Nonprofit Expert Episode 26 – The Art of Board Engagement

Welcome to Nonprofit Expert presented by DonorPerfect.

Robbe Healey Host00:13

Thank you for joining us for this episode of Nonprofit Expert presented by DonorPerfect, and in this series we’re talking about relationships and resources and respect, and I’m thrilled to Read More

Welcome to Nonprofit Expert presented by DonorPerfect.

Robbe Healey Host00:13

Thank you for joining us for this episode of Nonprofit Expert presented by DonorPerfect, and in this series we’re talking about relationships and resources and respect, and I’m thrilled to have with us today Andrea McManus. Andrea and I got acquainted with each other with AFP. She was first Canadian chair of AFP and actually succeeded me. We had a really lovely working relationship and that’s continued even as we have transitioned into other roles, and Andrea’s had a very interesting career path and, in addition to welcoming her, I’d love to have her introduce herself and highlight some of the roles and work she’s done in the sector. I know you started out as a stewardship person with the Olympics, because that’s seared on my memory. How cool is that to have worked on the Olympics, but that was kind of the springboard for a lot of things that followed that.

Andrea McManus Guest01:20
Yeah, yeah, it was, and it was a highlight. I mean, it was the 1988 Winter Olympics that were held here in Calgary and I worked as a sponsor liaison. I came from a marketing background and we didn’t negotiate contracts, but once the contracts were signed with all of the global sponsors, we did everything for them. So I worked with the head offices of Coca-Cola, 3m, visa, the Royal Bank and Shell and it was an amazing experience. It was just an amazing experience, yeah. And then from there I was actually pregnant with my first daughter during the Olympics.

02:01
So you know, back then you didn’t look for a job if you were pregnant. So I had my daughter in the summer and I got a call four or five months later from a friend who was chair of the board of Calgary Handy Bus, the paratransit system, who said to me you know how to raise money from corporations, can you come and do a campaign for us? So of course I had no idea, but I said yes and that was pretty much it. That was how I ended up doing what I’m doing I did at one point, I’d say, about four years in, I kind of thought, you know, I had two more children and I kind of thought how did I end up working in the nonprofit sector?

02:46
And you know, I took two more children and I kind of thought how did I end up working in the nonprofit sector? And you know, I took a break and did I want to stay or did I want to go back corporate and I just decided that it gave me the lifestyle that I wanted in terms of family and I loved working with nonprofit organizations and volunteers. And so, yeah, I made a conscious decision at that point and never looked back.

Robbe Healey Host03:05
Well, and it’s interesting that we’re going to talk about relationships, and your stewardship role was all about relationships. Definitely, when you and I were chatting, you had a really interesting perspective on that, I believe which is, what are the assumptions that we, as development professionals, bring to working with board members, and which of those assumptions are helpful and which of those assumptions might hold us back.

Andrea McManus Guest03:35
Yeah, I’ll respond to the latter point first. You know I’ve worked with many boards over the years and I’ve sat on many boards and I think that one of the assumptions that we make as development professionals working with boards is that we look at the board as a collective rather than looking at the board as individual board members. And if we look at them as individual board members, then we’re really obligated to find what is our best working relationship with each individual board member, with each individual board member. So if I said, if I was working with a board, and I said, and Robbie, you were on that board and I said, robbie, I really need you to help fundraise for XYZ organization, I’ll guarantee that 95% of the time you would think, uh-oh, she wants me to ask for money. So I’ve long said that I think, as development professionals, when we approach it that way, we’re throwing up immediately throwing up a barrier that we don’t need to throw up, because then we have to deal with that barrier and it just makes it more difficult. And so if we talk to board members and we can do this at the board collective level, but if we talk to them about, to board members about fundraising as a process, uh, that involves many stages, and that that ask, that that ask is a very tiny percent of that whole pie and, um, the other pieces are essential, um, to getting to that ask. Uh, and so the job of the board.

05:36
I used to think that boards had a governance obligation to fundraise and I no longer believe that. I think that boards have a governance obligation to ensure that an organization is worthy of philanthropic support. So it’s well run, it’s well led, it’s financially viable, it sticks to its mission, it has a clear mission, it has strategic goals and it’s accountable to its mission. It has a clear mission, it has strategic goals and it’s accountable to the community. If a board does that as a collective, then I think as development professionals we are so much more able to effectively work with individual board members in ways that each individual board member is comfortable.
06:26
I’ve met board members in my lifetime in my career. I guess that I would never want to put in front of a donor. They just wouldn’t do well. But if you ask board members, can you make calls just to say thank you, can you open doors, can you provide names? Can you meet up with these three people at this event that you’re coming to and just say thanks. I think then we empower them to be successful in a way that they can see that they’re going to be successful.
Robbe Healey Host06:58
How about staff give the same advice, things that we assume about our programmatic colleagues, our program colleagues, administrative colleagues that hold us back when we’re engaging with them and smooth the glide path when we’re engaging with them? How about that?
Andrea McManus Guest07:18
Yeah, you know what? I think it’s essentially the same thing. Now, one caveat I would make is that it’s really tough if you have an ED or a president and CEO who doesn’t want to have anything to do with fundraising and and I have been in that situation with client organizations and and that is tough. But I’ve also long said that, well, you know, I I was the council on record with a $120 million campaign in Calgary that ran from about 2010 to 2018. That involved nine separate social service organizations and we were raising money for affordable housing, and the most powerful presentations we made included a homeless person or a person who had dealt with homelessness at some point in their life, or a client of one of the nine partner organizations. So they were.
08:33
They were everything from addiction to high risk women to, you know, john Howard, like people coming out of the correctional system. They were all different organizations and if we can include someone who could actually speak to their experience, their personal experience and what it was like, those were the most powerful presentations that we made. And so, in working with staff, wow, if we can get frontline workers to engage in meeting with prospective donors or, you know, engage them, getting them to do tours. Doing all of that we’re putting them in their limelight and we’re putting them in, we’re providing an opportunity for them to show their passion and hopefully for that to affect and rub off on the prospective donor. So I think with staff it’s the same thing. They’ve got to be proud of the organization and if they’re proud of their organization they can speak to that. They don’t need to ask for the gift. We can do that as development professionals.
Robbe Healey Host09:46
You know, as I’m listening to you talk, I’m thinking about two things. And one is this idea that, depending on the culture of the organization, frontline staff are protected from the development office because they don’t want to take them away from their important work of doing the work. And that goes back to one of the comments I made in the opening video for this series, which is Hank Rosso said the degree to which your fundraising will be successful is in direct proportion to the degree to which your agency sees it as a program as important as other programs. So if we don’t want the frontline staff, those passionate direct care people, to interact with the donors, we’re depriving ourselves of the opportunity to help the outcomes really shine. And the second thing I was thinking about was this idea that we can never ask one of our participants with lived experience to be a focus because it somehow violates their dignity. Now, I think we would both agree you would never feature someone without their permission. But how do you attack, address that reticence to allow someone to share their story?
Andrea McManus Guest11:22
Personally, I think it’s arrogant of us to assume the motivations or the wishes or the opportunities of other people, and so I had a situation in my very first fundraising job after the Olympics. That has stayed with me all my life and I’ve written about it and I’ve told the story many times. But when I was working with Calgary Handy Bus. So it was a paratransit system, so all of our customers were the vast majority of them were on government assistance and the service was run by the city of Calgary. But we, the organization, we raised money for buses to put buses on the road, adaptive buses on the road. At that time the buses were $25,000 each. After about a year in we got a new general manager and he and I worked well together. But I had an idea that I wanted to run a campaign with our users, our customers, to put a bus on the road. That was donated to the idea not 100, sure, but he said okay, let’s bring it to a board meeting.
12:39
Well, I slunk home after that board meeting. I said to my husband yeah, I think I may be fired, like suffice to say they did not like it. And uh, they, they. They were appalled that I would. I was recommending that we ask our customers, most of whom are on government assistance, to contribute to the organization. And anyway, I went to work the next morning and pat said well, come on in and talk to me. He he said I talked to a couple of the board members after last night and we think there’s actually some merit in this, so let’s rework this and bring it back to the board.
13:19
So we did and it was approved because I was able to make the point that we’re giving them an opportunity. We’re not going to coerce them, we’re not going to make them feel guilty, we’re just giving them an opportunity. And I can tell you, robbie, that we raised that $25,000 in about eight or nine months and we had people saying to our drivers, thanking them for treating them with dignity, for giving them the opportunity to contribute if they so chose. And I’ve never forgotten that. I’ve never forgotten the many layers of that and how to apply that in other fundraising. So when I worked on the Resolve campaign, the homelessness campaign, you don’t force anybody. You find the right person and if they’re willing, it’s just powerful and it’s a dignified. There’s dignity and pride to the relationship and that’s what we need to find with our staff, with our volunteers, with our customers, clients and with our board members.
Robbe Healey Host14:43
So as boards get their brains around this because we obviously we agree with each other on this that no one should make a decision for anybody else and it is profoundly arrogant to think you know what someone else will decide so as boards evolve, as they go through their learning curve and the organization grows, you could have a development program that grows. You can also have an organization going through different life stages. So I’m wondering whether, in your work as a consultant, working with so many organizations, do you see different characteristics of board evolution, of staff evolution, depending on the sector in which the organization works or the life stage? I mean, I think a lot of founding organizations have all kinds of enthusiasm because the founder’s charismatic. Everybody wants to be part of that, but then it kind of levels off. It can go through stages that aren’t quite as robust. So do you have insights into that? Do you see differences?
Andrea McManusGuest15:56
Oh for sure, I mean, I used to joke. So I’ve done a lot of work, capacity building work in the nonprofit sector on the national level in Canada. So I’ve been on a number of national committees, I was on the advisory committee to the Minister of National Revenue and and I’ve done a lot of work in that area. And to some extent, you know I’m coming up to, you know I hate to tell you I’m coming up to, I’m in my fourth decade of doing this work and I still hear some of the same conversations happening about who we are as a sector, what we do, and I used to joke, um, that my tombstone was going to read death by overhead, and you know I mean that. But I am seeing a shift and I and I think, I think that if, as development professionals, if we can work, if we can build the relationships with that whole team of people that we need to engage in order to be successful in fundraising, then if we can tap into their passion and their pride in the organization, then then that’s going to carry over, it’s going to be like a waterfall effect, and so then they have a stake, they see, they see what they’re doing as valuable. Then that makes that conversation about appropriate resourcing so much easier to have. So because they have a stake in the game, they know what it’s like to feel good about what they do.
17:44
So I’m currently working with a medium-sized theatre company here in Calgary Alberta Theatre Projects, and we had a launch event a week ago for our 24-25 season, and this organization has just gone through a huge renewal. You know, coming out of the pandemic, people aren’t’s. It’s challenging. Theater companies across North America are really struggling. The arts in general are really struggling. Um but um. The board of this organization has also gone through a renewal, and so we had about eight of the 12 board members who were coming to the launch and I gave each of them four names. They were so excited.
18:29
I said look, we’re going to have 250 people there. You may not find these people, but if you do, joe Smith. Joe Smith is a 20 year subscriber and a donor. Just say hello to him and thank him. And I didn’t give them, I didn’t weigh them down with a bunch of profiles. You know lots of information.
18:51
I said you know, the couple of us will be there. We’ll help to try to connect you. Don’t. If you can’t, don’t find everybody, don’t worry, I just want you to say thanks and you know it’s really important to ATP that you continue that. Your support is really important. They were, so. It was the first time they’d been given something concrete to do and I, as a result of that, I’ve gotten a number of good leads out of that. We’ve already got a couple of meetings set up, that is, including board member, and they want to be engaged and they want to be successful. So they that whole conversation around resourcing will be that much easier for us to have. If it was difficult before and actually it’s not so much with this organization, but I’m just saying that you know, include them, engage them and it becomes theirs.
Robbe Healey Host19:46
Was there any when you, when you were introducing the idea of everybody taking four names? Did you get any pushback at all? Or was that an easy glide path?
Andrea McManus Guest19:58
No, well, I set the glide path up because I just started working with them. In May and in June I attended a board meeting and I talked to them about my philosophy around fundraising, which was very much what we’re talking about. Is that? That ask piece is just one small piece, but I wanted to have a one-on-one conversation with each board member about their experience on on in the non-profit sector, any experience they had around fundraising, what they were comfortable with and how they would like me to work with them. So I had those conversations and they were chomping at the bit after that to do well, what can we do? Give us something tangible to do so. When we decided to do this launch event and they were primed and ready to go, but I invested if I had done that last part without doing the first two parts, it could likely well have been a very different story.
Robbe Healey Host21:04
Absolutely, absolutely different story, absolutely, absolutely so, when you think about the kinds of people who serve on boards and they seem to be all in because you help them see the reason for the task are there things you advise clients to look for in board members? I realize we agree, not everybody has to be a fearless asker, but is there a baseline of willingness to do some of the outreach, some of the ambassador work, some of the advocate work? Is there a way you coach governance committees, nominating committees, to think about that conversation, to think about that?
Andrea McManus Guest21:47
conversation. Yeah, I think too often we don’t do a very good job of that, like in recruiting board members. We don’t necessarily want to talk about that because they might scare them off. Then again they’re approaching it the wrong way. So, um, you know, I I’m a big advocate of having, um, a list of you know, a job description, um, for board members. I mean there’s the role of the board, there’s job descriptions for board members, um, because they need to come to the board knowing that they are making uh, you know, they’re making a commitment of what’s involved in that commitment. And that’s where language is important.
22:38
I mean, I try to talk as much or more about philanthropic giving as I do about fundraising, and I used to do a lot of presentations around the fact that fundraising versus philanthropy, that we fundraising is what we do, but philanthropy is our outcome, is the impact, and that leads to the impact of the organization.
22:59
And I’d say about maybe 20 years ago, I kind of had this light bulb moment about you know, this light bulb moment about you know, just talk about what the outcome of this is and don’t talk about you know that whole thing about. You know, do you have an obligation to make a gift to an organization, well, make it one of your top three philanthropic priorities Puts it in a totally different perspective, which is, you know, the reasonableness of that is is harder to dispute, I guess. So I think language is really important and being transparent about it. So you know saying, instead of being involved in fundraising, being involved in the process of fundraising and the relationships we have with donors. That broadens it, and I think it’s a softer but also a more accurate way to set the stage for how we would like to work with our individual board members.
Robbe Healey Host24:12
Well, and I think in this sector, we talk so much about transparency, and when we aren’t transparent with candidates for the board because we’re afraid we might scare them off, then we get them in the room. And, by the way, we didn’t mention this, but you got to do this too. That’s, that’s bait and switch. It’s, it’s, it’s just plain wrong why would they trust you? Why would they trust you, exactly, yeah and my experience is, when we’re honest and transparent and they say yes, then they actually do it.
24:44
Oh, absolutely yeah if they opt out, then let them opt out with dignity yeah.
Andrea McManus Guest24:51
So you know, as I said off the top, we can’t tell you how many times I’ve had the conversation that, uh, about how a person might be engaged in the fundraising process, and they said, no, but I, you know, I can’t ask for money. I said, well, you know what. Would you be able to thank donors? Oh, yeah, yeah, I can do that. Would you review some prospects for me and let me know if you have any information on any of them? Oh, yeah, yeah, I could do that. Would you open a door for us? Oh, yes, I can do that. So all of those things are really super important and by not being transparent, we shut the door on those at the outset, so that they’re only focused on that one little tiny percentage.
Robbe Healey Host25:41
We started this conversation talking about what assumptions do we, as professionals, bring? I think we’re talking about what assumptions do they bring, so maybe it’s a little bit of full circle.
Andrea McManus Guest25:52
Yeah, that’s a really good point. Yeah, yeah.
Robbe Healey Host25:56
If we’d stop assuming and talk to each other candidly, we might discover we’re on the same page.
Andrea McManusGuest26:02
Right, yeah, we might.
Robbe HealeyHost26:03
I have one last question for you.
Andrea McManusGuest26:05
Yeah.
Robbe HealeyHost26:06
Well, it’s two parts. Might I have one last question for you? Yeah, well, it’s two parts. If you could have given your post Olympics but pre handy bus self the best advice you you’ve ever gotten, what would it be? And the opposite, the worst advice you ever got. What would it be about doing this work in the sector that we know is so important?
Andrea McManusGuest26:29
First part is easier for me because I’ve long acknowledged that I wish I had gotten on the philanthropy bandwagon earlier in my career.
Robbe HealeyHost26:40
Well, we’re glad you finally got on it, yeah.
Andrea McManusGuest26:45
Sorry, what was the second part?
Robbe HealeyHost26:47
What’s the worst advice you ever got, or advice you wish nobody had given you?
Andrea McManusGuest26:51
Oh, I would say, just focus on getting the money. Yeah, I think that’s the worst advice I ever got.
Robbe HealeyHost26:57
Yeah yeah, donors are not ATM machines.
Andrea McManusGuest27:00
They’re not. They’re not, and I think I mean I would make what I think would be a pretty good guess that for the vast majority of us we’ve seen that over and over and over again, that they are not ATM machines and we need to learn from that, like really sit and look at that and think, oh okay, what was that all about? Well, that makes total sense and communicate that to to those around us, cause I think we, we are complicit as professionals and I’m making a generalization, I agree, but I acknowledge, but we are complicit in setting that perspective.
Robbe HealeyHost27:41
Or tolerating it.
Andrea McManusGuest27:43
Or tolerating it yeah.
Robbe HealeyHost27:44
Well, I’d like to believe we’re getting into an era of engagement in philanthropy, where disabusing people of that assumption will be less and less difficult, but I’m not sure it will ever go away.
Andrea McManusGuest27:57
Sure it won’t. Like I said, I’m hearing the same conversations I heard 40 years ago Many levels, yeah, yeah.
Robbe HealeyHost28:04
Well, thank you very much for spending time with us. Thank you. Relationships are so important between and among staff, between and among donors, between and among board members, and without that we would not be successful, and I like to think philanthropy makes the exceptional possible, and so without this, so much wouldn’t happen. That needs to happen.
Andrea McManusGuest28:30
I agree, yeah, my pleasure.
Robbe HealeyHost28:33
You’ve been listening to Nonprofit Expert presented by DonorPerfect in our series Relationships, Respect and Resources, and thank you so much, Andrea McManus, for joining us resources.
DonorPerfectAnnouncement28:47
And thank you so much, andrea McManus, for joining us. Thank you for listening to Nonprofit Expert presented by DonorPerfect. For more information and a special offer, visit DonorPerfectcom/podcast.
00:00 / 29:04