Traditionally Not-for-Profit boards have been largely comprised of people with a passion for the cause or a personal connection to the organisation. Manifest examples in Australia are Jeff Kennett’s work with Beyond Blue (he is the former Chair and Founder of the organisation, now chaired by former Prime Minister, Julia Gillard) or Rosie Batty of the Luke Batty Foundation. Kennett sought to bring mental health issues such as anxiety, depression and suicide into public conversation, which as former Victorian Premier and Hawthorn Football Club President, he championed as public health issues. Batty, who directly experienced domestic violence, was Australian of the Year in 2015 and has gone on to become a Founding Member of the Council of Australian Governments Advisory Panel on Reducing Violence against Women and their Children and Chair the Victim Survivors’ Advisory Council for the Victorian Government.
No doubt, like other similarly committed NFP Board Directors, this has resulted in them providing hours of unpaid work to supplement the executive in areas such as fundraising and planning. Depending on the size of the organisation, pro bono board members often get involved from grass roots levels, right through to preparing the financials. While any assistance is gratefully accepted, it can sometimes blur the lines between Board and Executive responsibilities, not to mention adulterating governance requirements.
Skills based boards have been common in the commercial sector for many years. More recently we are seeing For Purpose Organisations move towards this format, but there is some debate as to whether it comes at the cost of losing the organisation’s soul. So what is the right balance to ensure the mission of an organisation does not get lost?
In its guide to Good Governance for Not-for-Profit Organisations, The Australian Institute of Company Directors (AICD) recommends a board should be comprised of a diverse group of people with an appropriate mix of skills, knowledge, professional as well as industry experience (ideally the philanthropic sector) who are aligned to the organisation’s objectives and strategic goals. It notes there is often a delicate balance to achieve when making board appointments for NFPs, because they are run by passionate people aligned with a particular cause. While it’s desirable to recruit individuals who will help promote constructive discussion and challenge any group-think behaviour, it’s important not to lose board cohesion. “The absence of a collegiate approach to decision-making can lead to highly dysfunctional outcomes, including decision paralysis.”
The AICD’s suggested skillset for NFP board appointments includes:
TRANSEARCH often work with clients who have this same challenge, and no one formula suits them all. While it can be argued that you don’t need to understand the service sector of the organisation to be effective at a governance level, if there is no subject matter expertise on the Board, you may not appreciate the inherent risks facing the service itself. Equally, if there is no personal attachment to the cause, will you really be passionate about achieving the best outcomes for stakeholders? A Board position is also a significant time commitment. Sometimes you’ll be required during business hours (which can be problematic, if elsewhere employed), but you can expect a lot of out-of-hours work.
It’s fair to say all Boards should be made up of professionals who are personally committed to the objectives of the organisation. But if you can’t find this, which way would you lean?
As the population ages, the profile of leaders change. After years of steady growth – albeit with a few scares, like “the recession we had to have” – Baby Boomers are starting to retire and Gen X are filling more and more senior leadership positions with measured and meaningful skills they learnt along the way.
Boomers brought independent goal oriented and self-actualisation into the work place – not relying on others to get things done, self-made and proud of it! They adjusted the world around them to get the outcome they wanted.
Gen X bring technology and flexibility to the fore, aiming for work-life balance. Doing it their way, but retaining the traditional beliefs of home ownership and a comfortable affordable lifestyle. They are educated and have driven specialisation, creating a whole new vocabulary of work terms such as specialism and workforce to cope with specialist project and change management, moving away from the more generalist skillset.
But what about Gen Y, or as they are increasingly being referred to, Millennials? What will be their way of working and have we even considered what legacy they will leave?
Having read a number of academic papers recently, several things have come to light:
Millennials are often unkindly referred to as an entitled generation, wanting to progress before they have paid their dues, seeing themselves at the centre of the universe. But when you look at job availability, housing affordability and the high level of education debt they carry, is it really any wonder they are concerned about themselves?
The continued growth and success of your organisation depends on investing in the future generation of leaders. It may be timely to review your strategy to engage Millennials and other aspiring executives.
Remember when your business plan was the holy grail on market strategy? A good strategic plan defined the best way to achieve success, which relied on superstar recruits all reporting in to a leader who represented the hierarchy, often far removed from operational activities and the culture amongst the people involved in day-to-day production and delivery of the goods or services its customers bought.
There’s an evolutionary shift taking place in leading organisations, says organisation culture expert and designer of the TRANSEARCH Orxestra© methodology, Dr John O. Burdett. He’s not just talking about a better way of approaching ‘how we do things around here’.
Discussing the effective recruitment of executives, John Burdett describes senior leaders with a different mindset about what it means to lead, an attitude which has changed dramatically over the last ten years. His observations (tabled below) can be translated into leadership competencies, which are detailed in John’s book, The A-Z of Organisation Culture, launched in Australia at our seminar series earlier this year. In fact assessing those essential dimensions of leadership including employing the head and engaging the heart, are fundamental to the Orxestra© Methodology.
|Leadership 2006||Leadership 2016|
|The ‘plan’||Strategic scenarios|
|Strategy drives culture||Culture enables strategy|
|The team works for the leader||The leader works for the team|
|Structure: hierarchical||Structure: network centred|
|Team: homogeneous||Team: multicultural|
|The one best way||Comfort with ambiguity|
|Expertise||Speed of learning|
|If it aint broke, don’t fix it||Introducing disruptive technologies|
|Change management||Reframe mindsets|
|Enrich the tribe||Build community|
|Steady state||Embrace complexity|
In the complex new world of contemporary commercial business, the stoic leader who successfully maintained the status quo – a homogeneous workforce, sustainable profits, predictable growth – has given way to leaders with agility – ones who embrace technology, are prepared for or initiate disruption, and are open-minded about diversifying their product/services and client mix.
As John Burdett says, we as talent acquisition specialists should be hiring with tomorrow’s culture in mind: Are you hiring for today, or tomorrow?
Today is a day to check in with your colleagues and friends to make sure they are OK, but is one day a year really enough?
In workplaces across the country people will hear “RU OK?” today. Some may think the question is invasive, others will think the person asking is simply being a bit trite, only enquiring because someone informed them that they should. Then we’ll usually answer offhand “I’m fine, how about you?” But what about those people who are hiding their difficulties?
We’ve seen the statistics about the impact of mental health on productivity, with the ABS reporting self-harm (suicide) as the leading cause of death among those aged 15 to 44. Beyond Blue reports one in four young Australians currently has a mental health condition. Yet we only seem to raise the issue once or twice per year.
During my 30 year working career I have had the privilege to work in a number of countries, with some amazing people. There’s one who really sticks with me. He was a brilliant man, a world leader in his field. A father, a grandfather a loving husband who to the world around him, appeared ‘normal’.
Being engaged, enthusiastic and a contributor, appearing to be outwardly happy took a great deal of energy to maintain when he headed out the door to work each day. He often said, if workplaces were more accepting of people’s personal flaws, colleagues more empathetic and society more genuine in its desire to help others, he could have achieved so much more in his career.
So he kept his head down, became very risk averse, doing things the same old ways. Not wanting to draw the attention to himself, he kept his ideas to himself in meetings, leading others to question as his productivity dropped, whether he had any value to add to the organisation.
Unfortunately his internal demons overtook him.
One in five people suffer from a mental illness at some time during their lives. They experience self-doubt, become disengaged, unproductive and eventually isolated. Their impact on co-workers can be enormous. The Aussie attitude of showing no emotion in the workplace has resulted in a hidden epidemic that has seen us lose some of our finest minds, our friends and co-workers, mothers, fathers, children and siblings.
We can improve the way we connect with our colleagues, families and friends by starting a meaningful conversation. Ask someone “RU OK?” every day.
Yesterday I had the pleasure of touring the new Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre (VCCC) building in Parkville as an invited guest of the Melbourne Chamber of Commerce. Our hosts from Grocon and Plenary Health showed us around selected areas that were very impressive – not what you may expect of a cancer service!
On entering the 13 story building the stunning internal atrium towers all the way to the roof top garden… a striking feature, but I’ll talk about that later. Still undergoing final touches before the moving in day, the building has three zones: health service delivery, research and back of house (administration). Colour coding is a feature of its leading approach to way-finding through the Centre.
With 160 overnight inpatient beds, a 42-bed capacity intensive care unit and 110 same-day beds, the majority of patients enjoy natural light and some of the best views of Melbourne.
There are also a number of outdoor areas – remember the roof top garden I mentioned earlier? It is one of the largest in Melbourne and features mature trees, a BBQ area and spots for quiet contemplation. All are within easy access to a cafe giving patients and families the opportunity to take in some fresh air and sunshine.
The Centre is a collaborative partnership between Peter Mac, Melbourne Heath, Melbourne University, Plenary Health, VCCC, the Australian and Victorian Governments, and looks to be setting the bar high for facilities combining health research and delivery. True to the aim of architects DesignInc to make ‘a positive difference to the health and happiness of people’s lives,’ the design has been created to encourage knowledge sharing, impacting on breakthroughs to deliver next generation cancer treatments.
VCCC is not only a model for health services of the future. It’s a great example of how more workplaces could be.
Debate has raged for years about the value of the Human Resources department. Is it deserving of a seat on the Executive or just an administrative function that provides staff with the warm and fuzzies? Often maligned as the go-to place when things go wrong, both organisations and the people working in them could benefit from readjusting their view of HR to the place to go to get things right.
Recent discussions about Behavioural Capital highlight that the way you relate to and act with different markets, such as B2B and B2C, will impact your bottom line. There are a plethora of articles and writings that highlight the importance of behavioural capital, but few that actually quantify it. Have a look at A Cognitive Theory of the Firm: Learning, Governance and Dynamic Capabilities by Bart Nooteboom or read Praxis Towards Sustainable Empowering Learning Environments in South Africa edited by Dennis Francis, Sechaba Mahlomaholo, Milton Nkoan for example.
What if we were to extrapolate the concept to include how you act internally with colleagues? Interestingly, the experts also point out that while many organisations believe they understand their culture, when questioned, they are likely to describe their aspired culture.
So let’s imagine a motivated and aligned workforce who were all working towards the same goal… Let me introduce Cultural Capital. A better title for a new relationship with Human Resources.
In Cultural Capital, HR is a key driver. It partners with the Executive, develops a culture map, then works across the organisation to embed it throughout the employee lifecycle. Imagine the savings: improved productivity, less sick leave and fewer disciplinary issues. Not to mention the value added to your brand when your business becomes a true employer of choice. Prospective candidates will be beating a path to your door. What a difference a word can make!