Image
It has been one of the holiest commandments of nonprofit religion for generations: Give and get, or get off the board. But it is an ethic that may well be obsolete, according to nonprofit leadership consultant Liz Callahan of CompassPoint.
“We’ve been trying to get boards to raise money for 50 years and all of that time we’ve been frustrated,” says Callahan, who believes that the emphasis on fundraising as a central requirement for board membership can actually inhibit an organization’s growth. And as chorus boards increasingly focus on strategy and community engagement instead of organizational support functions they too are letting go of fundraising prowess as a primary determinant for recruiting trustees.
Callahan does not advocate abandoning the “give” part of board fundraising. It’s the “get” that gets her. “There should be a policy that there is 100 percent participation at a personally meaningful level,” she says, “but using the ability to raise major dollars as the criterion for putting people on the board? Those days are past. It gets in the way of bringing in talented people.”
Callahan draws on economic theories presented by authors Daniel Pink (A Whole New Mind) and Thomas Friedman (The World is Flat), who have observed the evolution of Western countries as they outsource “left brain” skilled jobs in favor of the development of “right brain” critical thinking and creative skills. She sees a similar pattern in the evolution of nonprofit boards across social services, health care, and the arts.
“People come onto these boards with high expectations for giving back and they go away frustrated and not feeling like they’ve had an opportunity to give the organization their best stuff,” she says. Instead of using community leaders for left-brain support functions like fundraising, she encourages organizations to embrace board members as right-brain “thought partners” who sit down and think about strategy and longer-range issues. “When we identify the people we want thinking about these kind of things, we don’t necessarily want to use as one of the criteria, ‘Does this person have the capability of giving or getting $10,000 for us?’ ”
Hubie Jones, founder of the Boston Children’s Chorus, agrees. “Our board is learning about broader, longer-range thinking and strategic, mission-based thinking rather than who is setting up the events,” he says. The BCC was founded as an instrument of social change, a means of bringing racially divided communities together through music. “We don’t get down into the weeds anymore,” he says. “My whole mantra is, ‘It’s the strategy, stupid.’ If you don’t have a strategy, there is no way you are going to grow and prosper.”
The Resource Balancing Act
Jones' journey has always been a balancing act between resources and outreach. “To get the resources you need you have to have a substantial number of people who have that financial capacity,” he says, “but you also need people who bring other things to the board. You need to have some folks who know a great deal about music or the arts. You may not find somebody who has a lot of money in that category.” Assembling the ideal board that combines financial, social, musical, and educational components requires what Jones calls a “calculus.”
Allison McMillan, executive director of the Providence Singers, concurs. The chorus is in the midst of transitioning from a singer board to a community board. “Right now, with our diversity needs and our interest in having broad representation, we do not ask that every board member be able to make a major gift,” she says. “Every board member needs to be generous to the best of their ability and put the organization near or at the top of their priority list,” she says, but the potential for financial support should be just “part of the many pieces of someone’s background that it is important to know about.”
“Some have more time than money, some have more money than time,” says Anne B. Keiser, past chairman of the board of the Choral Arts Society of Washington. “It is a matter of keeping balance and it’s the responsibility of the nominating committee to maintain that balance,” she says. She believes non-monetary contributions, such as in-kind contributions of professional services, can and should be taken into account.
“You have to make a contribution yourself or you are not invested,” says Peter Fellegy, president of the Indianapolis Symphonic Choir board, but he emphasizes that no matter the size of the gift a board member cannot be effective without a deep commitment to the chorus’s mission. “We are looking for people who want to contribute but who first and foremost have a passion for the art form,” he says. “If you don’t have an interest or a passion, I don’t know how you can serve effectively.”
Fellegy says that everyone on the ISC board is meeting the required level of giving (with a number of board members doing more), but that one of the reasons for their success is a document sent to every board member at the end of the calendar year. The “mid-season summary recaps each board member's ticket purchases and donations and acts as a friendly reminder/invoice for the balance due on their commitment."
Choral Arts reviews its board member commitments regularly. “We monitor who gives, who doesn’t give, where they are in reaching that particular amount, and we review their relationship in being on the board,” says Keiser. And if a board member is delinquent? “Most often we don’t ask someone to step aside,” says Keiser. “Sometimes you make the call and say, ‘We’re reviewing your participation.’ Some will say, ‘The check’s in the mail.’ Some will acknowledge it’s not the right fit. But it’s best to let that decision come from the board member.”
You Only Need One "Closer"
Though Callahan doesn’t want fundraising to be the primary focus of board endeavors, she does not exempt them from the fundraising process. “All members of the board can and should be involved in the development process, from prospecting for potential funders to stewardship of the donor after the fact,” she says. Still, the deed needs to be done. “I have met a handful of folks who do like to sit across the table and do the ask. You only need one.”
McMillan comes from a fundraising background and is not shy about asking for money. “I am one of the ‘closers,’ ” she says, acknowledging that the “ask” part of fundraising is not a popular task. “I don’t think we have many people on the board who like putting a figure in front of people,” she says. At the Indianapolis Symphonic Choir, the executive director is the primary fundraiser. “That’s part of his job description,” says Fellegy. “It is not assumed or implied. This board took it upon itself to put that in writing.”
Keiser is ambivalent about leaning too much on staff for fundraising. “The job of the executive director used to be managing the organization,” Keiser says. “Now if your executive director is successful it is because she is a good fundraiser.” The risk of delegating too much to the staff, as Keiser sees it, is letting board members “off the hook” and diminishing their effectiveness in reaching out to peers in the community.
She acknowledges that even experienced board members are not always comfortable when it comes to the final stages of solicitation, but believes that finding those who are is the responsibility of the nominating committee. “Every board I have been on has one person in a position to close the deal. Are some people good at it and enjoy it? Yes. I’m not one of them.”
Of course, not all asks are alike. “Getting general support is the hardest thing to do,” says Keiser, and Callahan agrees. “Nobody is terribly interested in paying for you to turn the lights on or take the garbage out or teaching you how to be a good leader,” she says. One strategy to soften the touch is through sponsorships. The ISC has developed “a portfolio of giving opportunities,” says Fellegy, including season sponsorships as well as sponsorships for concerts, receptions, even the chorus’s website.
Fellegy, a communications industry executive, believes one way to relieve the pressure of the “ask” is to diffuse it at the beginning by ensuring that the prospect is engaged in giving from the beginning. “It starts with a very simple request,” says Fellegy. “It’s never a pointed dollar linkage. The simple question is ‘Do you have an interest in making a contribution to the choir?’ And then you stop. No embellishment, no ad lib, no detail around it. If they don’t have an interest then the cultivation experience has ended, at least for that round.” If the prospect does express an interest in making a contribution, cultivation advances to a variety of informal engagements: breakfast, lunch, coffee, an invitation to a performance, each of which offers a variety of ISC board members a role to play in cultivation.
“We need to engage board members to be excited about that part of the process so they don’t get frantic about asking someone for $5,000,” says McMillan. “Every board member needs to be involved in advocacy and communicating the value of the organization and its mission to the community. It’s important to close, but it’s just as important to do the lunches and dinners and the socializing. You can’t ask someone to marry you on the first date.”
Ed Note: Liz Callahan of CompassPoint Nonprofit Services presented a session on maximizing board impact at the 2011 Chorus America Conference; the chorus leaders quoted in this article were all panelists in a session on building effective boards, chaired by Miriam Abrams.
This article is adapted from The Voice, Fall 2011.
