(Audio recording available after 8/31)
Panel with Marla Cornelius, Compasspoint; Julie Davidson-Gomez, Exhale; James Lin, Glide Foundation; Olivia Araiza, Justice Matters; Miho Kim, Data Center.
Compasspoint did a report on next generation orgs: Next Generation Organizations by Marla Cornelius and Tim Wolfred (coming in September). Covering a variety of characteristics of next generation organizations: Impact Driven. Finance & Business Savvy; Continuous Learning; Shared Leadership; Wired for Policy Advocacy; Ambiguity of Work-Life Boundaries; Constituents as Thought Partners; Board as Value Add; Multicultural & Culturally Competent.
Initial thoughts/ aspirational components of these dimensions
(Audio recording available after 8/31)
Using storytelling to reframe how we think about impact and results. Being solution agnostic - try everything until it works. Break down the silos between programs, finance, etc. Using failure and learning to improve and innovate. Power is diffused, power is shared, everyone is tapped for solutions. Keeping connected to advocacy and policy work that relates to your work. People do, touch, learn things in their life that adds alue to their work, hence the need for good work life balance. Results-Only Work Environment (ROWE) - who cares what the time sheet says, get work done in a good way that keeps the larger picture in mind.
Discard that scarcity/ charity mindset - you are more than an org, you are part of a larger system. Engage with the network of orgs/people in your focus area as thought partners to find solutions. (Transparency and Openness- see Networked Nonprofit). With boards we try to limit their sphere of influence, we can use them as thought partners in solutions. Boards should derive their priorities from the organizational needs - what impact are they having on your org?. For cultural competency, recognize forms of power, privilege and disadvantage attached to social/cultural categories - does the org seek to counter that kind of oppression.
Points from stories from the panelists:
Julie: Talked about previously avoiding board membership, now a board member, thanks to a board recruitment model that courted her over 3 years. Now learned that governance is just a small part of what she does as a board member. Enjoys haring professional gifts around process and leadership.
James:
Multiculturalism - they really don't use that term. It is really about bringing the whole person into the room, engaging their whole story. traditional model is to keep peoples stories out of the office. Requires engaging with self-knowledge. learning to tell your own story, where your story and the orgs story connects..
Example from Glide: building is open, no buzzers no locks no "do you have an appointment?". Can be chaotic but is an opportunity for connection. Security is charged with holding the space open but to be there if there is a situation. Had security staff attend domestic violence program. Same triggers that start domestic or street violence trigger bad bosses, asshole colleagues, etc. Helped people find internal physical signs of stress when someone pushes your buttons. Rather than reacting, I can respond if I recognize when I am triggered. Security staff learned from the model, learned to handle his triggers. If you can't recognize/handle your own triggers you can't handle other peoples stories that are bound to trigger you.
Olivia:
They are about how to change a school from the inside out - change the lives of children from families of color, create social justice. Very open space at their office, living room atmosphere. Involves rainstorming, it's about every member of staff in every stage of their lives, being responsive to their needs. More creative staff is engendered when you embrace peoples lives and accommodate staff's lives.
Miho:
Shared leadership. Org model is group of circles focused on focused on capacity building, program, administration. They had a leadership decapitation. Co-directors left with all of their work, including grant files. Staff was polarized. Looked at how staff interacted with each other. Traditional model was not working, opportunity to create/shape new leadership model. not traditional management structure. Centered on Coordinating council vs. traditional hierarchy. Takes power from founder, major donors, state, etc. and gives it to the staff. Did an exercise about what did/did not work, major disagreements that they hashed out. Found principles they could agree on. First reaction was to create a policy document. Instead they created a "quilt" with different panels, on their wall, reminds them of the fundamental principles that they are working from. Have a tool that reframes mistakes as learning before moving to HR discipline. They have pay equity - everyone gets paid the same. How does pay equity promote/ cultivate the value that you express to the world. There are other elements that they use to mitigate the issues of pay equity. It's about working on things as a process. Shared leadership is actually more structure than less.
Panelist reactions:
James: These new ways of thinking are exciting but intimidating. SOunds great but sounds impossible at the same time. Inspiring but fear inducing.
Miho: Not only the personal is political but the spiritual is political. This journey of change made her look into herself, what are things she is ashamed of, strengths, but once you are authentic, your bond is deeper.
Marla: Thinking about how to incorporate these ideas and stories into her life and be aware of her own limits/paradigms, traditional ways of thinking.
