or environmental need is that they should no longer be needed.
Because the job is done. We have a feeling there will always be other issues that need addressing – hopefully they can be solved as well but not continued and perpetuated with an eye on continuing a legacy of having existed in the past.
For example, if your charity were set up to eliminate avoidable blindness, or to eliminate all pests in Aotearoa’s forests, when could this be achieved by? Set that challenging and motivating date.
Having an end date target in your strategic plan can be a very powerful motivating force to focus attention on the most efficient means of achieving the aim. Interestingly, having such a target and a goal of society no longer needing your organisation can also make those involved much less precious about how they achieve the target. The alternative is the building of a strong NFP/charity brand. Without clear focus on getting the job done, this can unfortunately (and often almost unconsciously) lead to more focus on the brand and protecting the ongoing nature of it - rather than why the brand actually exists in the first place. This is just human nature to protect what we have built. To be proud of our organisation doing good and our legacy. But are we being truly objectively honest towards our cause?
5. Should we continue to try and go it alone?
By any relative measure compared to many other countries we have a large number of charities and NFP’s in Aotearoa.
However, we are a small country with a small population and as a result by having a large number it means that the vast majority of these charities and NFP’s are also very small.
We are not saying that big is beautiful. However, we cannot ignore the fact that the existence of many very small entities results in a lot of duplication and administration that detracts from the amount of impact that can be achieved. As one example, think about governance boards and how many volunteers are needed to help operate so many entities. In any organisation there are critical size points below which even basic administration can seriously detract from the positive impact that can be created.
Do a search of the Charities Register or have a look on the internet and you will also quickly find that there are many NFP’s and charities existing to address the same or a similar issue and often even in a similar geographic area. As such they are usually competing for the limited resources available.
Again, if we are truly seeking to create the most positive impact for society at large, is this a sensible approach? Merging like organisations is at the extreme end of the spectrum to addressing this issue. We are not advocating that it always represents an appropriate solution because it has its own complexities. That can also be a bridge too far for many to contemplate, unless they are forced to by funders or legislation.
However, we are starting to see, and expect to see more of, an increasing pressure from funders wanting groups to work better together and for there to be better collaboration to achieve greater positive impact with the limited available resources. Hence even if a merger may be just too hard, there is still significant positive potential to be gained by closer collaborations. One example of this could be creating hubs where many entities can access and share common resources rather than needing to duplicate all – that can be a very effective option.
6. Are we thinking broadly enough about who we can collaborate with?
We believe we are headed into a much more global and interconnected future. It will be one where more and more businesses are waking up to for-purpose and social licence, and more enlightened Governments are waking up to holistically measuring wellbeing rather than just economic busy-ness. For your charity or NFP to remain relevant and impactful in such an environment are you thinking widely enough about who you could partner and collaborate with to create more impact?
Sometimes 1+1 can equal 3 if you get the mix right. But this takes inspired leadership skills to leave ego behind, to truly think openly and creatively, to expand your networks into perhaps surprising areas, to put yourselves in someone else’s shoes to understand how it can help them as well as wider society, to explore the unusual and untested.
7. Can we reimagine the future?
In the midst of uncertainty, people are re-evaluating what they support, so we suggest it may be time to look at our messaging and how we convey why our organisations exist. This is a time to have stronger communication to our stakeholders and the general public around what we do, and why.
Is this an opportunity to reimagine how we fulfil our purpose in order to be successful and as impactful as possible?
Those that can imagine the future can create it.
Photo: Phil Botha/Unsplash
Extract from the white paper “Charting the Future: A Framework for thinking about Change” co-written with Craig Fisher in July 2020. While written with charities and NFPs in mind the principles apply to all. Thank you Craig for the chance to collaborate on this.