|
|
Notes for
the by Paul Pribbenow, Ph.D. |
|
|
Philanthropy is a journey. Let JGA be your guide. Johnson, Grossnickle and
Associates LLC
|
Volume
Three, Number Six (August 2002) ****** "What we have loved, others will love, and we will teach them how." (W. Wordsworth, from "The Prelude") NOTES FROM READERS >>What you think<< I’m a bit tardy this issue – for several reasons. School, of course, is about to begin, which adds some important items to my to-do list. I never grow tired of this time of year on a college campus, even after 27 consecutive years. But I’ve never been the president before so my perspective is shifting! So very many of you were kind to write after the last issue of Notes to offer your thoughts and prayers for my mother, about whose battle with cancer I had written. Mom died on August 7, 2002, after several weeks in a hospice. Please know that your prayers and meditations were heard and felt by my entire family during this sad time. We celebrated her remarkable life with great music and memories at a worship service last weekend. My, how much she taught us all… There were many other responses to the last issue as well. Several of you indicated that you had contributions to offer based on my challenge to consider the vices and virtues of organizations. Nothing yet received – perhaps vice has gotten the best of you! – but I did happen upon this expanded list of virtues, first penned by Benjamin Franklin and reported by Randy Cohen, “The Ethicist” for the New York Times (June 30, 2002): · Temperance – eat and drink in moderation · Silence – Avoid trifling conversation · Order – Let all things have their place and time · Resolution – Do what you ought · Frugality – Waste nothing · Industry – Be always useful · Sincerity – Think and speak innocently and justly · Justice – Wrong none · Moderation – Avoid extremes · Cleanliness – Tolerate no uncleanness · Tranquility – Be not disturbed at accidents common or unavoidable · Chastity – Rarely use venery but for health or offspring · Humility – Imitate Jesus and Socrates Distinctly American virtues perhaps – some call them the protestant work ethic without Protestantism. Franklin’s project was to renovate himself morally, living out these virtues, which he ultimately abandoned, but we could do worse than to emulate his aspirations for individual and corporate lives of virtue. What might it mean for an organization to be chaste or sincere? What about corporate arrogance and noisiness? I’m still waiting for your ideas! And on resilience, subscriber Lea Werbel suggested that we visit www.resiliencycenter.com, which has a wonderful assortment of analysis and advice for those of us trying to be resilient individuals and/or build resilient organizations. I especially enjoyed the resiliency quiz! Occasionally, I (or my colleagues) refer to items from previous issues of Notes. If you have not been a subscriber previously, and wish to review our conversations, past issues of Notes are available on-line at www.jgacounsel.com. The website version of Notes also includes helpful hyperlinks to sources for purchasing or subscribing to the various publications mentioned in Notes. I thank my friends at Johnson, Grossnickle and Associates for their abiding support for our reflective practice. ****** REFLECT ON THIS >>Leadership and difficult times<< Harvard professor, Ronald A. Heifetz, has long been a guide to many of us through his important work in Leadership Without Easy Answers (Belknap Press, Harvard University, 1994), which offered a framework for understanding how genuine leadership needs to navigate both the demands of our times and the leadership expectations we place on ourselves and each other in the midst of difficulties. Now come Heifetz and colleague, Marty Linsky, writing in the June 2002 issue of Harvard Business Review on “A Survival Guide for Leaders.” Their counsel has struck a chord with me as I work to steer an organization through a time of fairly radical change. They offer a few basic rules for genuine change leadership. Change that truly transforms an organization, they tell us, demands that people give up things they hold dear - “daily habits, loyalties, and ways of thinking” - in exchange for but a promise, a promise of a better future. Transforming change – not just tinkering with technical aspects of the organization, but adapting to a radically different situation – is hazardous business for leaders. We can be attacked directly for our character and style. We can be marginalized, undermined by a limited view of the larger problem. We can be seduced by our supporters, afraid to lose their approval and thus unable to make the really tough decisions. And people, who want you to tend to day-to-day details, thus keeping you busy and preoccupied, can divert you from your primary tasks. I have recognized each of these four hazards in my work during the past several months. To combat these hazards, Heifetz and Linsky suggest six rules – four meant to guide your leadership work in an outward sense, responding to the environment in which you lead; and two meant to focus inward on your own needs and vulnerabilities. First, rules for leadership of your organization and the people in it. · “Operate in and above the fray.” Change leaders must be reflective, able to maintain perspective in the midst of the action. Leadership, Heifetz and Linsky contend, is a improvisational art, guided by overall vision, values, and plans, but our moment-to-moment efforts can never be scripted. But it is hard to be both observer and participant in a change process. One way I find of practicing this dual perspective on an organization is to use meetings as forums in which I watch participants engaging each other, rather than focusing on me. Sometimes pushing back my chair a bit from the table is enough of a sign to encourage other participants to go on without me, allowing me to watch and listen carefully, gathering a more reflective perspective before being forced to reenter the fray and point to a particular strategy or decision. · “Court the uncommitted.” It can seem easier to “go it alone” in a change initiative, sure that you know best how to proceed, concerned that others will slow you down or dilute the message. This is a foolish tack, say Heifetz and Linsky. Instead, you must seek partners, folks who can help you by protecting you from attack or pointing out the flaws in your position. You must have allies and you must keep your opponents close. But perhaps most important, you must court those who are uncommitted. These are the folks like several members of the faculty I’ve met who quite candidly point out that they’ve survived several presidents who had grand schemes for the college! These are those who need to be convinced that you are serious, who need to see results, and who will demand that you recognize the pain inherent in the losses that come for people through change. For the uncommitted, we must practice what we preach. There is nothing worse than a disconnect between words and actions. We also must take seriously the need to take responsibility for the organization’s past mistakes. It is not good enough to blame past leaders or organizational practices. It is now our – my and yours – responsibility. We share the blame – now let’s get to work together to define a new path. · “Cook the conflict.” Very few of us enjoy conflict, but of course it is an inevitable part of organizational life and must be managed carefully if genuine change is to occur. Think about it: Conflict is the result of clashes between people’s deeply held and passionate differences of opinion, behavior, and so on. If those passions can be channeled constructively, good may come; if not, they are bound to undermine efforts for change. Two strategies for managing change may help. First, create secure forums for conflict to happen. Put warring parties in a room and challenge them to get their differences out on the table. But second, don’t let the temperature of these conflict sessions get so high that you are unable to channel those passions and differences into constructive efforts. You need to set rules for the conflict to unfold – you may need to slow the pace of change so as to keep the passions from boiling over. Heifetz and Linsky call balanced management of conflict – keeping the heat high enough to motivate people but low enough to prevent a disastrous explosion – maintaining a “productive range of distress.” · “Place the work where it belongs.” Transforming change requires all members of an organization to adapt. The danger for a leader is the tendency to want to give people the answers, tell them exactly what to do, and/or do it for them. Instead, successful change requires that you transfer the work and problem solving to others. This is incredibly difficult to do. As a leader, you are expected to have the courage and vision to show people how to get to a new place with your organization. Heifetz and Linsky argue that it takes more courage and vision – and will ensure long-term successful change – to let others do their jobs and thereby create a culture of accountability. And two rules for your inner work as a leader: · “Manage your hungers.” The intellectual, physical and emotional challenges of leadership are fierce. You need to assess the tolls they are taking on you and not allow yourself to become vulnerable to those personal difficulties – your opponents will seize on them. One of the significant challenges we have as leaders is to withstand the personal hungers that can disrupt our capacity to act wisely and purposefully. Heifetz and Linsky cite two primary hungers: the desire for control and the desire for importance. The need for control can be a source of great vulnerability. You may impose order and control when it is not appropriate or helpful. Of course, others will urge you to take control – it may be better for “their” side if you impose a resolution – but perhaps some chaos and disorder will get your organization to a better place for the long run. Self-importance, of course, is something we all seek. It is good to be affirmed. But self-importance can quickly become self-delusion and it can encourage others to become dependent on you. · “Anchor yourself.” I heard a wonderful sermon recently in which the preacher suggested that our personal mission statements are often too limited and limiting. We need to be open to reinventing ourselves with broader purposes and values. Such is the claim on a successful leader of change. But to navigate the treacherous water of change, we also must be anchored. We must have confidants who will not judge or betray you. We must have safe places to retreat to – a sanctuary, a place or routine, that can help to relieve the stress. We need to distinguish between our personal selves – which truly can provide an anchor – and our professional roles – which never will. Your job as leader is never the real you – your life (of which your job is just a part) is you. Authenticity is your most secure anchor for a life well led. The authentic self will provide the discipline you need to remain calm, focused, and persistent in engaging people with the tough issues. >>Books that shape our philanthropy << It is that time of year when teachers and students alike consider the books that will guide their studies over the next months. We all remember the books that have changed our lives, that have led us down new paths, that have motivated our callings, that have made a difference for us and others. Philanthropy, a publication of The Philanthropy Roundtable, recently named “Eight Books That Changed America…And the Philanthropists Who Made Them Possible, “ (July/August 2002). You might recognize the publisher’s perspective on life in America (we all have our perspective!) from some of the titles on the list: · Losing Ground: American Social Policy, 1950-1980, by Charles Murray · Free to Choose, by Milton and Rose Friedman · The Naked Public Square: Religion and Democracy in America, by Richard John Neuhaus · Illiberal Education: The Politics of Race and Sex on Campus, by Dinesh D’Souza · The Tragedy of American Compassion, by Marvin Olasky For the entire list and commentary, visit www.philanthropyroundtable.org. I thought it might be enlightening and fun to gather from my dear subscribers their lists of books that have influenced America (or beyond) and our philanthropy – a bit wider charge than that of our colleagues at The Philanthropy Roundtable. Send me a few suggestions (with your reasons for choosing the particular books) and I’ll compile a list for our common review. To get things started, here are five books that I find indispensable as I reflect on philanthropy in our time: · Twenty Years at Hull House, by Jane Addams – Surprise, surprise…but I can’t imagine a more compelling story of how genuine philanthropy is at the core of a strong democracy. · Philanthropy: Voluntary Action for the Public Good, by Robert Payton – This text defines the term ‘philanthropy’ for a post-modern America and challenges all of us to broaden our perspective on the role of philanthropy in our lives. · Habits of the Heart: Individualism and Commitment in American Life, by Robert Bellah and colleagues – Here is the historical and sociological analysis that helps explain (and points to future paths for) the genius of the American democracy: the dynamic between individual responsibility and common purpose. · The Needs of Strangers: An essay on privacy, solidarity, and the politics of being human, by Michael Ignatieff – Perhaps the most elegant statement I know of the connection between the liberal arts and an understanding of our common human condition. · The Courage to Teach: Exploring the Inner Landscape of a Teacher’s Life, by Parker Palmer – There is no more remarkable statement of the transforming power of education as a source of both personal and social meaning – and that is the stuff of philanthropy! I could go on and on and on. I look forward to your contributions. ****** PRACTICE THIS >>Back to basics: Strategic philanthropy<< Sometimes it is important to get back to basics. Such has been the case in the past couple of months here at my new institution. We sometimes take for granted that all good and valuable institutions have been led to see philanthropy as a mission-critical aspect of organizational life. And then we are surprised to find that misguided philanthropy actually undercuts the fabric of an organization, creating competition and fragmentation rather than a genuine sense of common purpose. And so it has been back to basics at Rockford College. Thanks to Hank Rosso and Bob Payton and many other similar-minded teachers, we know what it means to practice strategic philanthropy. (1) Philanthropy is a core value of organizational mission and thus linked to, and in service of, mission-based work. (2) Mission-based work for an institution is best guided by a strategic plan that reflects consensus about institutional priorities and values. (3) Institutional priorities and values must be translated in opportunities for philanthropic support that are both strategic (i.e., priorities for the institution) and donor-oriented (i.e., a way for donors to do what they want to do for the institution with their philanthropy). (4) Philanthropic practices must have integrity, i.e., must fit with the values and commitments of the organization and its mission. (5) Philanthropy (and stewardship of relationships) must “belong” to all members of an organization – in other words, philanthropy is common work and in that way it involves everyone who cares about an institution in seeking support for the institution’s strategic priorities…priorities that they had a voice in articulating as part of the planning process. Basic stuff indeed, but when forgotten or neglected, philanthropy falters and the philanthropic relationships that confirm our organizational missions and sustain our common work go sadly untended. >> Innovation management << I am intrigued by the challenges of helping an organization make innovation a part of its day-to-day culture. Complacency aside (certainly a pattern of behavior to be reckoned with!), the demands of innovation are sometimes overwhelming, even for our most dedicated and talented colleagues because they just don’t know how to improvise, cooperate across boundaries, and re-invent themselves and their work. Much is being written these days about innovation, including a special theme issue of Harvard Business Review (August 2002), which features several insightful articles about how to create and sustain a culture of innovation. In the end, though, a few key steps and characteristics seem crucial to successful and ongoing innovation (thanks to Kevin Houchin, who edits the IMPact email newsletter for Stamats, for these summary insights): · Innovation is seldom as revolutionary as we might think – instead, genuine innovation happens as small changes occur systematically over time. · Innovation is best understood as the obligation to “enrich the whole,” a concept that social commentator Stanley Crouch attributes to the jazz world, in which improvisation by the individual musician enriches the whole. · Enriching the whole requires a level of trust in a group or organization that can be created and sustained through consistent and strategic planning. · Planning as the basis for sustained innovation can be described with what Houchin calls the Innovation Pyramid: o At the base of the pyramid is Institutional identity – mission, brand, core values o In the middle of the pyramid is a commitment to serving others, to customer service, to donor-oriented philanthropy o And at the top of the pyramid is the individual power to act, to make something happen without having to ask permission. Think about how this innovation pyramid might work for developing a new academic program. Here at Rockford College, I challenged a small group of faculty members to consider how we might best be “Jane Addams’ college in the 21st century,” and specifically how we might organize our community service programs to support that aspiration. To be Jane Addams’ college in the 21st century is our identity, our brand if you will, now what difference does it make? The faculty group went away and considered how our mission could be translated into programs that would serve all members of our college community – staff, faculty, students, alumni, and friends – who believed in community service and its connection to higher education. And when they came to me with their response to my challenge to live out our mission for key college constituencies, our innovative faculty members presented a persuasive plan to establish the Jane Addams Center for Civic Engagement, motivated by their trust that this idea, this new program, “enriches the whole” and helps the institution better live out our mission. In September, we will formally announce that this new center has been established at Rockford College and thereby model for our entire community what it means to practice mission-based innovation. For more information, visit www.rockford.edu. ****** PAY ATTENTION TO THIS >>Some new resources<< The environmental movement is often a source of insightful principles and practices for all aspects of good stewardship. The Summer 2002 issue of Boston Review has a powerful article by David Bollier, entitled “Reclaiming the Commons: Why we need to protect our public resources from private encroachment.” Bollier suggests, “It is time to revive this (American) tradition of innovation in stewardship…” We can all take a lesson from Bollier’s essay. I’ve enjoyed a bit of attention these past couple of months for many of the ideas and practices discussed in my Notes. Thanks to friends Susan and Bob Walling, I was introduced to Richard Hoffman, editor of The Greentree Gazette, a monthly magazine for higher education leaders. After a couple of interviews, Mr. Hoffman chose to feature me as the cover story for the July 2002 issue of the Gazette. A PDF version of the article, entitled “Mission First, Money to Follow,” is posted at the Rockford College website: www.rockford.edu. Thanks to the Wallings and the Gazette for a great gift for a new college president! Also, I now am contributing a column to Contributions, a bi-monthly magazine for those in the philanthropic community (available on-line at www.contributionsmagazine.com). You’ll note that I am using material from my Notes to comment on “Issues and trends in philanthropy.” I would be grateful for any suggestions you might have. >>Resting in peace<< Some friends and colleagues gave me the following poem and I keep it near by in these sad days after mom’s death. In Memoriamby Alfred Lord Tennyson
I wage not any feud with Death For changes wrought on form and face; No lower life that earth’s embrace May breed with him, can fright my faith.
Eternal processes moving on, From state to state, the spirit walks And these are but the shatter’d stalks Or ruin’d chrysalis of one.
Nor blame I Death, because he bare The use of virtue out of earth; I know transplanted human worth Will bloom to profit, otherwhere.
For this alone on Death I wreak The wrath that garners in my heart; He put our lives so far apart We cannot hear each other speak.
Resquiat in Pace
>>Subscription information<< Subscriptions to Notes are simple to establish. Send me an email at paul_pribbenow@rockford.edu, ask to be added to the list, and you will receive a confirmation from the mail server at Wabash College that you are on the list. Please feel free to forward your email versions of Notes to others—they then can subscribe by contacting me. The current and archive issues of Notes are available on-line at www.jgacounsel.com. >>Topics for the next issue (October 2002)<<
(c) Paul Pribbenow, 2002 |
|
