image from http://thecelebration.wordpress.com/2011/08/25/bridging-the-gap/

Over the past few months, members of our Interim Executive Director pool have shared some resources and lessons through the most recent installment of our Interim ED blog series. They shared everything from thoughts on leading during a merger to working your way through Founder’s Syndrome. They shared a recommendation for framing the Interim ED position as a long-term consultant, shared a checklist of essential documents for leadership transitions, and made the case for using the transition period as an intentional pause to build organizational strength. In addition, they discussed leveraging experienced EDs as mentors and executive coaches to retain key leaders or help new ones acclimate.

Greenlights established the Interim ED program in 2007, and since then, members of the group have provided 67 months of personal leadership, support, and guidance to nonprofits in transition. Through these experiences, they’ve shared wisdom with local nonprofits on the topics above and much, much more. Because the members of our group are all former nonprofit Executive Directors and have served on nonprofit boards–in addition to many of them having for-profit leadership experience as well, they are well-prepared to enter a nonprofit in transition and apply their skills and expertise to transitioning the organization to its next phase.

They receive training and support from Greenlights to leverage their talents and perspective to organizations as an Interim ED, with emphasis on being a calming, stabilizing influence on your organization during an often complex time of transition and providing an independent, objective perspective during their placement period.

Whether your organization is working to retain or buttress your current Executive Director through coaching and mentoring, in the gap between leaders, or helping a new ED get up to speed, Greenlights and our seasoned pool of Interim ED members can help your organization through the transition with objective insights, application of best practices and resources, and confident and calming leadership. If you would like to learn more about how your organization can work with a member of this group, please get in touch with me or Tara Kirkland.

Guest post by Gretchen Flatau, Member of Greenlights’ Interim Executive Director Pool

In one of my recent Interim Executive Director assignments I was surveying staff and board members about their concerns for the organization. One respondent said that it was unconscionable that the organization would hire an interim and take 6 months to hire a permanent ED. Really?

This person saw an interim as an unnecessary stopgap and would have preferred the board immediately search and hire an ED as soon as the former gave notice. But instead, the board, not only gave itself time to find the right person through a thoughtful, well-planned search but they also increased the organization’s chance for future success.

Why is it better, in many instances, to hire an interim ED? According to Tom Wolfred of CompassPoint Nonprofit Services:

• Hiring an Interim ED provides an opportunity for an objective review of the agency. It is a chance to gather information on what’s right and what is dysfunctional.
• It is an opportunity to remove organization barriers. Essentially a chance to fix problems of the past so the new ED can focus on the future. For instance it is not unusual for organizations to have a need to improve administrative systems. An interim ED will have the experience to identify and address those issues.
• Hiring an Interim ED provides some distance between the previous ED and the next; creating a more welcoming environment for a new ED. Often whether an ED left on their own or were encouraged to move on, the board and staff have feelings about the change and the person that are better resolved before a permanent ED starts.
• The Interim ED will be a mentor and coach for the new ED. The interim can serve an extremely valuable role as mentor for an incoming ED providing objective guidance and support.
• Hiring an Interim gives the board the time to engage in a thoughtful and well-planned executive search. The future success of the organization depends on finding the right leader; the search should be done with care and consideration.

According to Wolfred, “groups that do use an interim ED emerge stronger, more financially sound, and with high levels of optimism about the future impact of their agency services.”

In my experiences as an interim ED, there have been board members who were initially not sure if it made sense to hire an interim. They were concerned about taking the time and putting off hiring an ED. But once the process is underway, board members often feel that they gain valuable insight into the organization and hire the new ED with knowledge and deliberateness that they would not have had otherwise. These boards were glad that they used an Interim ED and in the process not only helped their agencies to succeed but also became better board members through the process.

View all the blog posts from our Interim ED series. If you have any questions or would like more information about Greenlights’ Interim Executive Director Program or succession planning, please contact Tara Levy.

Guest post by Jack Nokes, Member of Greenlights’ Interim Executive Director Pool

AMOA-Arthouse at Laguna Gloria, where Jack Nokes is currently Interim Executive Director

Boards can be at their best (and worst) when hiring a new Executive Director.  Typically, this is the most important decision a board will make. It requires discernment, judgment, patience, and big-picture vision. If a board makes the right decision, the new leader can transform the nonprofit into an effective sustainable force in the community. A wrong decision can be a setback for the organization, continuing a cycle of struggle and (possibly) resulting in another search in the next few years.

The decision to consider merging with another nonprofit with a similar and/or overlapping mission is another momentous board decision. Get it right, and it could mean organizational efficiencies, rejuvenation, and a path to sustainability. On the other hand, a wrong decision could damage the effectiveness—and even existence—of both entities considering merger.

I recently went through a merger process as an Interim Executive Director for one of the merging parties, and I would like to relate some of my experiences and lessons learned from the vantage point of an Interim ED.

Board Leadership Matters

Perhaps the most important key to the merger I experienced was that both board presidents saw the potential benefits of a merger, were committed to the process, and stayed in constant communication. Despite setbacks and fundamental disagreements between the parties, these leaders were dedicated to doing the process right, and they kept “their eyes on the prize” throughout the process. Without their vision and commitment of an enormous amount of time, it might not have happened. However, they did not ramrod the merger through, but instead were both very careful to let the process work, keep their boards informed in a transparent manner, and include every member of their respective boards in the important decisions.

Mergers are Not for Beginners

Typically, key staff and board members will not have had any experience with mergers. Therefore, bringing in experienced consultants can play a key, possibly determinative role. As an Interim ED without merger experience, I had to respect the preferences of the leaders of my board, but I also was there to provide my best advice. In this case, my advice was to meet with Greenlights President and Executive Director Matt Kouri, who has substantial merger experience. Matt’s initial advice on how to proceed was spot on, and I was convinced that not only did we need a skilled facilitator for our merger exploration process, but also Greenlights was the right facilitator to use. Matt will be the first to say that having a facilitator does not ensure that a merger will succeed (and he has facilitated an unsuccessful one), but not having a facilitator may make failure more likely. Early in the process, I called a few colleagues who had been through mergers and I found that the most likely predictor of an unsuccessful attempt at merger was the lack of a facilitator.

Mergers are Complex and Cannot be Rushed

In our initial talks with Matt, this merger appeared to be such a “no-brainer” that our board and staff leaders (including me) felt that a merger could be accomplished in four months. Matt cautioned us that our timeframe was unrealistic, and that six or more months would be required. In our agreement with Matt, we compromised on five months, but Matt was right … it took about seven. Why does it take so long? After all, corporate mergers can be done in six weeks or less. Whereas corporate mergers are typically straightforward takeovers (i.e., the corporation with the most money or leverage does the taking over), nonprofit mergers are more complicated and time-consuming. While financial issues are one important aspect of a nonprofit merger, there are a number of other key issues involving mission, staff leadership, audience, programs, funders, events, etc. Whereas corporate boards normally delegate much of the responsibility and authority to a CEO, nonprofit boards are much more involved. Since these are not financial takeover situations, the nonprofit board has the final say on a merger. In short, the decisions and the decision-making process are more complicated in a nonprofit situation.

Due Diligence Matters; Trust But Verify

The “due diligence” phase of the merger process usually takes place after the groups have decided to merge but before the formal documents are signed. While most of the fundamental reasons to merge are fairly easy to discern early on, the details can be devilish. The due diligence process involves opening up the respective organizations’ financial books as well as legal and operational documents, a good old fashioned Ross Perot “look under the hood.” You hope that everything is as it appears to be, but sometimes you can find surprises. For instance, in a merger of two established visual arts organizations, one would think that there would be a reasonable amount of overlap in their memberships. However, when we merged and purged the mailing lists, we discovered that 4.25% of the members belonged to each group. This surprising fact was not anywhere near a “deal-killer,” but it certainly gave us a sense of what a challenge (and opportunity) it would be to develop programming for a merged institution that would attract two very different audiences.

The above are just a few of the lessons learned from going through a six month merger process.  It was a lot of work, but in the end, the operational efficiencies, addressing the critical needs of both institutions, and the ultimate benefits to the community made the process all worthwhile.

View all the blog posts from our Interim ED series. If you have any questions or would like more information about Greenlights’ Interim Executive Director Program or succession planning, please contact Tara Levy.

Guest post by Ashley deJong, Member of Greenlights’ Interim Executive Director Pool

Many of us have worked for an organization or served on the board of an organization susceptible to the dreaded condition of “Founder’s Syndrome” (FS). To a founder, their organization is like their baby they have invested in emotionally, professionally, possibly financially. A lot of parents find it hard to let their babies go (my son is 5 and I’m already learning this). But when the baby is a nonprofit, FS can be the poison pill of a powerhouse executive and ultimately hurt more than help.

How to Identify FS

FS can be defined in many ways. In an FS-stricken organization, decisions are rarely made collectively. Nell Edgington recently noted in her blog that FS occurs in organizations with a culture where:

• Power and influence all reside within the single founder
• The brand of the organization is inextricably linked to the personality of the founder
• Staff are often powerless to speak up and be heard when they disagree
• The board of directors is a rubber stamp for founder decisions
• Decisions are rarely tested or debated

When FS takes over, the real danger is that the organization is designed to depend on one person, rather than systems, structures, staff, or even the mission. So when a founder leaves—by his choice or the board’s—the organization can find itself in real trouble.

A few questions to ask about your organization:

1. How are you linked to the community? Is it solely via one person or personality?
2. What is the institutional memory of the organization? What is actually written down and documented?
3. Are you worried that your founder is the best fundraiser that exists for your particular organization, i.e., do you think she is irreplaceable?

What is the Rx for FS?

If you’re reading this and thinking “Uh oh, this is us…” then what to do? While there is not a little blue pill for this issue, organizations need not despair.

First, treat the situation with compassion, not blame.

Founders are the ones who had the inspiration and passion to create a response to a serious problem in starting the organization.  While the Founder may not have the skills to run an organization or transition it to another level, they have other strengths that served the organization when it was in start-up or crisis mode.  No one sets out to harm their own organization.

Second, have a succession plan.

All organizations have to have leadership transitions—people don’t live forever.  If your organization has FS (or some variation of FS), consider this an opportunity to become more pro-active versus reactive. Appreciate that this is a time to plan, reflect and reorganize. As you look for your next leader, avoid writing a job description that is either a list of everything the founder is or is not.

Third, ensure the board and staff are engaged.

Often with a change a leadership there is a lot of fear floating around. Give your stakeholders a chance to communicate their concerns and be heard. When fear is just whispered about it will often lead to panic. If you do have FS, most, if not all, of the other voices in the organization may have been drowned out. Those new perspectives are likely very important.

Fourth, get on top of financials immediately.

Make sure the board has a firm grasp on where things are, how funds are accounted for, etc.

Finally, if facing a leadership transition, consider hiring an Interim Executive Director.

Finding an Interim ED can be an invaluable transition resource. An Interim ED can help identify all your weaknesses (and strengths). Interim EDs can provide a source of comfort and calm when everyone is wondering if the organization will continue without its fearless leader. They can help your board and staff acclimate to life without the founder so that the next leader arrives to a environment driven by more excitement than anxiety. This outsider perspective can be especially helpful with FS and, more importantly, set up your future fearless leader for an easier transition and long-term success.

Carter McNamara provides a great in-depth resource on Founder’s Syndrome.

FS is not a death sentence; it’s an opportunity to ensure your baby continues to live and thrive as an adult.

Greenlights’ consultants and members of our Interim Executive Director pool are often able to provide coaching and support. If you are interested in learning more about this, please contact Tara Levy.

Guest post by Sharon Reece, Member of Greenlights’ Interim Executive Director Pool

In these times of funding limitations and budget cutting measures for ALL nonprofits, one of the tempting targets for the “budget cutting ax” is always the staff development line items. After all, they might not be the items that show IMMEDIATE results like buying food for our clients or paying the utility bills. However, if we as Executive Directors or CFOs analyze our budgets, what is usually the biggest chunk of the expense? The staffing, of course.

While we all search diligently for those staff that come to us with really top level skills (and there are lots of those folks out there job hunting today!) those skills can fast become outdated. In addition, our need to “do more with less” has a tendency to place more and more responsibility on ourselves and our top level managers, leaving them in positions of constantly putting aside the important work of calm, reflective time needed to truly strategize, problem solve for the long term, and give adequate time to our direct reports to keep them functioning at a high level.

I recently worked with the finance and accounting group of a good sized nonprofit. During a two-day retreat, they wanted to focus on team building. Applause to them for still finding resources to actually do the retreat when the dreaded dailies were still waiting for them on their return to the office! In working with the CFO in preparation and during the retreat, one of the issues that came out loud and clear was that she, while being a very capable and talented CFO, struggled daily with the issue of managing her very diverse group and all their “quirks” and issues. “Why,” she lamented, “couldn’t they all just do their jobs without the drama and the constant need for her time and attention.” She felt that she could barely keep up with her high level work, much less supervise the staff and help them be more productive.

Sound familiar? Unless you have a Chief of Staff or Chief Operating Officer, a luxury many smaller nonprofits feel they cannot afford or justify, who among us has not felt that the line outside our door often keeps us from focusing on what we really need to be doing—the high level work and thought that we are so capable of and were hired to accomplish?

I would propose that these scenarios are exactly why Executive Coaching is a crucial investment for EVERY Executive Director and probably for every Senior Manager too.

Benefits of Executive Coaching:

• Builds in dedicated time for the busy executive to take a full stop away from the demands and stresses of the everyday office
• Gives the executive personalized “me” time to discuss and focus on very specific management problems that they may not be able to safely discuss with anyone else in the organization
• Provides an experienced, non-judgmental, non-threatening outsider view to help the executive discuss and consider new, customized management tools and possible solutions to everyday complex management issues
• Provides a regular forum (perhaps at monthly or 6 week intervals) to review progress in use of new techniques and to set new priorities for problem solving

Participants in Executive Coaching usually find that the time and money spent in this very personal type of development is much more beneficial and much more likely to have an immediate impact on their own performance and professional growth than equal time and money spent on group seminars, classes, management publications, etc.

Greenlights’ consultants and members of our Interim Executive Director pool are often able to provide coaching and support. If you are interested in learning more about this, please contact Tara Levy.