Challenges of Not-for-Profit Sector Organisations - An Overview

In my PhD research on change management in the not-for-profit sector, I have identified a range of unique challenges faced by this sector. Organisations within this sector face ongoing sustainability problems which are directly linked to full or partial government funding which places them at risk of being responsive to ongoing political bias and the associated challenges of managing the ongoing conflict between issues of mission, and practicalities of operational and organisational sustainability, especially within religious based not-for-profits.

The ability to attract, maintain, and develop human resources, places ongoing strains and stresses on the constancy of programme and service delivery for not-for-profits. This issue specifically threatens those not-for-profits operating in the broader human service sectors of disability, mental health, and aged care. Additionally, the use and application of hybrid performance measurement criteria for those not-for-profits operating commercial and quasi commercial activities, in competition with for-profit organisations, test their management capabilities at both executive and board levels.

The demanding business environment that many in this sector have faced over extended periods of time, has jeopardised ongoing program funding, and placed heavy demands on service delivery, threatening the continuity of segments of their operations. This has been further compounded by a unique reliance on a diverse volunteer pool which challenges many in managerial and leadership functions within this sector, and places significant strain on their organisation’s abilities to achieve strategic and operational goals, within given timeframes.

In this context, the need to understand and deal with large, varied, and dispersed external and internal stakeholder groups, continues to strain not-for-profit human, financial, and capital resources, placing even further management constraints on these organisations, and potentially focusing attention away from their predominant service, and program delivery objectives. Moreover, these organisations tend to have complex revenue generation models, which reflect the varied sources of funds that need to be managed within a complex and often multi-skilled environment, where their ability to attract the full gamut of skills is already under sharp focus.

In amongst these NFP organisational issues is the multi-dimensional focus of not-for-profit management, which must have more than a unilateral view on purely bottom-line and associated shareholder value outcomes.

Many of these challenges are global characteristics of not-for-profit organisations, for example, regarding issues of revenue generation models in the United States, performance management difficulties in New Zealand, the United Kingdom & Europe, leadership and management ideological challenges in Scandinavian countries, and governance related challenges, especially within not-for-profit hospitals in the United States.

Associated with this broad range of challenges are the cultural attributes of those working within this sector. Those committed to working in this sector may do so because of a perceived connection with a broader societal good and the lack of private gain or profit at the organisational levels and their own perceptions of being human change-agents that become integral in changing the lives of those that rely on their services. Integral in this view is recognition of the pivotal role that such human service type organisations are now playing in society as part of an integrated four-pillar institutional service provision network encompassing government, not-for-profits, business and family networks. The above framework sets the cultural context within which the not-for-profit sector operates and provides insight into the challenges that lay ahead during processes of transformational change.

With a wealth of practical and research based experience, OPTIMUM NFP has developed a range of core capabilities in the servicing of Not-for-Profit sector organisations. These include:

• Change management where Action Learning is applied as a change method working across the organisation, and where organisational readiness for change is assessed at key points in the change program; 

• Strategic Risk Management where bespoke Risk Management Frameworks are developed around unique organisational characteristics

• Governance assessments where the effectiveness and efficiency of NFP boards are independently assessed, recommendations identified, and training developed to strengthen board functioning.

These core capabilities have been applied to such NFP organisations as The AIDS Council of NSW, Ausdance NSW, Australian Catholic University, The Australian Centre for Posttraumatic Mental Health, The Australian Diabetes Educators Association, Catholic Community Services, Centacare Broken Bay, Cure Cancer Australia Foundation, Eastern Respite & Recreation, Family Resource & Network Services Inc., Flintwood Disability Services, Koorana Child & Family Centre Inc., Meat & Livestock Australia, and Nepean Area Disabilities Organisation Inc.

Contact David Rosenbaum of OPTIMUM NFP to further discuss how OPTIMUM NFP can add value to your Not-for-Profit organisation.

The Alan Jones Debacle– What responsibilities do we all share as intelligent people?

There are a number of issues in this sad and sorry tale that disappoint me in the context of seeing myself as a reasonably intelligent Australian.

Firstly, there is the ridiculous notion expressed by Alan Jones that if he was aware of the fact that the event he was speaking at was not private, he would have not made the comments that he had made. At the same time he indicates that his 58 minute tirade was unscripted and unplanned and entirely off the cuff. On that basis how does he now indicate what he would have planned to say or not? 

Everyone knows what he thinks of the ALP and its leadership. He has expressed this openly for the last 2 years and used similar language in different contexts throughout that period.

This leads me to the second issue. Alan Jones is a very intelligent man and has maneuvered his way around public life for many a decade. He knows what to say and when to say it. As a very effective opportunist, he knows when to strike and when to pull back – swordsmanship is his forte. The time-frame hear was exquisite. Make the comment, feel the temperature and then quickly apologise. As evidence of this approach, see the amount of airtime this has and will get over the next few days and beyond. And what does that add up to? – AUDIENCE. And what does audience add up to? – RATINGS. And what do ratings add up to? – ADVERTISING DOLLARS. Even his apology was actually designed to add fuel rather than to portray a meaningful heartfelt apology from a man who knew exactly what he was saying, where he was saying it and why he was saying it. The apology was qualified (as all superficial apologies are!)

This leads me to the third issue. As intelligent people what do we do? Not listen to his radio rants? Ignore his radio station? Don’t give him oxygen? Don’t advertise on his station? Reject the shock-jock approach to public discourse? 

All Australians, especially in New South Wales (as Alan appears to have less of a following in other Australian States) need to have a serious look at themselves with regard this issue. The death of a parent is not an avenue for political advantage. We should ALL denigrate this. It is un-Australian and not in the public interest. Everyone should be speaking out and putting an end to this ongoing, unintelligent garbage that appears on our public airwaves and perpetrated by shock-jocks who rely on such public opportunities to pursue their own very self-centered interests.

All leaders in this country, political, commercial and religious need to support a return to values based discourse – unless, it is of course, in their interests not to, for whatever reasons they may have!

Social Unrest in Sydney's CBD - The Muslim Riots

The unrest that took place on the streets of the Sydney central business district over the weekend of the 15^th and 16^th September, were as unfortunate as they were ugly – but perhaps not for the reasons publicly stated on the airwaves and the printed press during and after the event.

Australia is, irrespective of what some would like us to believe, a society that is now made up of many different cultures and ethnicities. This has been so for many a decade, and if we correctly listen to our indigenous brothers and sisters and recognise the hundreds, if not thousands, of different cultures that made up the Australian continent before white settlement, a vast example of multi-culturalism that spread from one side of this great land to the other, north to south, and east to west.

We are not an isolated country bathing in the southern seas, oblivious to the rest of the world and the vast populations of the other continents. We cannot merely interact with these peoples of the world and their cultures when it suits us for trade or other commercial benefits. We must interact with them as a mature member of the so-called ‘global village’. The days of England and the so-called ‘mother-country’ are over. Accept it and reap the cultural and social rewards that are obvious to many, and not just the economic rewards that are more obvious.

The unfortunate aspect of what transpired over the weekend is the ugly face of Australia, those that fed the radio ‘shock-jocks’ of Sydney’s 2UE and 2GB radio stations with evidence of pure vile and hate, calling for an end to immigration, especially from Muslim countries, with the even more radical of these ‘shock-jocks’ supporting each and every word as if their commercial rating counted on each.

I was astounded as I was ashamed as I switched from the ABC coverage where I heard balanced discussions and arguments on both sides of the story, to the commercial stations that seemed to want to win the race-to-the-bottom, indeed succeeding in their fact-less exercise. What the protestors managed to achieve with children holding pure hatred in signs that they held with little understanding of their meaning, was also achieved by ignorant and ratings hungry ‘shock-jocks’ who, in the end, have different methods, yet debase their standing in the community, to equal depths of ‘lowness’.

We need to focus on inclusion and not exclusion, not just between Muslims and non-Mulsims, but between all cultures and religions that fundamentally have only good in their hearts. Let’s not judge everyone by the low standards of ignorant men who see violence as a solution. The rush to violence is the question that challenges us and how we respond as intelligent people is the solution.

Looking for a Change Management Tool for Your Not-for-Profit? Try Action Learning – It Really Does Work

The humanistic attributes of the Organisational Development link to Action Learning, have been identified as potentially the most important for the purposes of changing the cultural attributes of organizations and it is this element that makes it so applicable to the not-for-profit sector as a direct reflection of the characteristics attributed to staff within this sector. In this context, Action Learning is viewed as a multi-faceted, structured, experiential process that impacts an informed group of individuals in an organisational context, focusing on the proactive elements of the organisation as distinct from the more reactive elements

Whilst it has a defined starting point, being the resolution of some form of strategic or operational issue with no clear immediate or identifiable outcome, its end point is less defined as it relies not only on the identification of the solution or solutions, but also its implementation over time with constant feedback and input. Thus, an unending cycle of action, reflection and understanding underpins the base of an Action Learning approach. Hence it is an iterative process that rolls on until the end ‘target’ is achieved – that end target being the resolution of an organisational challenge.

It therefore relies heavily on successful workings of an open systems methodology that underpins the learning processes that makes Action Learning applicable. This is supported by the collaborative approach to problem solving as well as the learning that underpins the successful Action Learning outcome. Contextually, participants are the experts and these experts develop the solutions, implement the solutions, monitor the success and learn from the process, enabling the application of similar processes to future organisational and human development issues

Two fundamental elements of Action Learning are described in the name itself. The Action element refers to the underlying need to resolve issues at various levels. These could be personnel developmental issues that underpin personal performance or they could be organisational issues that underpin organisational performance. It is clear from a practical perspective that, implementing the outcomes of the participants within the Action Learning groups, empowers them and underpins the full learning experience which also underpins change outcomes.

The Learning element refers to the ability of the members to clearly identify the path that has been taken to derive the end outcomes and to inculcate this path development into future projects, irrespective of the nature of the project itself. Moreover it enables the participating individuals to become aware of, and further develop their own, functional attributes, both from an individual and group perspective. Thus, the Learning component of Action Learning enables participants to identify, develop and improve their utility from a personal and organisational perspective. Skill enhancement and development, therefore, becomes a fundamental by-product of the process. The extent to which such learning is focused entirely at the management level should be questioned, as a strong case can be made to elicit Action Learning as a process of engagement and development across the broader organisational hierarchy, further inculcating change processes in support of potential institutionalisation of the change outcomes.

OPTIMUM NFP has designed and developed Action Learning programs at numerous not-for-profit organizations with excellent results having been achieved both organisationally as well as from the perspective of personnel development.

Contact David Rosenbaum of OPTIMUM NFP to further discuss your requirements in this area. I would be more than happy to introduce Action Learning to you in an attempt to determine the extent to which it fits your organisational requirements.

Community Engagement and Volunteerism

Community Engagement and Volunteerism  

The Australian Not-for-Profit sector would never be able to achieve what it has, and continues to achieve, without heavy reliance on volunteers sourced from a very broad spectrum of society.  

The 2010 Productivity Commission report identified that some “4.6 million volunteers work with NFPs with a wage equivalent of $15 billion.” This report further identified that whilst most areas have seen a decline in volunteering hours over the 7 year period to 2006-07, cultural and recreation based organisations had seen strong growth during this period. This quantitative finding underscores the relative importance of this sector and therefore the need to encourage further involvement in this sector – with volunteers being an obvious resource, both intellectually and numerically. The centrality of this sector has been further reinforced by such writers as the American author Jon Van Til, writing in his 2008 publication entitled ‘Growing Civil Society’ wherein he suggested that “From a society-wide perspective, the role of the third sector is not only important because it concerns individuals, it is also important because the third sector has become a major player in modern institutional life.” This holds true in Australia as much as it has in the United States.

Brisbane based Colin Ball in his 2011 book entitled ‘It’s the Community Stupid!’ raised the question as to “What is it that influences people insofar as community awareness is concerned, and how do we encourage, enable and foster such awareness?”

IT is clear that society generally needs a NFP sector that is vibrant, resourced, and driven, in order to ensure that wherever possible, societal needs are being addressed and service provision gaps that result from transient, and sometimes politically driven government policies, are being met. The alternatives should be undesirable for us all.

Australian NFPs should consider the more efficient use of professional volunteers, outside those involved at the board level, as a source of vast experience that can contribute to organisational well-being. Bob Norbie, President and CEO, Special Olympics Montana USA, suggested that “If we wish to be all that we can be, we must forever learn better ways to service our mission through volunteers. When it works, it is extraordinary.”

The effective engagement and management of volunteers by NFP organisations can only be undertaken though the development and deployment of a clear and precise organisational policy framework which seeks to address a range of issues including:

·         Volunteer engagement strategies

·         Funding volunteer involvement

·         Management of volunteers

·         Integration strategies

·         Legal compliance issues, and

·         Monitoring and evaluating volunteers

Another avenue for volunteering at the ‘professional level’, is provided by the tertiary education sector through the formal placement of business school students into this sector to gain first hand understanding of the needs of these organisations and the needs of people who are serviced by them.

As many of you know, I am associated in a number of capacities, with the Australian Catholic University (ACU) in its North Sydney campus where I am involved as a sessional lecturer at the undergraduate and postgraduate levels, and where I am also undertaking my PhD research into change management in the NFP sector. ACU’s involvement in the NFP sector is strongly in keeping with its own value proposition and clear societal goals, one of the reasons for my involvement with this university.

The Business School at ACU is extremely active in this area. One of their key programs is the Professional Experience Programme. Contextually, all second-year undergraduate students undertake the Community Engagement unit which is now part of ACU’s core Curriculum. The unit develops an awareness and understanding of individual and social responsibility, with students volunteering 105 hours at a not-for-profit organisation and directly assisting the people accessing the service's support. This enhances the students' interpersonal, business-communication and teamwork skills, and encourages them to embrace community involvement and ethical and social responsibilities.

Third-year Bachelor of Marketing and Bachelor of Human Resource Management students complete a Professional Placement as a core unit of their course. In applying theory to a real business environment, they develop industry-specific competencies, career opportunities, best business practices and professionalism.

In terms of accessing ‘professional’ resources, this could be beneficial to your NFP organisation in the context of your broader volunteer engagement strategy and in the context of specific projects that you may be currently running or are considering.

OPTIMUM NFP can assist in developing your NFP organisation's Volunteer Management Framework as well as putting your NFP in contact with the appropriate representative at ACU

Having difficulties with the Australian public hospital system? Try dealing with a public medical specialist unit – that’ll make you sick!

I always thought that to get a picture of the general ‘health’ of a society, one of the many indicators could well be the state of its public health system, with regards both the skills and quality of its technical expertise, how that expertise is applied in the delivery of the services for which it exists, and of course the technology and facilities that it provides.

If this is a measure, then Australia is starting to fail. Perhaps this decline has been far more advanced than I have noticed in the past. In fact, maybe the only reason I have started to notice, is the fact that I recently had to put my faith in this system owing to a medical complaint that was not straight forward and remains undiagnosed – not for want of me trying to get a diagnosis, but rather, the communication and operational inabilities of a certain, and nameless, public specialist unit attached to a major Sydney based public hospital.

Without labouring too much on the details, as these do not really add much to the overall points that I raise, the problems could best be sequentially highlighted as follows:

• Not being able to make direct contact with a living human being in the Unit, irrespective of the perceived urgency of the problem. The only contact numbers that are provided to the patient, or in fact, the patient’s General Practitioner for that matter, is an answering machine.

• Discovery that the answering machine is not checked regularly. In fact my personal experiences were that the answering machine appears not to be checked for days on end. In one case I was told that was due to the staff member being away ill, which begs the question as to due processes within the Unit. Are there only certain staff that are able to work an answering machine? Or are staff so scarce that this is a superficial function that can be overlooked?  In the second instance, there was no reason given other than to change the subject during the course of the conversation.

• Being exposed, as a patient, to potential internal political machinations within the Specialist Unit. At one point I was advised verbally by the particular person I was speaking to, who was medically qualified but not a doctor, that he/she was unsure of the “current internal politics that resulted in the doctor not making contact with you regarding your status despite me having advising him via email on two occasions to do so.” As the patient, I am not sure if I really want to, or in fact need to know, what is going on within the unit or not. Just provide the service! Remember – I am the one with the condition that they appear not to have the answer to at this stage. Do I really care what’s going on between the doctors, the nurses and the administration? Call me naive, but somehow I don’t believe this knowledge will result in an improvement to my condition.

• Being offered a suggested but unconfirmed diagnosis by a senior nurse of the Specialist Unit without hearing from the doctor – something that I actually thought was illegal?

• Not being in receipt, as at the date of this blog entry, of test results which were called for by the doctor and therefore remaining in the dark as the diagnosis. I should also add at this point, that the senior nurse provided her unconfirmed diagnosis despite her not having access to the test results either! My General Practitioner has not been informed of anything by the Specialist Unit, other than of course that I was scheduled to have some tests. (You know – the ones that no-one can give me the results of!)

As an endnote to this saga, I can now unfortunately confirm the following:

• It has been slightly in excess of three weeks from the time of completing a certain test and for which no results have been forthcoming. Frustrating, considering that I was advised that results would be available for the specialist to interpret within 72 hours.

• I have since been overseas attending a conference in the United States. During my last conversation with the aforementioned senior nurse, I indicated that I would be flying overseas and expressed concern as to precautions that I may need to take should an episode occur whilst overseas. She indicated that she would ensure the doctor would get back to me before I left. (I await this event, and am now back in Sydney).

• My blood pressure remains in normal range, something I am quite impressed with, considering the pressure of not knowing places on you – but then again I am only the patient and I am convinced that not all doctors recognise the importance of keeping this poor sucker up-to-date with their condition. Bedside 101 may not have been on all doctor’s university experiences.

Readers of this blog can let me know if I am overreacting to these set of circumstances or have they experienced this sort of sub-standard patient care in the Australian public health system – the one that is meant to be one of the best in the world and yet seems to want to vie with some of the more poorer performing systems in the western world.

Conclusion at this point – fantastic system – as long as you don’t need to interact with it. Good luck as we all get older. And I pity those elderly who can’t advocate for themselves.