​In this podcast episode, Carol Hamilton and Mary Hiland discuss the challenges and strategies of nonprofit executive directors working with their boards. They explore the importance of leaving a legacy and sharing knowledge, and how it inspired Carol to start her podcast, Mission Impact. Mary's book, "Love Your Board," is also discussed, focusing on the primary sources of trouble for executive directors when working with their boards. The conversation delves into the dimensions of capacity, connection, and culture within a board. They highlight the significance of building trust in board relationships and challenging assumptions in board recruitment. Additionally, they emphasize the need for emotional connection and individual check-ins with board members.


​(00:08:52) Dimensions of Board Challenges
(00:15:11) Building Trust in Board Relationships
(00:21:39) Challenging Assumptions in Board Recruitment
(00:27:55) Board Member Engagement
 
Guest Bio: 
Mary Hiland Ph.D. is a nonprofit governance expert and leadership development consultant dedicated to helping nonprofit leaders lead effectively. Mary has over forty years’ experience in the nonprofit sector – both as an executive and as a board member. She has been consulting and coaching nonprofit leaders for 20 years. Mary is a speaker, published author, researcher, and a business professor at her local community college. She is author of the #1 international best-seller: Love Your Board! The Executive Directors’ Guide to Discovering the Sources of Nonprofit Board Troubles and What to Do About Them (2021) And Mary is a contributing author to four other nonprofit leadership books. Mary is the founder and host of the podcast: Inspired Nonprofit Leadership
 
 
Episode Links:
 
Hiland Consulting: https://www.hilandconsulting.org/
 
Inspired Nonprofit Leadership: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/inspired-nonprofit-leadership/id1446218521
 
Talk with Mary: talkwithmary.com
 
Alliance for Nonprofit Management: https://allianceonlinecommunity.org/

Transcript:
Carol Hamilton
Welcome, Mary. Welcome to Mission Impact.


Mary Hiland
Thank you very much, Carol. I'm delighted to be here.


Carol Hamilton
what drew you to the work that you do, what motivates you, and what would you describe as your why? I know you came onto the podcast a little while ago. Maybe it was I don't even know, maybe even a year or two ago now. So I'm guessing that that's why it keeps evolving. I'm curious for you, what is it now as you're thinking about your career that really keeps you motivated to stay engaged?


Mary Hiland
It's a really good question. For now, I'm glad you asked me what's changed, because of course, we get into nonprofit work because we want to make a difference. And I started in the service profession, but then, now as a consultant, my reason is about helping nonprofit executive directors and other nonprofit leaders be effective and not burn out. But I would say more recently, as I'm getting older and older, as we all are, I've had more of the thought of leaving a legacy. I've been consulting now for 20 years, and I've just learned so much that I think I look at my work with the idea of how can I share what I've learned over all these years? Because I don't want to disappear and not have shared as much as I possibly can about what works, what you can do. So you're not reinventing the wheel, especially for new executive leaders. I think that I care about making a difference in that way.


Carol Hamilton
It's so interesting that you say that, because in some ways, thinking about people's legacy was part of what inspired me to do this podcast. Because I was at a nonprofit consulting, the Alliance for Nonprofit Management Conference, and I went to a panel where there were a number of people who know at that stage in their career where they were thinking about what's next after consulting, but thinking about that legacy. And I was in the process of moving into consulting. And so I was talking to lots of folks who were ahead of me, already established. So I was doing those one on one conversations, and I thought, why don't I start recording them and sharing them so that people beyond just me get the benefit of all of that wisdom? And as the podcast has progressed, I've branched out much beyond folks just towards the end of their career. But being able to capture and share the insights that we all gain by working with multiple organizations versus being inside just one or one movement or one field of work, I think is really valuable.


Mary Hiland
Yeah, that's a really good insight. The idea that you're exposed to more, you have new ways of thinking about things. Yes, I think that's definitely something. And, I have a podcast too, so that started off as not I don't think I was thinking so much about legacy, but I was thinking about sharing tips and strategies and bringing information. And so it's a great tool and it's lots of fun. And I've gotten to connect with lots of people like you, right?


Carol Hamilton
I mean, it is so much fun to hear about different people's experiences and all the things that we have a chance to observe as we work with different organizations. And I think one of the things that's valuable from that is also being able to help organizations realize that oftentimes what they're experiencing is something that's pretty common, whether it's because of their stage of development as an organization. Where they are in the life cycle of organizations or the typical things that come up between executive directors and boards and being able to see those commonalities and be able to share with the group. What you're experiencing is totally normal. There's nothing particularly wrong with you. It just tends to happen when you're going through an XYZ transition or whatever it might be. And a couple of years ago, you wrote Love Your Board the Executive Director's Guide to Discovering the Sources of Nonprofit Board Troubles and What to Do About Them. And so I'm curious, from your point of view, what are some of the primary sources of trouble for executive directors when they're working with their boards?


Mary Hiland
Actually, the book talks about the three categories that all these troubles fall in. And I had been doing research and lots of experience, and it finally dawned on me that if you could pay attention to these three things, that you could figure out how to make a difference with whatever the challenges are you're having with your board. And the three things are capacity, connection and culture. And capacity is where my experiences, most executives start. I used to get these calls and I still do actually just come teach my board what their job is. They don't get their roles and responsibilities. This is something that all of us who are consulting in the sector hear. And even when I was an executive, I heard this all the time. So this is very common. This is, I think, the low hanging fruit. This is where people go first, thinking that there's something that people don't understand or they don't know. And in some cases that can be true. Capacity, all of these things have two dimensions. They have a process dimension and a people dimension. So maybe you don't have the right people on the board, or maybe the board's processes are just not good enough, or you don't have them at all. That can be a capacity issue. But then if that's not really making the difference for you, trying to intervene at that level, the next level is the connection level. And you don't have to start with capacity, but you need to think about connection. And connection is all about relationships. And we all know whenever you have a group coming together to do work in an organization together, whether it's a board or a work group, you have issues sometimes around the relationships. Are you an effective team coming together as a board, or are there issues there? Maybe it's not that you have conflict, but maybe you just don't have any connection. You're just not gelling as a group. You come together maybe every other month for a meeting, you take care of business and then you go home. That's not really a connection. So we know that effective boards are effective teams and there's a lot of implications about that in terms of the connection dimension of your board. And of course, then there's the culture dimension and this one is the hardest to change and shift, but it's really important to be aware of it. And I think a lot of people, when they have challenges with their board, they don't even go to the idea of, is this a cultural issue? Is this rooted in something we believe? Is it rooted in an assumption we're making as a group? Or are individual assumptions being proposed in such a way that they're dominating the conversation we're having? So those are the three things, and I use the metaphor of a tree with the capacity being the leaves and all of the different people and things and processes, and the connections being the branches and the trunk, and of course, the roots then being the culture of the board. So there are a lot of situations and examples, but I just found that there isn't a challenge that I hear that doesn't fit into one of those categories.


Carol Hamilton
Yeah, and I love the visual of the tree and yeah, I've definitely been called in to organizations to try to deal with some of those things at the leafy level. Although there are some organizational theorists that say that oftentimes when something isn't going  within a group, people will blame personalities will blame the individuals versus we're not clear about our goals, we're not clear about our roles. And so ensuring that the board understands what their role is, is certainly important, but not sufficient, as you're saying.


Mary Hiland
Right. Can you give me some? I mean, it can be early on, if you have a brand new board member and they just never got a good orientation. That's a real flaw in the sector, I think, is we don't have good board orientations, so we run into more problems right out the gate with that.


Carol Hamilton
Right. So those orientations where it's an orientation not just to the organization, which I think people over index on, but it's also an orientation on what is the role, what are you stepping into, how do you need to be as a member of the board? And that can be a really preventative measure, so that instead of having to solve problems later, you're really making sure that people understand that. And it's probably not just a one time thing, right? It's continuing to remind people of the role of the board. What are some examples of those connections? What are some ways that executive directors can really help foster and cultivate those relationships between them and the board and then between the board members?


Mary Hiland
I think in the first case between them and the board, of course, this is really critical. And I think that you need to be having one on one conversations with each board member. You need to meet with each board member. Not just at the beginning when you're bringing them onto the board, but at least, and I think this is a minimum at least once a year, you and your board chair should be meeting with every board member, evaluating how it's going. What are you getting out of this, what you need? 

There's so many things that you need to be asking and engaging people in to keep them engaged as a board member. So, I mean, your relationship with them is really critical in that regard. So meeting with the board chair can help that sort of evaluative experience. But the other thing then is I think you, as the executive on your own, should be meeting with each board member in person, one on one, maybe six months after you and the board chair have met for the same reason, to check in, to get to know them. And I would be on the phone with your board members every month. This is a relationship, and I think that executives, a couple of things, they don't know how much they can influence what the board is and what it becomes, and that it's okay to do it. And they also, I think, don't invest the time because they're busy. I mean, overwhelmingly busy. So if it's going okay, taking things for granted, those relationships can be a big risk. But I think people hold back. They aren't as intentional about building relationships with each and every board member as they could be. And there is a lot you can do as an executive to do that. What do you know personally about each board member? 

What do they know about you? One thing I mentioned to executives is if this was the board that hired you, everybody on this board would know your resume, would know your background, would know about you. Right. Because they interviewed you, they read about you, they checked you out. As soon as that board starts to evolve and new board members come on, do they know anything about you the same way? Maybe a little bit. I don't think executives put their resumes in the board manuals. I don't think they bother to update because they don't think about it. And those are the kinds of things that are the meat of our relationships, getting to know each other anyway. I can go on and on and on about that, as you can see.


Carol Hamilton
Yeah. I think there isn't enough attention paid even at the beginning of building that relationship. But it is too easy to think, especially if things seem to be going, to let it go, let it be on the back burner, but continuing to be in touch. I think in terms of employees, oftentimes folks are now talking about,, don't just do an exit interview, which is also a really useful thing to do with board members, but do a stay interview. you're having those conversations periodically all the way through the experience, so that you continue to get to know the person, continue to understand better how they want to contribute to the organization, help them understand your perspective and your background, all of those things. I think it is too easy with the crush of the to do list to let that slide. But then what ends up happening is that then there are problems that pop up, and you're having to solve a problem versus getting ahead of it and building that trust, which is ultimately what is needed.


Mary Hiland
And that takes a lot of work. And I think that even if there's no problems, you're not getting the best you can get. You're not getting the best performance. People are doing enough, maybe, to get by, but they're not as invested as they would be if the relationships were really close and important to them. You're going to spend time on what you value the most. And I think that executives, they need to put the board up there at a higher level in terms of what they value in the organization and not have it just be a must do or I've got to have this. You're going to get the benefit of it if you invest the time in it. I really believe that, and I see it. I see the difference for executives that have that.


Carol Hamilton
Yeah. And you talk about meeting with people one on one. Obviously, that's been challenging. Or if you're serving a national organization where your board is, or an international organization where they're distributed by geography, oftentimes you can get the work done by doing it online via Zoom. But I think I was just recently working with a group, and their first meeting in person as a board after three years, and some of them had come onto the board and not met each other in person until this month. And what's missing, I think, for a volunteer is that part of the benefit of being part of a group like that is not only the discussions that happen in the formal meeting, but all those things that can happen in those informal times. Going out to dinner with your board members, having the coffee break that you don't get when it's all on zoom. And I mean, I'm a great proponent of working online because it can be very effective and efficient, and I think you need to make sure that you're integrating that social aspect as Much as you can.

Mary Hiland
Yes. You mentioned trust. And trust building is really a skill. It's something that years ago I took for granted until I did my doctoral research and I was interviewing board chairs and their executive directors and I was discovering what are the behaviors that people do to build trust in that relationship. And getting personal not inappropriately, but getting personal is really important to building trust in organizations. It's not that you've just got to keep everything professional and not talk about yourself or your interests or inquire about other people. Part of being intentional about building effective relationships is about being intentional about making time to get to know each other on a personal level. And that's a really critical thing to do to build trust. If you don't get into a relationship that involves some of that personal sharing and knowledge about each other and doing things based on that knowledge, you're not going to have as strong a trust as you could. It just isn't going to happen. And it makes a huge difference when it does.


Carol Hamilton
Yeah, you're only getting part of that person, the one that's showing up with the virtual suit or whatever it might be.


Mary Hiland
That's a good way to put it. Yeah. That you're only getting part of them.


Carol Hamilton
What are some of the things that those kinds of hidden things or you talked about beliefs or that really impact the culture of a board that executive directors can be more intentional about?


Mary Hiland
The ones I see most often have to do with, so there's the big one. One of the big ones which I know you're doing work around is the DEI issues, is what are the assumptions we make about each other based on the color of our skin, our backgrounds and those kinds of things. But beyond that, some that people may not think about as readily are assumptions about recruiting. I have people say we can't find the people we need and want and if they're trying to be diverse,, we just can't find people. These are assumptions. 

And so when I've worked with people in the past and what I teach in my course about board recruitment success, how to get it is the very first thing you need to tackle is mindset and what you need to do. And I'm not sure everybody who takes the course or it's an online course actually does this work because it's a little woo woo and it really is not necessarily comfortable. But I'm just going to say that you have to do this and it isn't just about recruiting, it's about other things. And that is you've got to ask yourselves, what do I believe about this? What comes up for me when I think about recruiting new board members? What's coming up? How am I feeling? Am I comfortable? I mean, fundraising is a big one. I think we all know people aren't comfortable with that. But recruiting, it can be a little more subtle, where people say,, we've tried everybody, we just don't know anybody. 

And this is one of the assumptions that really gets in the way, is that board members think they have to know people to recruit them, and that's not true. And so when you can just brainstorm and say, what are we all thinking? Put it up on an easel sheet on a board and then test it, look at it and say, is this true? Maybe it was true before, but is it true now? Is it always true? Where's the evidence? It's true. Take the time to go through and look at what you're thinking and see whether you could suspend it, just suspend it for a little while and say, what if it wasn't true? What would the other side of this statement be? What would the affirmation, if you will, say every day? And I tell them, you need to do this every day. Today I'm going to find the board members we need and want, or There are lots of people out there that would love to serve on our board, or we're going to find the person in this special community that's important to us because we want their perspective to change. The way you're thinking and the way you're talking about it, to yourselves, to each other, it makes a difference. I see it. It does. So I just have to take my word for it. I guess some people do.


Carol Hamilton
Yeah. One of the things you said was people think that they have to know the person to be able to recruit them. Can you say a little bit more about that? And I think the flip side of that is that if they're relying completely on their own networks, it can become a very insular group. So I'm curious about absolutely the assertion that you can recruit people that aren't necessarily in your network yet.


Mary Hiland
You can. So the question to ask is, who would know? Who are the types of people or a profession, maybe that's related to your mission, an association, maybe even churches, who would know someone who cares about our mission? Where would we find people who care about our mission and be willing to go into those groups, call people, identify people, whether maybe there's some people who teach classes at a university that might know people who are related to the field of service you're in. It's about being willing to do the cold calling. 

I even give clients scripts for this. If you don't know someone, you just introduce yourself and you talk about the mission because that's what you're looking for. You're looking for people who care about the mission, who might know someone who cares about the mission. And you ask them, and if they aren't the one, then you say, do you know someone? So it's that consistent networking being persistent, and it works. I tested this with ten nonprofits in the real world, not just people who took the online course. This was before I created the course. And every single one of those nonprofits found people that met the criteria. They were looking for it because they got past this fear of talking to people they didn't know, reaching out to people, and wanting to help. This isn't about you asking for something for yourself. This is about you asking for a cause in the community. And people are receptive to that. It's hard to get past it. It's not necessarily comfortable, but that's the challenge. And it can work. I know it works.


Carol Hamilton
And I think being ready, willing to hear, no, not right now, but then not letting that be, oh, then this can't work. If I get one, no. Keep moving. You'll find the person. Yeah. I think another thing that I see organizations do because of that fear defaulting to is let's do a big blast email or notice. And if you ask everybody on your board, why did they get involved with this organization, chances are they were asked by somebody to step up.


Mary Hiland
That's right. And when you're talking about a mission, you're talking about an emotional connection. You want people on your board who are emotionally connected with your mission. Not intellectually connected. I mean, you can have both, but intellectual connection isn't going to have the stick to it-iveness that you need. Another issue I hear a lot about recently, because I'm asking about it, number one, is board member engagement. Executives are saying, I'm having trouble with board member engagement. And that's about the emotional glue.


Carol Hamilton
And that goes back to what you were saying in terms of checking in with people one on one, not just having it be a group experience, getting to know what's going on with them. If they seem disengaged, what would they like to step into? Maybe they got asked to be on the wrong committee. I know in an organization that I've been a member of for a long time, people look at me and they're,, she's pretty organized. Let's ask her to organize this big event. Truth is, I hate organizing events. I am organized, but I hate organizing events. So let me use that skill somewhere else for some other cause. So really tapping into what people want to share. And then I think the other thing that just for volunteering in general, is to not assume that folks want to do whatever they do in their day job. They want to contribute to you.


Mary Hiland
Absolutely.


Carol Hamilton
I've been able to long before I was doing strategic planning consulting, I was on a committee in an organization that was doing the organization's strategic plan because I knew that was an interest. It wasn't something I was doing at work because of the point in my career, but I knew that I was interested in it and it gave me a way to start learning about that and develop that skill.


Mary Hiland
Right, yeah, I think that's really true. It is important for you to be aware of the skill sets you need and want on the board.


Carol Hamilton
Sure.


Mary Hiland
But for example, I have people say,, we need a CPA or we need an accountant because we need someone who can help oversee the finance part., number one, you don't need your accountant or your bookkeeper to be on your board. You may have staff with those skills. But the other thing is that people don't have to have that profession to be able to understand how to read a basic balance sheet or a financial statement. Maybe they can be a small business person or a moderate business person or there's a lot of people with those skills.


Carol Hamilton
Just someone who's not afraid of numbers.


Mary Hiland
That's right. Because you don't have to have the person who's doing the work for your organization. You don't want them to be on your board. You just want someone who is knowledgeable in that area to be on your board. So you have a lot of options for what profession?


Carol Hamilton
Actually, that can be really helpful. Because if you have that person who isn't in that profession, they might be able to actually do a better job of translating that important information to the rest of the board than someone who just has all that knowledge.


Mary Hiland
That's right.


Carol Hamilton
And has that curse of expertise.


Mary Hiland
Yeah. And they can go do a much deeper dive than the board as a whole needs in an area. Yeah.


Carol Hamilton
So on each episode I ask the guest what permission slip would you give to nonprofit leaders? Or what would you invite them to consider to avoid being a martyr to the cause and as they work towards cultivating a healthier organizational culture? So what permission slip or invitation would you give?


Mary Hiland
Lately I've been thinking a lot about this. I think that I would give and I started this thinking when I was doing my book a couple of years ago. I think I would give executive directors permission to lead with their board more to think about being a co leader, to be a catalyst for the change they want to see on the board. I've built a consulting profession coming in and fulfilling that role. To some extent, the third party person can come in and be the catalyst for change and nudge the board. But I think executive directors can be that and I think that they often think,, the board's my boss. The board needs to have its own initiative and that would be ideal. But when that's not the case, or even when it is the case, it doesn't mean you can't step up and influence and be a catalyst for things to be different. So I would encourage executives to take permission to be more proactive with boards in what they need them to become and to help make that happen. And there are ways to do that without getting in trouble, right?


Carol Hamilton
And really be in partnership. So where can people find you and be in touch?


Mary Hiland
Oh,, they can certainly find me at my website is highland consulting.org. That's Hiland Consulting.org. But you could email me at mary@highlandconsulting.org. I am on LinkedIn. People can connect with me that way. And, of course, you can also listen to my podcast. We have episodes with Carol inspired nonprofit leadership. But that's the best way, really, would be if you want to talk to me directly, is to email me, Mary@highlandconsulting.org. Or you can go to talkwithmarry.com, if that's easier to remember, and that takes you to my calendar, and you can set up a time to chat.


Carol Hamilton
Awesome. Thank you., we'll put all those links in the show notes so you can find them. And, Mary, thanks so much for coming on Mission Impact.


Mary Hiland
Oh, you are welcome. It was great to have this conversation with you, Carol. Thanks so much for having me. Bye.​

In episode 63 of Mission: Impact, Carol Hamilton focuses on healthy organizational cultures with past guests to discuss:

• why it is important for leaders to invest in themselves, 
• why paying attention to power dynamics and naming them is key, 
• and why it's important to realize that it takes time and investment to shift a culture away from less healthy practices.

Important Links and Resources:

• Episode 36
• Episode 40
• Episode 53
• Episode 56
• Episode 58

Transcript:
Carol Hamilton: Welcome to episode 63 and the first episode of 2023 of Mission: Impact. This is the second part of a two part highlights episode. Our topic today is healthy organizational cultures and what gets in the way of them. I am pulling clips from conversations with Anne Hilb from episode 36, episode 40 with Terrill Thompson & Monique Meadows, Episode 53 with Reva Patwardhan, episode 56 with Danielle Marshall, and episode 58 with Deneisha Thompson. We talk about why it is important for leaders to invest in themselves and consider getting a coach, why paying attention to power dynamics and naming them is key, and why it's important to realize that it takes time and investment to shift a culture away from less healthy practices.
Mission Impact is the podcast for progressive nonprofit leaders who want to build a better world without becoming a martyr to the cause. I’m Carol Hamilton, your podcast host and nonprofit strategic planning consultant. On this podcast we explore how to make your organization more effective and innovative. We dig into how to build organizational cultures where your work in the world is aligned with how you work together as staff, board members and volunteers. All of this is for the purpose of creating greater mission impact. 
Reva Patwardhan explains why many nonprofit leaders struggle with the idea of investing in themselves for executive coaching even though as the leader they have a broader impact on the organization and thus shifting their own behavior to healthier habits can have a big impact. As Reva points out it is in service of the mission.

Reva Patwardhan: The nonprofit sector, for whatever reason, has been behind. And really recognizing how important it is to invest in leaders, as individuals, as human beings. And that is what leadership coaching is. It's really investing in you. I think that's why it's hard for people. It's hard for an executive director to say, Hey, I'm going to spend some money on an executive coach because it's really for her. It is for her in service of her mission. And when I coach with people, we do have the mission centered in our work, but it is for her and her ability and her passion and her values. That is part of the process of what we're doing to serve the mission. In order to center your own wellbeing and your own development, I think it's a hard thing for a lot of people to do. We're very much conditioned out of that. And I do work with a lot of women but very much conditioned to always be giving to others, not to ourselves. And that is what coaching does.
Carol: Deneisha also prioritizes coaching in her practice in working with organizations trying to shift their cultures. Leaders have few spaces where they can be safely vulnerable and coaching is one space where they can own up to their own struggles.
Deneisha Thompson: Executive coaching and making sure you have strong leaders who are positioning themselves to learn and grow and be responsive to the needs of their team. Leadership is so, so, so important in building a culture. And when I do coaching with executives, I really try to work, to create environments where people can be honest and vulnerable. What I've heard from so many leaders is “I know that I have room to grow, but it can be really isolating as a leader to get the type of support that you need.” So who are you surrounded by? You have your staff who work for you you're supposed to know what you're doing. And so you don't really wanna be vulnerable with them and say, you know folks, I don't have this, so I'm not sure about this. I don't really have experience in this area. I'm not really sure what to do. No leader wants to tell their staff that they don't know what to do. Then you have your board who is supervising you, that's not necessarily the space where you also can be vulnerable and honest about your opportunities for growth. And then you have your colleagues who are other leaders of other organizations, and you definitely don't wanna tell them most of the time that you don't have it all together. And so. It becomes really hard for leaders to get the type of support that they need in order to be good leaders. And a part of that is also not creating systems to get feedback from your team around your leadership. And it is one of the most common things that I see that leaders are not getting evaluations.
Carol: I have also seen this. Even when an organization has a positive culture and the executive director has cultivated a really healthy relationship with the board. The board may not see the need to provide the leader with feedback if things are going really well. But that is not the time to sleep at the wheel – Recalling the conversation about feedback from episode 62 – feedback is both positive and constructive. Both are needed for the leader to learn and grow. And coaching can provide a safe space to confront one’s shadow side as Deneisha describes. Coaching provides a space to practice slowing down and being more mindful of the intentional response you would want to have in a tough situation instead of just reacting out of fear or anger or frustration.
Deneisha: Let's get in touch with your shadow side, because we all have one. It's never really the thing. We're proud of stuff, but what happens is it shows up at work and your teammates see it, and they don't know that. We do a lot of work around, who am I as an individual? How do I show up? When things come up change my reflex. So I am not automatically thinking about the external factor or the person who caused this thing or caused me to be frustrated. My first instinct is to be reflective and think about , how am I showing up right now? How did I contribute to this thing? How do I calm myself down so that when I do go to have this conversation, it can be productive and get us to a better place and not just be like a way for me to vent and, and, or feel vindicated. So I think it really just takes a lot of intention.
Carol: In the safe space of coaching you can shift from just venting to thinking more productively about the situation and how you want to show up in the future. Reva also notes that Younger leaders coming into positions have higher expectations for their role and what it will contribute to their career. They are not as willing to put up with poor working conditions that previous generations have become used to.
Reva: There is a wake up call going on for the sector. If it's not happening already, it's going to very soon because there is this emerging sense that people don't wanna put up with any of this crap anymore in their jobs. It's getting harder and harder to fill the position of executive director. In the for-profit sector being a CEO is seen as this glamorous thing. I think part of that is because of the ridiculous salaries and we don't necessarily wanna model ourselves off of that. Part of it is that they have resources, they have support to do what they need to do. In the nonprofit sector, [when] becoming an ED, you should feel proud. If the mission matters then so do the people who are working for the mission.
Carol: It is too easy for folks in the sector to prioritize mission over people. In the for profit sector, the call is for people over profit. In the nonprofit sector – there needs not to be a binary of choosing one or the other. They go hand in hand. If people are treated well and have good working conditions, they will be able to do that much more for the mission. And if you have been in a position of power in an organization you may forget your impact as Anne Hilbe points out. You may be aware of all the things you cannot do, and forget the agency you have. Yet staff will be waiting to watch and see what you do. Remembering what your position brings with it and being cognizant of that and willing to admit the privilege you have to just proceed with a decision at times is important.
Anne Hilb: Those who would be doing the asking have much less power in the organization. The folks with formal power and titles need to really understand the power over that they have , and take ownership over that. The understanding of that power, because I think oftentimes we are a manager or in the C-suite, or even just have informal, formal power or hurt in that we. Are positioned to take power in a manager position purely because of the type of role that we have, because it's a more formal desk job and it can roll into a manager position or because we have Privilege. We tend not to recognize that. And so working on that, understanding in an organization or just as an individual is really important in order for these shifts to happen.
Carol: Those power differentials are just one of the aspects behind how we see the world and the lens that may become invisible to us. Your social identities such as your race, gender, sexual orientation, class and education status all impact how you see the world. And you cannot assume that we all see things similarly or are having the same experiences as Danielle explains.
Danielle: We need to be able to. Understand that we are not all seeing the world. Similarly, we are not all having the same experiences. There is this really interesting thing in the US where [because of] the melting pot everybody's supposed to blend together. Therefore we all have to be the same. I don't agree with the fact that we should all be the same but beyond that, it was never true to begin [with]. There are different cultures. There are values, there are different beliefs that people bring to the table. There's just simply different understandings of the world. To not look at that is a detriment to us because yes, we may have gone through the same situation, but how we experienced it is vastly different, so we've all gone through this period of COVID right now. And depending on who you were. So did you live in an urban environment? Did you live in a more rural environment? Did you have a stable job or were you one of the first people to go on furlough or lose your job?
Carol: Reva speaks to an additional element of the differentiation that Danielle names – being the only. This puts additional pressure on the individual as they are often then seen as a representative of a larger group. Or having to engage in a circumstance where others have set the unspoken rules and  standards.
Reva: The problem is the fact that you are the sole member. You're the sole representative of your community. No one else in the room looks like you, you're the only person of color in the room, and that's the problem because you feel ashamed of the anxiety. You're trying to solve the problem yourself. Trying to hide the fact that you feel the anxiety. It's actually very normal to feel anxious in that situation. That's not the problem. I think people in this situation  – this is just a very ripe moment for imposter syndrome. They might be thinking , someone else could be doing this job better. The person who was in this role before me did it better. Or they might be thinking , I'm the least competent person in this room, which makes it feel like this is a problem with me. That's just paralyzing. What I do is, I help people take their power back and find their voice. Part one by realizing you're not crazy. This is a genuinely hard situation. You are not broken. So taking your power back [and] finding the things that you can do in your immediate sphere to take action.
Carol: Shifting from the individual level – and thinking more broadly at the group and organizational level – starting a process to examine the culture and start to dig into the challenges – and then shutting it down. Or just letting it fizzle due to neglect or the initiative getting over run by other priorities – can have a really detrimental effect as Terril and Monique describe. It can actually be even more damaging than doing nothing – because staff get their hopes up about positive change. So if you start a process – be in it for the long term.
Terrill Thompson: But it's really, really damaging. To open it all up, bring people's hope up and then nothing changes.
Monique Meadows: We really do see it in a lot of ways as healing work and, and really creating a space for folks where they are willing to take the risks with each other. But first it means acknowledging that there's been injury. And whether that injury. Intentional or unintentional it's there. We've worked with some groups where they're ready to acknowledge that and release it. Like we even sometimes have done work activities that are like released rituals, here's what we're seeing. We're constantly reflecting back to them so that they don't first feel like they're crazy? Like this is actually happening.  What agency do you have? What power do you have within the system to make the changes? That's also a part of our work is to see at all levels within the hierarchy that there's some power there. And so how. With the role that you have, how can you move this along so that you can move closer to fulfilling your mission?
Carol: Starting with an organizational assessment can help get things out in the open through the conversations that are sparked by the findings as Deneisha explains.
Deneisha: I do an org assessment to get us started. And I always pride myself. It's similar to supervision and with the evaluation that at the end, when someone gets their org assessment and you share it with the leadership and share it with the team that it should feel familiar, it shouldn't feel like, like a bomb just dropped and there's all this new information. But oftentimes the response that I get, people get their org assessment and they'll read through it. And they're like, yeah, we knew all of this. And it's almost as if they're expecting it to be a document full of secrets and things they didn't know. And that says to me, these are issues that everyone knows about. We know the landscape of where we are, but we don't have a system for us to have that conversation, which is why we had to hire a consultant to come in and tell us where we already know. And we could have elevated in a landscaping conversation if we just had a team that was able to communicate and talk to each other. And so it'll be like their assessment. It'll have recommendations. It'll have questions for further consideration. And I find, oftentimes the staff are like, this is amazing. I've been saying this for years. And then the leadership is. Oh, we, we knew some of this or, , it's good to see it, or you really captured , our organization 
Carol: All these processes have the impact of slowing things down. Stepping away from the day to day work and the to do list and examining HOW you are doing the work and the why – not just the what is something I talk about often on this podcast. Reva also describes the benefits of taking a beat.
Reva: The ability to pause and to actually say, , I'm a leader in this organization and I'm gonna decide to actually program into my day to day and set boundaries, time to reflect and pause. And that is a priority because when I do that, I'm better at my job. A lot of times people are truly experiencing urgency in their work. There's urgency coming from somewhere. Often people are working with, or serving communities that are experiencing urgency. It can sound bizarre. Who am I to slow down? Why do I get to do this but one of the things that can happen with coaching is you start to see, oh, this actually is gonna help me be more in service than I currently am, because it'll help me. See the forest rather than just the trees. If I'm constantly moving from one task to the other, I'm never able to ask the big questions, or if I'm asking the big questions, I'm not able to do anything about it. There's the undercurrent of frustration there of, there are things I'd like to do and there's no space to do.
Carol: Whether it is pausing as an individual or taking the time as a group to really dig in and get vulnerable with each other – it takes an intentionality and investment as Monique shares.
Monique: Groups say they want to do the organizational culture work. They bring in folks and. When they realize that the depths of time, like the amount of time, like the kind of commitment and the vulnerability that is really present, they shut down. Groups also don't always have the resources to really invest the time. Right. Folks are pulled in a thousand different directions. We found that to be one of the challenges. Are you really able to commit the time and the resources, the people power to be able to dig in and do this.
Carol: But as Danielle notes – it is feasible – it is possible – and there are folks already doing it.
Danielle: Some people are doing it every day. They don't necessarily stop to think about it. If I'm working with a group that is dealing with food insecurities, and they're also trying to tackle, let's say racial equity systems, they're not stopping the feeding of people. That work continues, but they are allocating time to sit down as a team to review the policies, to begin to look at data, who works in this organization. What's our retention rate based on the disaggregated data, are there certain demographics that are promoted at higher rates to are maybe leaving the organization? Or even hired into the organization at that point. So they're doing both sets of things and I, by no means, would say it is easy because it is an intentional carving out of time. But the people that are able to hold those two things as truthful and important in the moment, those are the groups that I see having the most success.
Carol: It is possible – and it is also important to recognize that we are all caught in systems that are not working. The wider system is broken yet we need to keep working to create a better world – internally for our staff and externally in the mission we are pursuing. Deneisha describes some of the challenges that come with working within that broken system.
Deneisha: The whole nonprofit system is broken and nonprofit organizations often find themselves perpetuating the same systems that they're trying to dismantle. One of the things I think is like the through line in that is culture. And if you have a nonprofit with this great mission, I usually work with direct service nonprofits and they wanna do these great things in communities, change indicators that are plaguing communities and really tackle long standing problems. You can't have a love for a community, but then internally they don't treat each other well, internally they have a toxic culture, internally they have an oppressive culture or one where communication and diversity and having tough conversations isn't valued. What's the real issue around why you are not reaching the impact that you hope to have both in communities and kind of internally as a team. Again, the through line of that is culture. You need to have a culture that is going to allow you to get to the impact that you want to be able to grow organizationally, to be able to support your staff so that they are able to do good work. These communities cannot wait for you to figure it out for you to have these tough conversations and learn how to work better together so that you actually can achieve the type of impact that everyone is working so hard to achieve on a daily basis. 
We blame the government. We blame communities. We blame each other. How do we reduce the culture of blame? Everyone has to have skin in the game. Everyone needs to work on personal accountability and everyone contributes to whether or not we have a healthy culture. 
Carol: It can be hard to face those realities and it is easier to look outside of ourselves to blame others, blame the system. Yet as Terril points out, we need to give ourselves grace. We are human, we will make mistakes. And we are able to acknowledge those and keep moving forward. 
Terrill: when we show up as full human beings who make mistakes, who are learning along with the client, people trust us more because we're not robots and neither are they. We need to be all in it together. 
Monique: We look at the multiple aspects of identities. As we do that, we invite people to look at the places where they have identities that are privileged identities and the places where they have identities. [They’re] oppressed. In terms of the modeling and the transparency that Terrell, and I do, we share our full selves with folks. Acknowledging that I have certain identities that are very privileged. I'm a US born English speaker. I live a middle-class life. And I have identities that are oppressed. I'm black, I'm a woman. I have a disability. What we do is, we invite people to look at their whole selves, not just through a single lens. And so. That really shifts how the conversation happens for groups. ? So you've got, white folks who are used to being in the conversation where they are the oppressor. I mean, that's, that's what we're working with here. We're saying, well, actually, you're more than that. You have many identities that you're holding where you're impacted by systems that. Take power away from you too. We bring that kind of conversation into a group when we're talking about equity and we find that for the folks of color, for the trans folks, for the LGBT folks, It's a, it's a new way of looking at ourselves. It's really powerful to be part of those moments where the group's like, oh right. Because there's so much fear going into conversations around equity. We've found that that type of approach kind of that's what the fear go away, but it definitely just creates compassion for each other.
Carol: That grace, that compassion we need for ourselves and each other will fuel the way forward. Then we are more ready to step in and have the brave conversations we need to create healthier cultures. As Deneisha points out – it is everyone’s job. Whether you are the staff leader, on the board or part of staff – you can do your part to contribute to your organization having a healthier culture. Remembering that it takes time. Allowing ourselves to get the help that we need. Finding safer spaces to have tough conversations. Bringing in someone from the outside who can hold up a mirror and help you look at yourselves – for the good, bad and the ugly. All of these actions are small yet important steps toward building braver organizations.
Thank you for listening to this episode. I really appreciate the time you spend with me and my guests. You can find out how to connect with the guests highlighted in the episode, the full transcript, as well as any links and resources mentioned during the show in the show notes at missionimpactpodcast.com/shownotes. 
I want to thank Isabelle Strauss-Riggs for her support in editing and production as well as April Koester of 100 Ninjas for her production support. If you enjoyed it, please share it with a colleague or friend. We appreciate you helping us get the word out.
And until next time, thank you for everything you do to contribute and make an impact.

In episode 54 of Mission: Impact, Carol celebrates the podcast’s two year anniversary by doing a best of episode about executive leadership transitions. We talk about:

• the types of transitions that organizations experience,
• how different leaders approach those transitions, 
• why it is so important for leaders to make space and groom the next generation of leaders,
• whether or not having an interim executive director is a good idea, 
• how those exiting the leadership role and those entering as new leaders can prepare themselves for their new chapter.

​Guests and Resources:

• Elizabeth Woolfe (episode 12)
  • https://www.linkedin.com/in/elizabethwoolfe 
• Andy Robinson (episode 21)
  • https://www.linkedin.com/in/andy-robinson-9a230b4 
• Carlyn Madden (episode 27)
  • https://www.linkedin.com/in/carlynmadden 
• Don Tebbe (episode 32)
  • https://www.linkedin.com/in/dontebbe 

• Will We Get There Hire by Hire? By Jeanne Bell, Paola Cubias, and Byron Johnson 

• https://www.compasspoint.org/sites/default/files/documents/Executive_Transition.pdf
• Don’s books

Transcript:
Carol Hamilton: Today’s episode of Mission Impact is a little different. To celebrate my two year Pod-iversary, I am doing another “best of episode.” Today’s podiversary episode focuses on leadership transitions - a topic that has been the focus of several interviews. We will be hearing from Elizabeth Woolfe, Carlyn Madden, Don Tebbe and Andy Robinson. We talk about the types of transitions that organizations experience and how different leaders approach those transitions, why it is so important for leaders to make space and groom the next generation of leaders, whether or not having an interim executive director is a good idea, and how those exiting the leadership role and those entering as new leaders can prepare themselves for their new chapter.

Mission Impact is the podcast for progressive nonprofit leaders who want to build a better world without becoming a martyr to the cause. I’m Carol Hamilton, your podcast host and nonprofit strategic planning consultant. On this podcast we explore how to make your organization more effective and innovative. We dig into how to build organizational cultures where your work in the world is aligned with how you work together as staff, board members and volunteers. All of this is for the purpose of creating greater mission impact. 

Leadership transitions come in all shapes and sizes. A lot of factors will go into what type of transition the organization is facing. One of those is the attitude of the leader, others include the lifestage of the nonprofit – is it a start up? In a growth spurt? Is this the first transition from the organization’s founder? Has there been ongoing transition on the board side, not just the staff side of the organization?

Don Tebbe is a leading expert in nonprofit leadership transitions and with Tom Adams in many ways founded the field of executive transition management. He has written several books on the subject and we will link to those in the show notes. He talks about what inspired him to focus on this aspect of nonprofit management.


Don Tebbe: In fact, I did some research for one of my books on callings and I was trying to figure out why I was attracted to this, to this nonprofit sector work. But it just seemed like a great place. To really, to do work that's meaningful. And that's one of the things I discovered in doing the research on callings is that everybody has this innate desire for a meaningful life.
Tom and I put together this program two day retreat called next steps. Particularly targeting founders and long term executive directors, cuz those, those are some of the. Can be some of the most problematic transitions out there and, I think it's just, it's a space where governance, executive leadership, and strategy all come together in, in one moment. And so I think it's a great opportunity really, to address all three of those, those prongs also the organizational capacity. When we realized that we needed to be working with organizations earlier, before they. That moment of transition. So that led us into the succession planning work. What are the characteristics of these high ity organizations? those organizations where you walk in the front door and you can just feel it. You can feel the energy, the excitement, the commitment and the impact. And what's going on in those organizations came up with these three tiers, that base level there's organizational stability, the, the vital signs that are okay. It's not at risk, it's not in the intensive care ward. The next level up was what I would call Sustainability. And then, layering on top of that was vitality. And so you really have to, I think you have to address both the executive and board leadership that the board hires the executive, the board, is responsible for, shepherding the mission and shepherding impact.

Carol: Leadership transitions really do impact all aspects of the organization and are an opportunity to take stock of how leadership is being shared – or not- across the organization – between the board and executive director – between the executive director and staff.
I appreciated Andy Robinson’s challenge to organizations and their leaders. His question goes to the heart of thinking about, planning for and preparing for transitions. And normalizing this process, instead of thinking of it as an anomaly.

Andy Robinson: One of the things I ask people is how long will it take to win? And they're like, what? And I say, how long will it take for you to change the world so effectively that the work of your organization is no longer necessary? Like, what's your exit strategy right now? We should acknowledge that many organizations are perpetual organizations. Hospitals, universities, some of these institutions should be around forever. I totally get that. A lot of groups are trying to solve a problem and go out of business. So my first question is how long will it take for you to win? Then I say, are you gonna be here for the victory party? And of course everybody laughs and says, no, I'm not gonna be around that long. And then I say to them, if you are not Actively grooming the next generation of leadership for your organization right now, by definition, you are failing at your mission by definition.

Carol: If you are not actively grooming the next generation of leadership for your organization right now, by definition, you are failing at your mission by definition. This is a real call to action for leaders – because very few are really putting this front and center as they lead their organization – or their movement. To dig deeper into how different people approach their leaving, Don Tebbe has reflections on the different common styles people take.

Don: The hero's farewell, and he outlined four different characters, four different profiles.
ambassadors, people that could leave the organization gracefully, or even have a continuing role with the organization. And, everything was gonna be just fine. Governors who went on to other big jobs and left the organization behind so forth.  Monarchs, they are gonna be carried out feet first. Stewards, what  I see most of in the nonprofit world. People that can leave gracefully, but not necessarily have a continuing role with the organization. So I encouraged department executives to think of themselves as stewards, and they're gonna hand off the organization to the next steward.

Carol: For those starting to think about their exit from leadership, which of these avatars will you embody? Will you be a monarch, an ambassador, a governor or a steward? And how ready is the organization as a whole for change? How are you cultivating shared and new leadership on your staff and board? Without this, the board – who is charged with finding the new leader can be ill equipped for the responsibility as Elizabeth Woolfe explains.

Elizabeth Woolfe: If the board is still firmly entrenched in what used to be, they're not going to be as effective. And it really, that can be a real recipe for disaster because then you have someone coming in new and fresh as a leader who wants to take the organization to the next level or in a different direction, and the board is stuck. When I do board coaching and board development, it's really to view boards on an ever-expanding continuum where they go from this working board as they commonly are in the very beginning, like sheep following the leader, to something that becomes what's more appropriate for a later or iteration of the organization where they're, they become a governing board and it's a completely different set of skills. 

Carol: Andy Robinson echoes Elizabeth’s points. 

Andy: You and I have both worked with boards where there's been board members on the board for 20 or 30 years. Term limits is a whole nother thing here that we can be thinking about in terms of a succession plan, is that even if the staff leadership turns over, you still have the same people on the board with the same set of assumptions and the same story that goes back to 1993, about why we should be doing this.
 
Carol: Don advocates for the staff leader to take the reigns in planning their exit.

Don: You need to take responsibility for your departure and your exit plan. And then I go to try to clarify that doesn't mean you suring the board's authority and trying to force in your handpick success or on the one hand, nor does it mean dumping everything in the board's lap. getting the board to engage in conversations about what governance relationship they want with this new executive, paying attention to how that handoff and making sure that the critical relationships get handed off that there's briefing materials for the new executive.

Carol: Carlyn Madden explains some of the work her search firm does to prepare the groundwork for the needed changes.

Carlyn Madden: On the front end, we are not just reviewing key documents. To get a sense of the lay of the land or does the last audit say and all of those sorts of things. But also we are surveying board members, see staff members for membership association, the actual members of the association, key volunteers, possibly even program participants. We're talking to funders, we're doing a survey, we're doing one on one phone calls. We're doing listening sessions. It's just, it's gonna depend on what the organizations are, how recently they've done similar things. And we're trying to learn what. What was really stellar about the LA person in this position?
What were some of the key achievements? What do you think is on the horizon? What hasn't been paid attention to that often needs too often, staff culture is a big east. I think we're really going through a virtuous time. Rightly so. In my opinion, where staff are much more vocal about what they're going to need from their next leader.

Carol: She also comments on what has often been missing from how boards approach executive searches.

Carlyn: What hasn't been happening, particularly in the equity piece, the racial equity or gender justice, or whatever, these different, different elements that affect individual organization. And this is their time to be able to lift and surface that. And for the board to be able to hear that in an objective way, that's not the The thesis banged on the front door that says, we're demanding change or we are unionizing because our rights are being infringed upon.


Carol: Andy Robinson pointed out the mission critical aspect of grooming the next generation and preparing a leadership pipeline. We talked about some specific actions that leaders can do to start that process. 

Andy: one thing you should do is look at your task list and try to hand it off. I don't know, one task a week, two tasks a week. And I don't mean, pardon me, Carol. I don't mean the medical stuff. I mean, substantive stuff. I mean, if you're doing all the data entry and you hand that off to somebody else. Sure. That's lovely, but that's not building their skillset. So that's one thing they could do is actually look at what you do and say, is there stuff that I can delegate reasonably appropriately without burdening other people, but also takes me out of the center 
when I'm building an agenda and I'm figuring out who's gonna lead. What section of the agenda. I want multiple people leading different parts of the agenda. Cuz the ability to, to run a meeting, facilitate a conversation is a leadership skill. Don't be a perfectionist. And there's the classic thing you see is that you have a leader who wants it done their way. And often somebody else has a different way of doing it. That is different, but could be just as effective or differently, effective or weaker in some ways, but stronger in ways that your way isn't. I think that's a succession planning strategy too. If you're a leader, how do you take up less space so that other people can occupy that space?

Carol: One thing that I would say to every leader – you can start creating more space for others to lead by one really simple yet challenging act. Do NOT be the first to speak in a discussion. Wait a beat. Wait two beats. Even when it feels awkward to be in silence. Let others step in and share their perspective before you. If you always go first – most likely everyone around you will be sharing in reaction to and in light of your contribution. I observe so many leaders dominating conversations and not realizing the impact they are having. By doing this, they are leaving a lot of good thinking on the table from those around them. If it feels super awkward – tell people you are going to do this – and have them hold you accountable. 

If you do try this, I would love to hear some results of your experiments.
As Elizabeth points out, your leadership pipeline doesn’t have to only be inside your organization. You can be looking to cultivate leadership with those in your wider ecosystem.

Elizabeth: If it's that organization that has a leadership pipeline, it could be that but most often in larger organizations, yes, that is more typical, but in smaller organizations, there's not.
Enough people working there for it to really be an appropriate way of organizing succession, but it is always nice. And, I encourage organizations to do this, to have sort of a. A running list of people that they have in their orbit. That could be either someone that they consider in, in a search or someone who would, they, they would consider to be part of a search committee who knows the organization well enough and who's connected enough.

Carol:. Carlyn also talks about how those wider networks and ecosystems are so important for effective searches. As well as tapping into a variety of networks.

Carlyn: Hire by hire and talk about some of the survey data on executive leadership in the nonprofit sector has not changed in the last 20 years, right. The demographic has not actually changed. And so what is required are that the conditions of executive search have to change.
we're very firm in that color transparency for all of our clients. I'm really thinking about building, not actually building out networks, multiracial networks, leveraging affinity groups, having open exchange with clients, recognizing that often leaders of color don't have those sponsors or, when we are reaching out to folks saying, who do you know in this space. That would be a good executive director because there's so many white people in the sector in top leadership roles. Our networks are very homogenous. If a transition committee is hiring an executive director and says only executive directors can apply for it. Well, what we know to be true about the field is that there are fewer executive directors of color than white executive directors.
And so we're already starting to limit the pool.

Carol: Carlyn also talks about the differentiation process of what is essential for the executive director role and what is there because of the current person in the role.

Carlyn: What's his pet project, right? The organization has been shaped around his identity and in many ways it's been really successful. His vision has helped propel this organization to really incredible heights in a very small period of time, short period of time. But there are also things, their pet project. And the board recognizes it to some extent but not necessarily the full extent. So that was the focus of our conversation yesterday, but it was really helpful just to identify, like there are some things that only he can do and only he wants to do. And so the next executive director might even bring their own pet projects and that's okay.


Carol: Interim executive directors is something that organizations going through a transition should consider as an option. There are consultants who do nothing but interim work and can bring their experience to your organization. But our experts were not totally in agreement about interims and their value.

Elizabeth: The transition period in an organization, especially when they're losing a position like a founder, it's crucial to, to build in some space where everyone can experience what that feels like before embarking on the next. I almost always recommend that they consider hiring an interim for that reason. And, and especially with a founder, and a founder that might have been with the organization for a very long time, it's a big change. It's like when you bake cookies and or, and when you make pancakes and, and the first pancake just doesn't turn out well, It's like that. If you hire someone too quickly, that first pancake just might not turn out that well, and that's unfortunate because then the organization is once again plunged into a period of transition, which is not really healthy or something I'd recommend. The statistics about, especially following a founder for new leaders coming in and not being successful is really shocking.
So the interim can really be that bridge very successfully. For all of the reasons that you just outlined, it's like a palate cleanser. It's a good thing to try. The most formative of those relationships, but when you have relationships with funders, when those people have those relationships that are very closely held, there's a lot of insecurity and instability that can affect the organization adversely if it's not handled correctly. And oftentimes that's the best reason to have an interim. Because that person can focus on those relationships. Otherwise it's a board member or maybe a secondary staff person that might not be as comfortable relationship building and relationship cultivating as the leader was. And it could be really debilitating for the organization.

Don: I've been listening to your interview with Liz Wolf and I take a little bit different tack about the idea of interim executive. Being the standard approach for an organization now, that was the, that is the experience in, in many religious denominations. For a lot of organizations that just doesn't work, you've got fundraising relationships that you need to hand off, or you've got key government contract relationships that you need to hand off and, you know, having an interim in there and doing that hand off twice, just, just, just doesn't seem to work.


Carol: Carlyn and I talked about the danger of a new executive director becoming an accidental interim – especially if they are following a founder or a long term ED.
 
Carlyn: Is that executive director going to be the person that hands over the keys? Or is that person going to need to use an interim executive director in order to facilitate that transition? And we're dealing with people. So every person is different. Every organization is different because of that person. I can't say there's one right way to do it, but often an interim executive director after the founder is a good idea because this person can help steward and.
Steer the organization's operation and help clean up. it's not like there's a mess necessarily, but, but be able to implement some new systems, be able to identify if there are staff members that need to be promoted. If there are staff members that have outgrown their position they can do some of that quote unquote dirty work before the next executive director comes in. We commonly say there's sort of. Accidental interim that often follows a founder, somebody that is in that role for about 18 months. And you don't want that. You want the next person to follow the founder to be there for a much longer term. Maybe not another 30 years, but five, 10 years be able to take the organization through its next cycle of opportunity.

Carol: The glass cliff, not the, just the glass ceiling, but the glass cliff of being offered, you women, women of color, especially being offered the, the impossible job. Yeah, exactly. And then people wondered why they couldn't.

Carlyn: Where women are called in to clean out a. And then have an impossible job out of them. And then our, their performance is managed in a way that is not commensurate with the, with the opportunity ahead, or the challenge ahead.

Carol: As Don points out it is never too early to start thinking about transition and succession. It is not just a process to follow or a set of steps. In William Bridges work on transition, he describes three phases that people go through  - the ending, the neutral zone and the new beginning. In our action oriented culture, we often think we can jump directly from the ending to the new beginning. The liminal  - in between spaces of the neutral zone can catch us off guard. It is messy and confusing. And all through the transition, you can feel like you are on an emotional roller coaster. Don describes how this impacts leaders. 

Don: the executive really should initiate the succession. Process and rather than the board initiating it on their behalf. They were shocked and surprised by how emotional the process was for them. That was something that really caught them off guard. You probably can't start too early. We were focusing on primarily trying to get to people four, three to four to five years ahead of their departure. A lot of times, executives are confused about their role in, in the transition process and the succession process to me, there's no ambiguity. You got three jobs. Job number one: lead the organization through the transition, of course, but understand that that role is going to evolve as your departure date draws closer. Number two is to prepare yourself for that next chapter of life. Like if you're gonna retire, have something magnetic that's drawing you forward rather than a job that you're leaving. And job number three is to prepare the organization for the succession and transition process. 

Carol: Don talks about how many leaders are caught by surprise by the emotional element of the transition – and I would add -  everyone in the organization is going through their own emotional roller coaster too. Don tells a story that illustrates just this point.

Don: He was rethinking his departure date and his long time, well seasoned deputy just up and.
Said, look, I'm done with this, you're, you're never gonna leave this organization. I'm gonna go do something else. I think I gave some notice, but you know what I mean? It really upset the apple cart. And I think it also makes people feel whipsawed. It can be a real stew for the staff and ripe for people, some of your best people, to look elsewhere because they're questioning their career. The future with the organization and, and there's always questions anyway will we like the new executive? Can we trust the board to pick the right person for a job?

Carol: I appreciate Don’s comment about the leader preparing themselves for the next step. In our conversation, Andy described his own process of succession and transition into retirement.

Andy: I feel like if I step back, there's more room for others to step up and jobs than I am not accepting. And I am referring to other people or jobs. I don't get anymore, cuz it's okay. I have enough, I've had enough work. I don't need to do it much longer, but I'm also supporting and training and helping other people who wanna enter this space. And that feels good to me. So this is my personal succession plan and I can't say I wrote it down, but it's something I've thought about for years and I've been implementing it step by step. And the latest step is for me to work less and be more assertive about pushing jobs out to other people, especially folks who are new to consulting. I'm sending a lot more work to BIPOC consultants. Black indigenous people of color as a way of supporting social justice and equity.

Carol: Carlyn and I explored what emerging leaders can do to get ready for an executive director role and what the board needs to do to set the new leader up for success.

Carlyn: if you're an aspiring ED, this is your time to shine. But if you're a board know that, that it's gonna be very additive to get the right person. So you might walk away with the perfect person, but you might be offering it to a couple different people. We've had a couple scenarios just in the last few months where someone's accepted a job offer, been in this situation where they're negotiating a parallel job offer. You have to be willing to make some, some adjustments to your timeline, to the amount of money that you have on the table, all sorts of things. If somebody is looking to ascend into an executive director role, the board is paying very close attention to how much fundraising experience they have, or what is their external facing. What are the technology needs that they're going to have? What are the key people that they need to meet in the first week? How are they let's go ahead and set up meetings with the board members so that that's all done for them. They like to walk in, they open their calendar and they're like, great. I will meet Jim for lunch next Tuesday. And Jill and Joanie are going to be a happy hour,
We also do 30, 60, 90 day check-ins with both the incoming executive director, and the board chair.

Carol: The topic of transitions seemed super relevant as we slowly emerge from the pandemic. As the going impacts of the Great resignation, great reshuffle keep reverberating through the economy. And the nonprofit sector as a subset of that – feeling all those transitions too. We are also I think – finally in the much anticipated generational transition as boomers retire and new leaders step into the limelight.

If these clips intrigued you and you want to go back and listen to the full episodes from each of the people featured in today’s best of – Elizabeth Woolfe’s is episode 12, Carlyn Madden is 27, Andy Robinson is 21 and Don Tebbe is 32.

Thank you for listening to this episode. I really appreciate the time you spend with me and my guests. You can find the full transcript, as well as any links and resources mentioned during the show in the show notes at missionimpactpodcast.com/shownotes. I want to thank Isabelle Strauss-Riggs for her support in editing and production as well as April Koester of 100 Ninjas for her production support. If you enjoyed it, please share it with a colleague or friend. We appreciate you helping us get the word out. And until next time, thank you for everything that you do to contribute and make an impact.

In episode 51 of Mission: Impact, Carol and her guest, Thomas Anderson discuss:

• How to approach vision development
• Why more people are working with founders
• Why it’s important to pay attention to those weak signals that could impact your organization in the future

Guest Bio:
Dr. Thomas E. Anderson, II is the founder of Teaiiano Leadership Solutions. He has over 20 years of experience leading high-performance teams in faith-based non-profits. As a coach, consultant, and workshop facilitator, Thomas helps founders, leaders, and managers to navigate the multi-loop (…and often elusive) process of vision development and realization. In fact, he measures results by how much he helps clients to move forward with their vision for the future. Thomas is a recurring presenter at Regent University's Annual Research Roundtables and has published academic articles in the Journal of Practical Consulting and Coaching (JPCC). Above all, Thomas enjoys being a devoted husband to his wife, Jamie, and dedicated father to his daughters, Arianna and Azalia.

Important Links and Resources:

• https://www.teaiiano.com/ 
• https://www.linkedin.com/in/thomasandersonii  
• Brenda Zimmerman
• Visionary Leadership – Burt Nanus
• The Leadership Challenge – James Kouzes, Barry Posner
• The Essentials of Sociology – Jim Henslin
  
  

Transcript:
Carol Hamilton: My guest today on Mission Impact is Thomas Anderson. Thomas and I talk about how organizations can learn to see and listen, why more and more people are working with founders, and what foresight is and why it is important to organizations. 
Mission Impact is the podcast for progressive nonprofit leaders who want to build a better world without becoming a martyr to the cause. I am Carol Hamilton, your podcast host and nonprofit strategic planning consultant. 
Welcome Thomas. Welcome to mission impact. 
Thomas Anderson: Thank you, Carol. It's nice to be here today, talking with you. 
Carol:  I like to start each conversation with what drew you to the work that you do? What would you describe as your why? 
Thomas: That's a great question. I started this work just to basically help visionaries to, I used to say, to change the world, but it's really to help visionaries to impact the world or to improve the condition of the world that we live in.
Carol: And. As you just said, you're a coach and consultant that really works with folks too, you focus on vision development. Why would you say that vision is so important for whether it's an organization, a team, an individual. 
Thomas: that's a good question. And I have to caveat it by telling you a little bit about the backstory of how I got into this work. So I had every intention of graduating from undergrad and just going right into it. Nine to five corporate jobs staying there retiring, but the more and more I talk to people who are around me and the more opportunities that were coming my way, they were really related to people would come to me with their ideas or they would come to me with some type of creative, something that they wanted to do. Made everyone else who gave them feedback on it say, okay, I don't know about this. You might be crazy. Those kinds of responses kept coming to them. And so when I was just open to just the fact that, okay, you want to do something new at the time? I graduated right after the dot com bust. I was in a sense , either forced to go back to school or to try something new. And I was at the time trying something new. And so I saw, I say all that to say, I saw how it motivated vision has a very motivating it's a very motivating phenomenon within itself. 
Carol: I work a lot with folks in the nonprofit sector and it's usually someone. Has a vision of, of how the world might be better or how they could have impact or how they could serve people or a gap that they perceive. They step into that. Sometimes the vision is very clear for the founder and not necessarily for everyone that they pull along with them. So you recently did some research into vision development and then its realization. Can you tell me a little bit about that research and what were the, what were the questions that you were trying to answer? 
Thomas: Yes. Yes. I'd be happy to. And you just brought up something that I thought about earlier. There's a trend going on and I can, I can break it down like this. And this is what my research has shown just on a cursory level. More new businesses are popping up and even more so since the pandemic has happened. The number of new business applications doubled between 2007 and 2022, and they actually spiked between 2020 and the end of 2021. They have level back off to that doubling, but when you couple that with the fact that corporate longevity has decreased from 67 years , companies used to last on average on the S and P 67 years in 1920 to 15 years. And in 2012 you had this trend that businesses are getting younger. And the chances of working with a founder are higher. And so I started to think, what does that say? Or a visionary leadership vision and visionary leadership. And so what I started to do was to reconceptualize there was a call in the research from a couple of scholars to reconceptualize visionary leadership. And I started to think about the trend of businesses actually getting younger. And I said, okay I need to jump in here. And so I started to ask two questions. The first one was, can an organization learn. And then the second is if so, how do organizations practice? Seeing together now I've had a couple of discussions around my book topic, or I should call it a manuscript at this point because we're still in the process of  the proposals and so forth and so on. But I'm even revising that question to look at a topic that came up in one of the sessions: can an organization learn to hear or learn to use the senses. And so what that looks like, going back to my original question, is how organizations learn how to detect and anticipate the future in such a way that they can choose which future they want to pursue. And also on the same token, be nimble enough to make changes along the way. 
Carol: Can you say a little bit more about what you mean by an organization seeing or an organization hearing. 
Thomas: Still, when it comes to seeing, basically when we talk about vision, we all know that it's future oriented and so. A term for that is the preferred future. And so which future the organization prefers, but visioning itself, starts with the ability to see. And you mentioned the founder earlier in, and that really comes into play here because founders take a journey through what they can see to be the preferred. But there's a lot of information there. That lies outside of the realm of visioning. It lies in the foresight realm of future-thinking, just picking up on trends that are happening or doing some type of horizon scanning or thinking about scenarios that could play out. And so all of that comes into play when talking about organizations. Learn to see together, not just the founder learning to see, but everyone, at some point being invited into the process through their feedback or through a whole group collaborative session, just in bringing all of that wisdom into one room and saying, okay, based on that, what do we want our company to be in this.
Carol: Yeah. And you talked about foresight also. Can you say a little bit about what you mean by that? Sure. 
Thomas: So foresight it's not really pie in the sky. Like sometimes vision enforced that can be treated that way, but foresight is basically seeing or detecting what's coming up in the next. So just to, I guess, make a juxtaposition between foresight and strategic foresight and strategic planning, right? Strategic planning looks, and you're an expert at strategic planning. So I need to get this right. Strategic planning looks in the near future, right up to maybe three or five years of foresight. Beyond that it can, it usually starts at five years, but can look up to 50 to a hundred years not to say that people can predict the future. But, you're just picking up on all of these trends that are going on emerging trends, things that could turn into something later, we just don't know. But there are things that would impact or could possibly derail that perfect picture of the future that many organizations and the founders do hold.
Carol: it's so interesting when you're talking about the near term and the longer term for nonprofits with the, with there being so much oftentimes just. Way more to do than can possibly get done. The visions tend to be huge, even when the resources and the organization are, are really small. And so I find even getting organizations to think about the next three years or the next five years can be challenging for them to just take the time. To step back, what are some ways that smaller organizations can tap into what other people are doing around foresight? So they don't have to start from scratch when thinking about those trends. 
Thomas: Hmm, that's a good question. I was talking to the president of a smaller organization. It wasn't a nonprofit, but I think the lesson for me in this was that there are certain organizations that are mission driven or are concerned with their teams as wellbeing. And I think that's good. The point of commonality, but what she told me is that she gets together with our team monthly and each team member gets a chance to be the CEO. And so in that meeting she selects someone or they volunteer. And what the first task that they have is to tell, in their own words, what the vision is. And so that's a good way for the leader to not have to always take center stage in communicating it, but also for someone to come forth through someone else's boys and for the leader to also see where that person is and what they see and see the organization from their vantage point. 
Carol: That's a great point. I often, when I'm doing strategic planning with organizations and in that initial phase where I'm talking to everybody, one of the questions I often ask. Why does your organization exist? What's the purpose to get everyone to, to describe that mission? They're probably not going to be able to recite the mission statement, but do they at core, have a common understanding of what the purpose of the organization is and, and have that be a checkpoint in the process so that if there, if it's like really all over the place, then that's something that the organization needs to deal with. Yeah. So in your research you were looking at how organizations can see and now maybe how organizations can hear or, or use the other sentences that we have. What were some of the findings that you, that came out of? The work that you did? 
Thomas: Great question. So I, going through the process, came up with 11 operating principles that were the focus for each chapter. Around organizational vision development and realization. And so I talked a little bit about this earlier, but vision is more than what meets the eye it's using your senses. It's really detecting and, and I came up with a lot of synonyms that I placed in, in the book. But one phenomenon really stuck out to me was picking up on weak signals on the horizon. And these are signals. Can often be missed, but they can inform the direction of the vision, the, what I call the iteration of the vision. That brings me to a second concept where I think Brenda Zimmerman, who was a consultant and a futurist, and she worked in chaos and complexity theory. She recommended it. Good enough vision, not necessarily wordsmithing it to the point of beyond recognition. She's had to get a vision to the point where it's good enough and then use it to be tested and, over the course of its life cycle, it'll change. 
Carol: I love that idea of a good enough. Again, when I'm working with organizations, I'm also trying to get them to what's a good enough strategic plan and to remind them that, yeah, you're not trying to predict the future and These aren't w once it's done, it's also not a tablet that came from on high, right. It’s something that you all created. And so when you need to, you can also update it. So just reminding people that there's flexibility, even when you want to set some intentions and some direction, but yeah, what's good enough. 
Thomas: Yeah. And it changes from a wallflower vision and to a working document.
Carol: Absolutely. What were some of the other findings that came out? Yeah, 
Thomas: Sure. So there are two trends that in my opinion are upending the traditional idea of visionary leadership and even vision development. And one of those we talked about just now is good enough vision or emergency. The other is shared vision. And in founder-led companies, I'm finding that shared visioning doesn't happen as much with employees at the start as, and I was surprised. I did one quick survey and the customers. So founders would actually. Go through the process of shared visioning with customers using design thinking. I know you're very familiar with that process more than they would with their employees. Once the company had grown. And I found that to be fascinating.
Carol: Well, yeah, I guess there is the focus there on going to the customer, but then if only a few people are involved in that conversation, then there's a big gap of folks who are in the day-to-day and yeah. For nonprofits. Oftentimes, the founder, the CEO, and the board get involved in those conversations and staff get left out of it. And I really encourage groups to include, as many people as is, really practically possible to get involved in those strategic conversations, because everyone has something to share and a perspective and that frontline, actually, implementing a program, actually making things happen is so important. When you bring it back up to that bigger picture vision,
Thomas: And I think we're at a point and I think we're at a pivotal moment in just organizational life. And considering visionary leadership and what it was contextualized for in the late eighties and nineties and where we were as a country at that time. I think we're at a moment where the call even on a generational level is for more people to be involved and that's, I'm picking up on corporations and nonprofits. I work with faith-based nonprofits and I don't really see a difference. People are lacking time and the budget to do certain things, but there is something that I did come across in the literature. It was a book on visionary leadership by Burton. And he actually when I was reading. And also looking through the work of Jim Kouzes and Barry Posner the leadership challenge. And I had a conversation with Jim Kouzes also. And what I found was there's a backstory, even to leaders coming up with a vision because they spend time talking. To people walking through the halls and Jim Kouzes just put it like this, leaders pick up on the vision. That's latent in the hearts of the people. Those are the visions that really end up working on when you start to generalize them for the entire organization. 
Carol: that shared leadership is so important because in a nonprofit organization there isn't just one person making the decision, right. It's always a group effort. Whether it's all volunteer all everyone on the board needing to come together and, and have a common shared, shared vision , between board and staff and I think that's one of the things that always can trip people up if they've come from the for-profit side and especially with smaller organizations where they've been in charge and been able to do things the way they wanted to, whether that was best practice or not, they had that ability.
And so to step into the nonprofit sector, whether it's faith-based or. Where it's much more of a matrix it's much more of a collective so that building that sense of shared leadership and shared vision is, is just so important. What would you say are some of the challenges that leaders face when trying to implement their vision and implement, and then build a shared collective vision?
Thomas: Yeah, there are two challenges that immediately come to mind. One is the adoption, like having the vision to be adopted by a critical mass of stakeholders, whether they be employees managers donors just getting that vision adopted. And  what, Carol, there is an example of that. I've been unpacking some of these examples and reading through them several times. And so with the March of dimes, I actually read through their history and included it in the manuscript. And so over a period of more than 80 years, their vision. And their mission has evolved several times. And so on its website, its structures, its history, for instance, around the four areas of an evolving vision. So the first iteration, what I call it, the first iteration was curing polio and the era was 1938 to 1955. When the VI, the vaccine for polio became available in 55, they entered into another iteration and they called it. Eradicating birth defects. You could also call it eradicating congenital disabilities that ran until about the mid seventies. And then they entered another one healthy pregnancies and they were ensuring at this time that babies were strong and that moms were healthy. This is random too. And it overlapped into the current era that they're in, where they're tackling a crisis of premature birds. And, and I think that I, as far as I can tell, that's where their focus has landed. And so we, we see things like that with the division becoming , moving in cycles instead of straight. 
Carol: each of those are certainly related and they've stayed in the same realm. But the particular challenges or particular eras have been different. Yeah, I mean, oftentimes we'll ask Organizations for some organizations, their mission is going to be perpetual, like healthcare institutions, a hospital. Others would love to see themselves out of business. , a homeless shelter, a food bank if we didn't have needs for that, we'd be a better society, right? Like folks don't want to have to have. The services available. But they see the need and so they build organizations to fit those needs. But yeah. So, so visions can, can iterate in, in a variety of different fashions. 
Thomas: And that's a great point. It reminded me of the challenge that the March of Dimes faced in that first shifting from that first iteration to the second, whether the loss of sponsorship and they had to. Find creative ways to tell their donors who had pretty much devoted themselves to the mission. And that shared mission of eradicating polio. Tell them there are other problems that we need to address here. And to your point about they would have gone out of business. Had they not iterated that. 
Carol: Which could, which would have been a in, in some ways a valid choice, right. Except that they were, they looked around and there were other related things that they could, that they had the infrastructure to tackle.
Thomas: Jim Henslin, he wrote a textbook on sociology. He put it this way. He said they could have gone out of business, but the bureaucracy. Made them continue. And so they said, okay, we have to come up with something else because there are jobs that stayed there we built so much Goodwill in this brand. And so they had to continue. 
Carol: Yeah. And sometimes I think we'll, we'll actually , caution organizations against that, that, that they're not. Certainly they want to be in the nonprofit sector. You want to have a well-run organization. You want it to be well-managed, be effective, all of those things. But if it becomes only about. Perpetuating the organization versus really staying on mission. That's where there can be a little bit of a gap, but certainly there's a multitude of challenges that they could have tackled and then what they chose to tackle. It made sense in terms of where they were and how they were set up. 
Thomas: For sure
Carol: I'm curious, what are the phases of iteration or other examples of that vision iteration that you see? 
Thomas: They are pretty much four phases. That first phase deals with foresight. Just really detecting what's going on in, in and around an existing organization. Or if it's a startup around the startup, in the external environment. The second is the one we know just sitting down, writing the vision, creating it or co-creating it. And there's a micro phase in between there where the vision is emerging. It's just organically in different quote-unquote containers. It could be through values. , it could be through culture. It can, it can emerge through several different things. The third phase is where stakeholders have a choice and this choice is often taken for granted for founders. They can accept them, its division or stakeholders can reject it. And we're seeing a lot of rejection of organizational vision right now in the great reshuffling. The great. What is it? What is the other name for it? Great. Resignation resignation. I think I've gravitated to reshuffling more, but yeah, the great shoveling, the great resignation where people are voting with their feet, they're rejecting the vision by leaving. And if organizations don't get to the point of the end of founders, especially in leaders, don't get to the point where they accept, okay. People can accept the vision or they can reject it. Then sometimes it becomes impossible. And if folks reject it, it's always impossible to get to this fourth phase where they, and I didn't come up with this term, but it's called vision integration. Dr. Jeffrey Coles, he came up with the term and he did a lot of the research where people do two things. They use the vision to make decisions in their everyday work life and they use it. The vision to guide their behaviors and their actions during the. 
Carol: it's so interesting with the whole great reshuffle or whatnot. I think it comes down to, for certainly in the nonprofit sector. What I've observed is often there's been a real gap between the vision that the organization has for the change that they want to make in the world, but then a real misalignment with how they actually act internally, how they treat each other, the culture that they've built and I think it's especially acute when it is a mission-driven organization and people they essentially have higher standards for a group. And so they, when they, when they see that gap, they're much more likely , to, to walk away. And I, I think certainly in the nonprofit sector folks just have gotten to the point and, and then I think with. I don't know, it's pandemic, you, you reminded me that we're, that our, all of our time is finite. That things become more urgent than they might've been. You might've put up with it in the past where folks just aren't willing to as much now. 
Thomas: that's a great point. While you were sharing that, I thought about when you, you talked about sometimes there's a disconnect people can vision mission. And I don't know if I said this previously, but it's often something that can be taken for granted with when it's in place, but if it's not in place you feel, or, or employees can feel that disconnection between Where the organization, what the organization does and where their job fits in. And that vision often gives everyone a common direction. And then it's a good launching pad just for even those team meetings weekly to say, this is where we're going. This is everybody's part in it. And , the check-ins, it gives focus and direction to a lot of the work.
Carol: I think that's a piece that people forget to do on a regular basis. And, and one of the values that I see in, in going through a strategic planning process, I mean, sometimes what will come out. The other end won't necessarily be super different than what folks saw going into it. But it's like a rechecking and a confirmation that folks are on the same page. I often get a lot of feedback, wow. That's really helpful to know that other people are feeling the same way I am or seeing it the same way I am that validation. So, I'll often say if you come up with a whole bunch of goals in your plan that are brand new, I actually will be curious about that. Like, why is there such a departure from what was before? And oftentimes it's much more of a through line and it's about conforming or reconfirming or reintegrating that. 
Thomas: Yeah. Yeah, yeah, absolutely. 
Carol: So at the end of each podcast episode, I played a game or I asked you one random icebreaker question. So I'm curious, what's your favorite family tradition? 
Thomas: Oh, goodness. That is random. Wow. I love that question. Let's see my favorite family. I wouldn't have to say there are several, but if I have to pick one, it would be going to Hershey park. Yeah. 
Carol: And how's that tradition originating and the same way.
Thomas:  What am I, that's a good question too. I think we are just random, and that's why I say yeah, I'm going to stay with the randomness because I think we were random at times and we like to just experiment, try new things, go places. And I think we just looked it up and we saw that they had a chill child-friendly rides and attractions, and we said, okay, let's go.
Carol: And you love chocolate. Well, I am, I'm always in agreement with that one, for sure. So that's something you do on a regular basis or when we can, at least once a year.
Thomas: Excellent. 
Carol: Well, I'm not, I'm not a rollercoaster person, so I stay away from us at the museum at the park, but I was lucky that my daughter loved them and my younger sister also loved them. So it was a big treat that my younger sister, auntie, would take my daughter to the amusement park. And they got, they had a great time, left me, left me behind, best stay out of the way.
Thomas: I discovered, and this is funny now, but I discovered that. I had vertigo on one of the rides at Hershey park. So my wife is the roller coaster person
Carol: Yeah. There you go. I definitely have vertigo. Vertigo is a real thing. So what are you excited about? What's coming up next for you? What's emerging in your work? You talked about a manuscript. 
Thomas: Yeah, I'm totally excited about that. So I'm working with beta readers right now to figure out what's missing what's resonating with them. And, and they're mostly scholars in visioning and organizational change so forth and so on. And so I'm hoping to have that type of yes, by the end of the year.
Carol: All right. Well, we'll look forward to it and let us know so we can let folks know when it moves to that next step. That'll be exciting. All right. Well, thank you so much. It was great having you on. 
Thomas: Thank you for having me.
Carol: I was struck by Thomas’ example of the CEO who has each of her staff be CEO for their monthly meeting and to articulate to the team what the organizational vision is. It is a great way to check in and find out whether folks are in alignment and really understand where you are trying to go. I also appreciated Thomas’ description of the ‘good enough vision.’ So many organizations can get caught up in trying to get it perfect. Whether it is their vision statement, their mission statement, their strategic plan. Having the attitude of we need to get it ‘good enough’ and then get moving can really help keep the momentum going. And the importance of visions being a shared vision. If you are a founder and you are the only person who really gets your vision, it will be a lot harder to realize it. You will be more effective if you create the vision with the people you are working with – whether everyone is a volunteer or you have a staff. It needs to be the vision of the group, not just the founder.
Thank you for listening to this episode. I really appreciate the time you spend with me and my guests. You can find out how to connect with Thomas, his full bio, the full transcript of our conversation, as well as any links and resources mentioned during the show in the show notes at missionimpactpodcast.com/shownotes. 
I want to thank Isabelle Strauss-Riggs for her support in editing and production as well as April Koester of 100 Ninjas for her production support. We want to hear from you! Take a minute to give us feedback or ask a question at missionimpactpodcast.com/feedback. Keep making an impact!