For the work I do in the community and with nonprofits, the "war" methapor is not used near as much as "competition." This term from business is brought into the conversation by well-meaning volunteers from their life experience in the business world. A few months ago I was presenting to a SCORE chapter which is made up of retired business people wanting to give back to the community. My topic was about the Top 10 differences to keep in mind when consulting with nonprofits. I thought we had had very eye-opening, effective time together---then, at the very end, one of the gentlemen raised his hand and said, "Wouldn't all this not be important if nonprofits just realized they were in competition with one another." Uggghhh! So I responded with the following question, "How can you be in competition to do the most good?" I believe that if the mission of nonprofits is to make our world and communities a better place, they should work together to ensure they are doing the most good.
Stephen shared "in leading with friendship, we give ourselves hope that we are all in this together and we all have a responsible to care and sustain one another through positive feedback and fostering shared visions. I reflect on last Christimas when I attended the "Band Together for Kids" event that was put together by five nonprofits serving kids. Proceeds from the evening of music, food, and fun went to a fund that any of the organizations can access to provide "extras" to the children they serve. The leaders of those nonprofits welcomed folks to the event, a few even played in the bands, and they laughed and had fun together...as friends. This event and the friendship and collaboration it exhibited for a shared vision of supporting children is much more compelling and sustainable than assuming competition/war against one another.
Even though it is more compelling to collaborate, our large systems often set us up for war. Our state budget this year in Illinois has meant "war" for many sectors. Just in back payments alone, the state owes nonprofits hundreds of millions of dollars. Also, most who receive state funding have experienced a 10-25% cut in their budgets. When nonprofits go to represent their cause to legislators, they must identify the specific area they represent...seniors, youth, people with disabilities, etc. Budget-related bills have been able to pass because they are tied to these nonprofit services. Ironically, Illinois is one of very few states that does not have a statewide nonprofit alliance or association. With the lack of this unifiying voice, the various silos of the sector have had to fend for themselves. The crisis of this year was more severe than past years (where this is has also occured) but seems to be shifting the conversation. A statewide organization the Donors Forum is beginning to help staff advocacy efforts--especially for the social services system. And I'm sure this is not the end.
How do we choose not to compete or be in "war" when our world of systems in business, economics, government, and more are based on it?
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Leadership & Friendship
THE PROMPT:
"Woolf (1938) in Three Guineas asked where the procession of educated men was leading. Her list of concerns exists yet today, with others added. The leadership challenges are enormous – an unconscionable rich-poor gap, in this country and world-wide, ghastly wars and internecine strife, violence of all types and degrees, and environmental destruction that threatens the sustainability of all, to name only a few. Underlying these tragedies are conceptions of the self as separate from others and the world. The challenges call for new ways to think about and practice leadership, or as Woolf (1938) said, “by finding new words and creating new methods. (p. 143)
“Metaphors are compelling ‘invisible powers.’ Since metaphors structure both perception and action, conceptualizing leadership as friendship provides a stance toward/with the world that can contribute to shaping new actions and ways of thinking. That friendship stance is grounded in perceptions of connection and interdependence from which emerge a sense of responsibility and care. This conceptualization of leadership as friendship extends the responsibilities of leadership beyond one’s own group.
“Leaders within a friendship orientation can only maintain such a stance by having a vision of Dickinson’s ‘possibles’ that are ‘lit by the imagination.’ Such a view allows leaders to leave behind, at least temporarily, an adversarial approach for one that is more respectful and open to the potential, if not yet actualized, mutuality of the parties involved, as illustrated by the cases above (in the whole article). Leaders practicing within a friendship metaphor call on their imagination to see ‘the possibles’, the possibilities they might otherwise not see. The friendship metaphor asks leaders to affirm the best in human beings, whether as followers, potential followers, or those who are viewed as ‘enemies’ of the leader. It promotes the making of ‘imaginative leaps’ (McFague’s phrase) across a distance. In doing so, it expands our capacities to imagine what ought to be, to act on that vision, and to respect and care for each other in an interdependent world, ultimately shaping a more humane world.”
"Rethinking Leadership: Leadership as Friendship,”Gerri Perreault
Advancing Women in Leadership Online Journal, Volume 18, Spring 2005
http://www.advancingwomen.com/awl/social_justice1/Perreault.html
MY RESPONSE:
As I reflect on Perreault’s writing, I am struck by two current situations where I am experiencing friendship grounded in connections and trust that have led to some amazing “possibles”…as well some challenges:
1. This week I have the opportunity to do one of my favorite activities within the Foundation…go on site visits. Site visits entail reviewing the full grant application from an organization and then spending an hour plus with the leaders of the organization discussing the project in more detail. It is a great way to bring the application to life…and to secure further information I can share with our grant committee who makes the ultimate decision about the grant. Last year was my first year to do site visits and I was able to do so with not knowing many of the potential grantees. This year, however, is different. Over the past year, I have built different levels of relationships and friendships with almost all of the prospective grantees. Three I would call friends, two I am in other networking organizations with, two I serve on other boards with, most have been to at least one of our trainings throughout the past year…and one is even my neighbor! As I review the applications, I have had a hard time looking at the proposed project or activity purely from a mental place. I know the people behind the projects and have a sense for them outside of just what I see on paper. Also, I know that the individual or group of people supporting a project/program are usually what make it succeed. I have had to be very intentional to look as critically as I can to ensure the people and the project make sense. As I reflect on Perreault’s remarks, I am aware that my friendships allow me to make more leaderful decisions but must also be tempered with my logical side of due diligence to ensure I am recommending quality grants.
2. Over the past year I have had a great group of eleven individuals meeting monthly and in between in action teams to bring a regional-wide effort and project to fruition. The group met last week to determine its future goals and structure. It was a very productive meeting and I am excited for the decentralized, local approach we will be trying. Many of these people represent organizations that could be seen as competitors (nonprofit term for “war”)—trying to secure more resources for their particular cause or geographic area. This could not be further from what occurred. These individuals work together and look for ways to build on what’s working in other areas and how to leverage the strengths of the group…and include others that have additional strengths. Could this happen more deeply? Sure. But as I read Perreault’s commentary, I was struck that probably one of the main reasons for their interactions and assumption for collaboration is that the “sense of responsibility and care” has been built. The challenge for me is how to foster it long-term especially knowing that financial incentives come and go, organizational priorities change, and more.
One of my personal soapbox issues is when people say they are partners or collaborating and all it is is an exchange of funds. We all have so much to offer as individuals or organizations that if a need must be met, it will! I loved the word “possibles”…as my experience has been that the most diverse the group, the better the possibles are generated.
"Woolf (1938) in Three Guineas asked where the procession of educated men was leading. Her list of concerns exists yet today, with others added. The leadership challenges are enormous – an unconscionable rich-poor gap, in this country and world-wide, ghastly wars and internecine strife, violence of all types and degrees, and environmental destruction that threatens the sustainability of all, to name only a few. Underlying these tragedies are conceptions of the self as separate from others and the world. The challenges call for new ways to think about and practice leadership, or as Woolf (1938) said, “by finding new words and creating new methods. (p. 143)
“Metaphors are compelling ‘invisible powers.’ Since metaphors structure both perception and action, conceptualizing leadership as friendship provides a stance toward/with the world that can contribute to shaping new actions and ways of thinking. That friendship stance is grounded in perceptions of connection and interdependence from which emerge a sense of responsibility and care. This conceptualization of leadership as friendship extends the responsibilities of leadership beyond one’s own group.
“Leaders within a friendship orientation can only maintain such a stance by having a vision of Dickinson’s ‘possibles’ that are ‘lit by the imagination.’ Such a view allows leaders to leave behind, at least temporarily, an adversarial approach for one that is more respectful and open to the potential, if not yet actualized, mutuality of the parties involved, as illustrated by the cases above (in the whole article). Leaders practicing within a friendship metaphor call on their imagination to see ‘the possibles’, the possibilities they might otherwise not see. The friendship metaphor asks leaders to affirm the best in human beings, whether as followers, potential followers, or those who are viewed as ‘enemies’ of the leader. It promotes the making of ‘imaginative leaps’ (McFague’s phrase) across a distance. In doing so, it expands our capacities to imagine what ought to be, to act on that vision, and to respect and care for each other in an interdependent world, ultimately shaping a more humane world.”
"Rethinking Leadership: Leadership as Friendship,”Gerri Perreault
Advancing Women in Leadership Online Journal, Volume 18, Spring 2005
http://www.advancingwomen.com/awl/social_justice1/Perreault.html
MY RESPONSE:
As I reflect on Perreault’s writing, I am struck by two current situations where I am experiencing friendship grounded in connections and trust that have led to some amazing “possibles”…as well some challenges:
1. This week I have the opportunity to do one of my favorite activities within the Foundation…go on site visits. Site visits entail reviewing the full grant application from an organization and then spending an hour plus with the leaders of the organization discussing the project in more detail. It is a great way to bring the application to life…and to secure further information I can share with our grant committee who makes the ultimate decision about the grant. Last year was my first year to do site visits and I was able to do so with not knowing many of the potential grantees. This year, however, is different. Over the past year, I have built different levels of relationships and friendships with almost all of the prospective grantees. Three I would call friends, two I am in other networking organizations with, two I serve on other boards with, most have been to at least one of our trainings throughout the past year…and one is even my neighbor! As I review the applications, I have had a hard time looking at the proposed project or activity purely from a mental place. I know the people behind the projects and have a sense for them outside of just what I see on paper. Also, I know that the individual or group of people supporting a project/program are usually what make it succeed. I have had to be very intentional to look as critically as I can to ensure the people and the project make sense. As I reflect on Perreault’s remarks, I am aware that my friendships allow me to make more leaderful decisions but must also be tempered with my logical side of due diligence to ensure I am recommending quality grants.
2. Over the past year I have had a great group of eleven individuals meeting monthly and in between in action teams to bring a regional-wide effort and project to fruition. The group met last week to determine its future goals and structure. It was a very productive meeting and I am excited for the decentralized, local approach we will be trying. Many of these people represent organizations that could be seen as competitors (nonprofit term for “war”)—trying to secure more resources for their particular cause or geographic area. This could not be further from what occurred. These individuals work together and look for ways to build on what’s working in other areas and how to leverage the strengths of the group…and include others that have additional strengths. Could this happen more deeply? Sure. But as I read Perreault’s commentary, I was struck that probably one of the main reasons for their interactions and assumption for collaboration is that the “sense of responsibility and care” has been built. The challenge for me is how to foster it long-term especially knowing that financial incentives come and go, organizational priorities change, and more.
One of my personal soapbox issues is when people say they are partners or collaborating and all it is is an exchange of funds. We all have so much to offer as individuals or organizations that if a need must be met, it will! I loved the word “possibles”…as my experience has been that the most diverse the group, the better the possibles are generated.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
