Answers are No Solution

Scott Briscoe wrote a post on Acronym about some speakers who did a talk about what Generation Y wants in the workplace but found their message carried across generations. Scott admits he's "anti-generation," though like most instances where he and I "disagree" we really don't. Scott says:

 I absolutely think the generational stereotypes have some basis in factual research, but these stereotypes break down so seriously at the individual level, that the noise around generational differences is significantly detrimental.

All stereotypes--or better, all generalizations break down at the individual level. The trick is in using them effectively. Think back to my post about micromanaging. I personally fit the stereotype of Gen X (was a latch-key kid, took care of myself, then in the workplace liked to be left alone and do things myself). As a manager, I got some feedback that I was "absent" from my younger direct reports. Now, if I had gone to the session that Scott described, I might have thought "Hmm, I'm not providing my younger employees with enough feedback, and I need to do that." Or, as I did in this case, I thought "Hmm, I'm Generation X and didn't like micromanaging so I might be over-reacting in assuming my younger employees want to be left alone as much." Either one is fine, because neither one actually gives me an answer and tells me what to do (answers are no solution). I have to have a conversation with my employees about it and together we will figure it out.

But knowing about generations can help me see what's happening, ask better questions, and have better conversations.

Daring to Lead 2006 - Finding 5

The authors of Daring to Lead 2006 saved the best for last—at least as far as The Hourglass Blog is concerned. Their fifth and final finding—that bench strength, diversity, and competitive compensation are critical factors in finding future leaders—cuts right to the heart of the generational shift coming to the leadership of nonprofit organizations. Here's a quick excerpt:

Because the majority of current nonprofit executives are baby boomers, anticipation of wide scale retirement has intensified the anxiety around leadership transition across the sector. This research suggests that many older executives are not on a traditional retirement trajectory; nearly half of executives older than 60 say that something other than retirement is what they will do next. Still, the nonprofit sector—like the other sectors—will most certainly have a market response to the talent supply available as the generational handoff unfolds. Our data suggest several points of concern. First, only half of executives at mid-sized organizations (5-20 staff) are actively developing future executives. Second, the sector does not appear to be achieving greater diversity in its newer and younger executives. And third, executives believe that the next cohort of leaders will require higher salaries and more work-life balance, things that small and min-sized nonprofits may struggle to provide.

What I really want to focus on is their third point of concern, that executives believe that the next cohort of leaders will require higher salaries and more work-life balance. The study cites that 61% of executives surveyed believe that if they left, their organizations would have to pay the next executive more than they are currently making. The amount of increased compensation perceived to be needed varies by organization size, but the majority in all size catergories seemed to think it would require 11-20% more.

The study authors conducted focus groups in additional to the survey, and some of the quotes from those focus groups are priceless.

Some participants believe that younger executives will expect to be paid more than baby boomers have accepted and that further, they will want work life balance to an extent the founders never expected from the nonprofit executive role. One executive commented, "The young people who come in want balance tomorrow." Another said, "Young people have a lot of high expectations about salary and benefits and they actually read the employee handbook and want everything they are entitled to."

To me, this is more than just reflective of a changing priorities of one generation versus another. I think it also reflects the growing establishment of nonprofit management as a profession—now with business literature, certification programs, degree programs, and a growing cohort of professionally-trained practitioners all its own. Yes, GenX wants more work-life balance than Baby Boomers, and is more concerned with being compensated for its talents, but some of that perceived demand for higher salaries goes with the development of that professional cohort.

Please don't misinterpret. I am not suggesting that Baby Boomer executives are not professional. But it would also not surprise me if a greater number of them are not in nonprofit management for the money or for the career development opportunities it can present. One focus group participant said:

People that do nonprofit work, that came out of the activism of the '60s, have a really different view: that somehow money is bad, or it's a shameful thing to expect to be paid well.

The survey also cites that 21% of its reponders are the founders of their organizations. I thought that was a surprisingly high number, but it seems to support this point. It would be interesting to see how that statistic changes over the next couple of decades.

Daring to Lead 2006 - Finding 4

Finding 4 of the Daring to Lead 2006 study states that, concerned with organizational sustainability, executives are seeking new skills and strategies. And the new skills and strategies they are seeking are, overwhelmingly, those related to fundraising and finance. The study cites the following percentages when executives were asked to identify the two skills they most need to build:

Fundraising = 49%
Finance = 30%
Networking/Partnerships = 26%
Strategy/Vision = 23%
Managing Staff = 18%
Working with Board = 17%
Advocacy = 14%
Public Speaking = 8%
Writing = 5%

I question how much of this, however, is due to their interest in organizational sustainability. If so many of them are planning to leave their jobs in the next five years (see Finding 1), couldn't this also mean that they are focused on their own professional development, and are simply trying to improve themselves in the areas they perceive themselves to be weak?

Indeed, this section of the survey also tracks the executives use of professional development. Depending on the size of the organization 87-89% of them attend workshops and conferences, 51-66% of them belong to professional associations, 19-33% use professional coaching, and 16-19% of them have some kind of nonprofit management certification or degree.

In my experience, association management is a sector that heavily invests in professional development, and these statistics may just be reflective of that trend.

Daring to Lead 2006 - Finding 3

Still working my way through the Daring to Lead 2006 study. Finding 1 was about how 75% non-profit executives of all ages plan to leave their jobs in the next five years. Finding 2 began to explore why, with Boards of Directors contributing significantly to executive burnout. Finding 3 continues that exploration of reasons—non-profit executives believe they make significant financial sacrifices to lead nonprofits.

This was another finding that did not vary much with the age of the executive. On a 6-point scale, 39% of executives under 40 years old rated their sacrifice as a 6, as did 37% of executives in their 40s, and 32% of executives in their 50s and 60s. What did seem to make a difference was the size of the nonprofit organization the executive was running—with the degree of perceived financial sacrifice much lower among executives of larger organizations where the salaries are higher. The data show as many as 70% of executives who work for small staff size organizations believing they have made a significant financial sacrifice, compared to only 44% of executives who work for large staff size organizations.

The study report doesn't address this point, but I'd be curious to see a comparison between those who believe they have made a financial sacrifice to lead a nonprofit with the various career paths that lead to nonprofit leadership. Is it only those who come from the for-profit sector who feel they've made a financial sacrifice? Or do those who have come up through the nonprofit ranks also feel that way?

Gen X Assets and Liabilities

Raines, Zemke and Filipczak have written a good book about Generations in the workplace. I particularly like that at the end of each chapter, they present an "Assets and Liabilities in the Workplace" section. I thought it was nice (and fair) to point out that EVERY generation has both assets and liabilities. Here's what they wrote for Generation X. Anything to challenge or add?

Assets:

·       Adaptable

·       Technoliterate

·       Independent

·       Unintimidated by authority

Liabilities:

·       Impatient

·       Poor people skills

·       Cynical

Daring to Lead 2006 - Finding 2

I continue to work my way through the Daring to Lead 2006 study. I blogged last time about the study's first finding—that 75% of surveyed nonprofit executives plan to leave their jobs in the next five years. Their second finding—that Boards of Directors and funders contribute to executive burnout—begins to get into the reasons why so many executives are apparently dissatisfied.

Look at these data sets from the study, comparing the responses of executives who were planning on leaving with those who were planning on staying:

Board is not personally supportive
46% of executives who plan to leave agree vs.
19% of executives who plan to stay

Board doesn't understand ED's job
49% of executives who plan to leave agree vs.
27% of executives who plan to stay

Board doesn't value ED's contributions
32% of executives who plan to leave agree vs.
8% of executives who plan to stay

Staff don't view the Board as leaders
66% of executives who plan to leave agree vs.
48% of executives who plan to stay

The point here is obviously the higher agreement rates among executives who are planning to leave. But look again at that last data set. Two-thirds of executives who plan to leave say their staff don't view their Board as an engaged leadership body—but nearly half of the executives who plan to stay say the same thing.

The study is careful to point out that it is simply reporting on executive perception of a relationship that requires strategic effort on both sides. In other words, just because an executive thinks her staff don't view her Board as leaders, that doesn't mean her staff really think that, or that her Board isn't really comprised of leaders.

I'm curious what you think about the potential behind this statistic—that between half and two-thirds of nonprofit staffs don't view their Boards as engaged leaders. Don't worry, I'm not asking you to comment on your staff and your Board. I'm asking whether you think such a disconnect really exists in such a high percentage of our nonprofit organizations. I'm skeptical.

The Leadership Meme - Hourglass Style

For background, read this.

Then check out what others have posted on their blogs: Jamie Notter, Jeff De Cagna, Deirdre Reid, Maddie Grant, Bruce Hammond.

Now, here's my list. The top three things I've learned about being a leader.

1. Make a decision. Get the facts, consult with others, hear what those affected by the decision have to say—but at the end of the day you need to make the decision and take ownership for what happens next. Leaders act.

2. Raise your expectations. The leader in any system sets the bar for performance, either knowingly or unknowingly. Do it knowingly. Expect more of yourself and of those you lead. You won't break the system and you may be surprised by what can be accomplished.

3. Don't get distracted. You must consciously decide what to spend your time on. Time is the most limited resource you have and it must be spent wisely on the things that you personally can have the greatest impact on. Don't let the trivial events of the day distract you from the long-range plans that you must nurture if they are to succeed.