Archives
March 2024
Categories
All
|
Back to Blog
INTERNALIZED POVERTY3/11/2024 This internalized poverty mentality is pervasive in non-profit, purpose-driven space. The wages are way too low compared with other industries. There's no mentorship and workforce development within this sector. No investment in anything long-term. They are proud of Zero budgeting. A zero-sum competition exists between non-profits in smaller cities especially for funding. The skeletal staff is doing 2-3 jobs for a salary of one. The Board is always a hands-on board, sometimes meddling too much on implementation. Volunteers are used as second-level staffers. Funders do not trust them to develop their organizations, only to deliver the programs. I got almost into a debate after I spoke about the fallacy of 10% administration budget that funders would only fund. I reasoned that 10% is too miniscule to account for what non-profit needs to scale, grow, and build stronger and robust systems for the community good that they do. A woman retorted, " so Executive Directors get to pad their pockets with lots of money?" Is this really what we think about this issue? What a narrow, escapist notion that people will pad their incomes when given more money for administration. It's like saying that we should not build bridges and roads because the contractors get the best of taxpayers monies or that politicians get a kickback somehow. There's no future in this poverty mentality than more poverty, scarcity leading to bad, low quality, one-size-fits-all services that serve no one. This is the loop that should be condemned by everyone. The non-profit is in a crisis and it has been like that for a long time. If these structural issues continue, no amount of billion dollar funding can make it better, it could trigger a more dog-eat-dog scenario. Let's stop kidding ourselves that it will change when a new government comes, or when the funders will get an epiphany, or maybe, if we can just demand for reforms. No! this is a case for societal response to a major overhaul. And I don't think we are near fed-up which is what I hope so.
0 Comments
Read More
Back to Blog
UNTOUCHABLES3/4/2024 There are sacred cows in many purpose-driven organizations. it can be a personnel, a Board Member, a funder, a practice/framework, an over-staying product, a founder's mantra, or a habit. All of these can be sacred cows- never questioned, continued to exist and proliferate despite its obsolescence/irrelevancy and sometimes exaggerated, larger-than-life value. You can't touch it, complain about it, or suggest an alternative route/option/offering. The employees would point up (ceiling) saying, something like, "Word from Management." Just follow or resign. Who is the management? Who is the boss? Board of Directors. The Executive Director. The Management Council. When there are sacred cows, it means that the organization has lost it adaptability and relies on tradition, dogma, and unfounded beliefs, usually not based on any thing factual and evidence-based. There's a place for tradition in building high-performing cultures in organizations. Cultures that are deeply rooted in values. For tradition's sake, continuity (some may say), or laziness, people revert to 'whatever been around for a long time' and seldom ask why. Tradition without relevance is fanaticism. In many societies, sacred cows roam the street unhindered. But in organizations, too many roaming unhindered sacred cows can cause a massive catastrophe. You don't want that. Ask, listen, evaluate. Rinse and Repeat
Back to Blog
PRE-MEDITATED NOTIONS2/26/2024 I used to respond to Request for Proposals. Not anymore. No way Jose. I call them: Pre-meditated Solutions Pre-conceived Notions Pre-pared Frameworks Pre-planned Realities Well, to tell you the truth: These RfPs: Do not conform to real-life situations, experiences, and delivery practicalities. They are developed by a bunch of staff sitting on their desks all day and doing the charts, formula, and frameworks they have studies/learned in their sector. They usually have a consultation team that favors bureaucratic processes and practices rather than getting the best candidate for the job. They focused many times on the money factor, Eg. Value for Money as if money/costs are all to this. It's like a vacuum. Nobody knows what happened to these ideas and insights. For all you know, these ideas are suggested to the chosen candidate. Much of the proposals are responded to by those who have actual relationships with the organizations tendering these. If you don't have a foot nail on the door, don't even try. Waste of time. There is power balance. It's all rigged to the issuing organization. They can cancel anytime, take 1-2 candidates that they liked, and the scoring system is prejudicial to their own biases and preferences which have no bearing on reality. In short, it's not fair, equitable, and just. |