Executive director leadership in long-established nonprofit community service organizations

Consulting

The situation facing this organization is that it has experienced a lack of leadership and a lack of strategic direction. The problem is not just with the Executive Director. The ED has avoided taking direction from the Board for around ten years, but the Board has not yet fired the ED. So this is a huge problem with leadership at all levels of the organization. Clearly, there is also no strategic direction with the organization. Its programs are deteriorating, and losing donors as well. The entire organization is in slow decline. One has to imagine this affects the morale of all involved as well. It is worth considering that this is a long-term problem, and if leadership does not change -- and after ten years why would they? -- the likelihood of meaningful change is slim to none. This report will outline some of the strategic options, but we have to be blunt -- it starts with an overhauled Board and a new Executive Director.

Four different decision-making tools will be used. The first will be a pro/con analysis that will evaluate some of the strategic options. The next will be a Pareto analysis, then the Six Thinking Hats analysis and the 5 Whys, before a conclusion is drawn.

Pro/Con

Pro & Con Argument: The organization needs a new board, a new ED, and needs to evaluate each of its programs for relevance, effectiveness and efficiency. A new strategy and vision needs to be developed from the top.

Pro

This approach solves the problems of stagnation and lack of direction (5)

The approach will revitalize the workforce and the donors (4)

This approach leverages the established brand within the community, for future good works (4)

This approach breathes new life into the organization (5)

Con

This approach is risky (3)

It requires organizational buy-in (3)

It will be difficult to convince board members to step down (4)

It will be difficult to convince the board to fire the ED (2)

The Pro/Con weighting is simple, with 18 points on the Pro-side and 12 points on the Con side. The organization has nothing to gain from the current course of action, so while there will be some resistance that will challenge the organization to overcome.

Pareto

The key to Pareto logic is the 80/20 rule, which states that 80% of problems are caused by 20% of causes. This is not rocket science and it was already identified right off the top that the problems lie with the ED and the Board. Also, in a one-paragraph case no other possible causes of problems were presented. So we will run with replacing the leadership of the organization.

Six Thinking Hats

There are six hats, each with a different color. These hats represent a different way of thinking. The white hat represents data -- I assume the consultant will have access to the data but none was presented in the case. The red hat represents intuition or gut reaction. That's where it is a leadership problem -- when the problems are throughout the organization then leadership is where the problems lie. The black hat is the pessimistic view. In this case, the proposed plan of action is likely to run into roadblocks because it involves challenging and replacing the existing leadership structure. The consultant answers to nobody and has no formal authority -- some buy in from the Board is required if this plan is to go anywhere. That will be tough when some of the Board needs to be replaced. The yellow hat represents positive thinking. This is simple -- the members of the Board genuinely want this organization to do good work, and they are committed to change even if that means self-sacrifice. As a result, they will accept the recommendations of the consultant in good faith. The green hat is finding creative solutions to the problem. Are there other ways this can be done? Certainly, if you believe leopards can change their spots. But after ten years, that is not likely. Overcoming difficulties starts with leadership, so that is where the recommendations need to lie. The blue hat is about process -- this is a good hat to use after the new leadership team is in place.

5 Why's

The problem is defined as "The organization has no strategic direction and is failing at all levels. The five why's are that there is no leadership, there is no vision, there is no plan, the workers have no sense of direction and the donors no longer have faith in the organization. So all of these need to be solved, and the problem also needs to be solved. It comes down to leadership, and the fact that for ten years there has not been any. The ED is useless, and the Board has simply accepted that there is a useless ED who doesn't take direction from them. Step number one here is that the Board needs to do its job and fire the ED. Then some Board members need to resign and let some more proactive people join the Board to begin the search for a new ED. Then, a vision, mission and strategy can be developed, and this will restore the faith of the workers, the donors and the community.

Conclusion