Tag Archives: recruit

Nonprofit Radio for March 7, 2022: Get Off The Recruitment Merry-Go-Round

Teri Beckman: Get Off The Recruitment Merry-Go-Round

When someone leaves your nonprofit, it’s an opportunity to carefully assess, not a time to jump into a hasty job description and post it on LinkedIn. Teri Beckman shares her strategies for thoughtfully recruiting, developing and retaining talent. She’s founder and CEO of HIGOL.

 

 

Listen to the podcast

Get Nonprofit Radio insider alerts!

 

Apple Podcast button

 

 

 

I love our sponsor!

Turn Two Communications: PR and content for nonprofits. Your story is our mission.

 

We’re the #1 Podcast for Nonprofits, With 13,000+ Weekly Listeners

Board relations. Fundraising. Volunteer management. Prospect research. Legal compliance. Accounting. Finance. Investments. Donor relations. Public relations. Marketing. Technology. Social media.

Every nonprofit struggles with these issues. Big nonprofits hire experts. The other 95% listen to Tony Martignetti Nonprofit Radio. Trusted experts and leading thinkers join me each week to tackle the tough issues. If you have big dreams but a small budget, you have a home at Tony Martignetti Nonprofit Radio.
View Full Transcript

Transcript for 581_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20220307.mp3

Processed on: 2022-03-05T16:35:03.223Z
S3 bucket containing transcription results: transcript.results
Link to bucket: s3.console.aws.amazon.com/s3/buckets/transcript.results
Path to JSON: 2022…03…581_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20220307.mp3.63081813.json
Path to text: transcripts/2022/03/581_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20220307.txt

[00:01:53.84] spk_0:
Hello and welcome to tony-martignetti non profit radio Big nonprofit ideas for the other 95%. I’m your aptly named host of your favorite abdominal podcast. Oh, I’m glad you’re with me. I’d be hit with para magnesia if you gave me the false idea that you missed this week’s show, get off the recruitment merry go round when someone leaves your nonprofit, it’s an opportunity to carefully assess, not a time to jump into a hasty job description and posted on linkedin. Terry Beckman shares her strategies for thoughtfully recruiting, developing and retaining talent. She is founder and Ceo of High Goal on tony steak too 22 NTC. We’re sponsored by turn to communications pr and content for nonprofits. Your story is their mission turn hyphen two dot c o. It’s a pleasure to welcome Terry Beckman to nonprofit radio she has worked in the nonprofit sector for over 30 years, including five years as an executive director. She understands leadership challenges and has been a strategic advisor and consultant, two executive directors and ceos as they grow their organizations, teams and boards. She and her team at high goal help nonprofit leaders, increased revenue and community impact. The company is at high goal dot c o. That is h I G O L for high impact growth oriented leaders and she’s at terry Beckman. Welcome terry.

[00:01:56.54] spk_1:
Hey Tony, it’s great to be here.

[00:02:22.04] spk_0:
Pleasure to have you on nonprofit radio thank you. Thank you. Let’s uh let’s let’s go right in because I think this is a an area where nonprofits could benefit from some, some advice about taking a breath. So let’s say someone has just given two weeks notice. What do we do,

[00:02:22.84] spk_1:
what do you do? Yeah, it’s nice when you get two weeks notice right? Sometimes

[00:02:28.17] spk_0:
That doesn’t happen or you can make it three days or 24 hours. But I was trying to, I thought I was trying to give like an average

[00:02:42.14] spk_1:
Yeah, yeah or I quit now. I had a client who, she had a team of 10 people and five of them left in one week. Either they were fired or they left on their own and oh

[00:02:46.79] spk_0:
Gosh, okay, well I did, I quit a job with 24 hours notice once

[00:02:50.24] spk_1:
if you get

[00:03:13.24] spk_0:
Mad enough, you know. Yeah. The last job I had, I quit it with 24 hours notice. That was 19. No, it was 2003. I am I certain that I would be a lousy employee. You wouldn’t want to onboard me, you don’t want to retain me off boarding me in the interview. We compress, yeah. With me, you compress the whole compress the whole cycle, you could on board, you could, you

[00:03:18.27] spk_1:
could, you

[00:03:25.14] spk_0:
could interview on board and off board being in like an hour and a half, you know, would put your, put your practice out of work but it would accelerate the cycle at least there’d be a lot of,

[00:03:37.64] spk_1:
yeah, it’s, you know, some of us are meant to be entrepreneurs but you know, most of us are

[00:03:46.14] spk_0:
not. So that’s what I’d be a lousy employee. Yeah, vacation request forms and you know, please could I have christmas day off? All right. All right. So let’s go to this. Uh, let’s go to the reasonable hypothetical. You got two weeks.

[00:03:52.11] spk_1:
Yeah. You have two weeks notice.

[00:03:54.60] spk_0:
What do you want folks

[00:04:53.64] spk_1:
to do? Yeah. Well, the first thing actually, you know, for Executive directors, typically this ends up on their plate in some shape or form, right? For the other 95%. And um, you know, the first thing I advise folks is just to take a deep breath. Like you really don’t have to panic. You don’t have to panic. Um, even though I’m sure whoever has, you know, resigned has a to do list 10 miles long. And of course your biggest fear is that’s going to become your to do list. Right? But that’s a, you know, it’s really, that’s a short term problem. And um, so the first thing really is to take a deep breath. And I think that in a way the very first question is, you know, do you, do you really still need this position? It’s the first question and you know, if that’s not clear, maybe the, you know, maybe the, the job as it was, you know, originally constituted doesn’t make sense anymore for the organization.

[00:05:06.92] spk_0:
So, you know, like, All right. So I’m gonna encapsulate that as don’t stress assess.

[00:05:12.34] spk_1:
There you go. I like that. Yeah, good for

[00:05:32.94] spk_0:
you. If I could think of something wrong with you gotta think of something to write with panic. I’d say don’t panic and do something else, but I couldn’t think of anything wrong with panic, but don’t stress assess maybe the job isn’t needed, but you had someone in the job. So isn’t that doesn’t that de facto mean by the Yeah, well forget by default, doesn’t that the fact don’t mean the job is needed? We had somebody in it.

[00:05:37.64] spk_1:
No, that doesn’t mean that

[00:05:39.24] spk_0:
needed. Yeah.

[00:07:04.94] spk_1:
Yeah. So, you know, I think, I think to answer that question also, it’s nice to just take a breath again and ask yourself, you know, is my vision clear for the organization for the next 12 months? Like where where do I really want to bring the organization in the next 12 months? Where’s the potential where opportunities and then yeah, if that’s clear, then you can really, Really look at how does this position contribute to bringing the organization to that point over the next 12 months, then you’re you’re, you know, you then you’re sort of stepping out of the kind of the panic cycle, right of someone leaving and getting much more strategic about, you know, time and money and skills, right? Which is this great resource in a sense that you have to be able to rehire. Um and and really looking at Yeah. What given these resources, how would, how could, how would I like to best deploy that to really help me leverage where I want to go over the next 12 months. I think that’s ultimately the question and that might be the same job, right? The person that’s leaving and maybe, maybe it’s not, maybe it’s slightly different, Maybe it’s a completely different job. You know, the other thing that can come up is also looking at the orc chart, right? And this is especially true. Wait,

[00:07:27.04] spk_0:
I’m going to stop before we go to the chart. Yeah, we’ll get to the orC chart. Okay, I promise. But so, so you’re suggesting, like, maybe there are things that this this job could encompass that the previous person wasn’t doing, or maybe some of these things are better done elsewhere, and maybe this has been in the back of your mind or

[00:08:56.14] spk_1:
all of those things, or maybe, you know, maybe it hasn’t been in the back of your mind, but, you know, sometimes when, you know, we we stay stuck in patterns with people, right? Like, okay, this is my job, leave me alone and let me do it. And they kind of do it reasonably well. But, you know, that’s what happens. You know, organizations are living are living organisms, really, and so their, you know, their environment is changing, they’re changing the dynamics within the organization, is changing the board is changing all of these things that there’s fluidity to them, especially coming out of the pandemic, right? There’s a tremendous amount of change that’s happened over the last couple of years. Um and so it could very well be that this position was not is not Really best focused and aligned with what your current needs are. You know, and like you said, two could be that this person, you know, maybe they’re doing things that could be even outsourced for less money so that, you know, low value kinds of repeating activities so that, you know, in the next incarnation, they could be focused on activities that are really bringing a lot more value to the organization. Those are, yeah, those are questions you can ask around that as well, you know, I just feel like every time there is someone leaves, it’s a great opportunity just to do a little refresh to see how does this position align with where we’re really headed as an organization.

[00:09:33.84] spk_0:
Alright, so don’t stress, assess, take a breath That that 10 mile long to do list, right? I mean, it can be uh maybe some of it can be delegated. I mean, if it’s, if it’s, if it’s a database person, you know, you’re not going to be, you’re not gonna be querying the database for the next mailing, you’re gonna, right, okay, so take a look at, you know, so you have to have a conversation with the person, understand what is coming, right?

[00:10:30.24] spk_1:
Yes, yes. That’s, you know, that’s certainly another piece of it, right? It’s kind of preparing that person to leave. So there’s the forward looking piece of like, okay, what do we want to do with this position moving forward and then there’s the backward looking piece which is equally important. So knowing what is coming up, what’s the price, you know, what does this person see as a priority? What, you know, what does their to do list look like? You know? And then also, I think naturally leads to the exit interview as well, um where the person has a chance to really honestly share, you know, their insights about the organization and you know what they see the strengths being, where they see the weaknesses. Um if there’s if there are other, you know, people leave organizations for all kinds of reasons, it’s helpful if they could really be honest with you or if you have an HR person about, you know, why, why are they leaving? It’s always it’s always very helpful to know that more clearly

[00:11:08.54] spk_0:
that I still have the orchestra in mind, we’re going back to the heart. But the the exit interview, I mean, that’s isn’t that hard for the ceo to to conduct because he or she may be the reason that the person is leaving or if they’re not the direct reason, you know, if the person is unhappy and they’re unhappy with the organization generally or with their job? I mean, it ultimately feeds up into the ceo you know, what level of honesty are you likely to get when it’s Yeah,

[00:11:28.44] spk_1:
yeah. I think it depends on the circumstance. Um, certainly that can be the case that, you know, especially if there’s tension with the ceo of the executive director, it could be that it might be better suited for someone else in the organization to do the exit interview. So that creates a little bit more safety, um, for the person leaving. That could be the case as

[00:11:40.84] spk_0:
well. Um, Alright, so the organ chart, you want us to look at the Yeah. As we’re not stressing, we’re assessing, Right. Right. What’s, what’s the role of the orchid chart here?

[00:13:18.24] spk_1:
Well, so that, yes, that goes back towards sort of the forward facing again, right, assessing? Um, mm hmm. It’s a similar question. Right. So is the ORC chart, you know, isn’t where we need it to be given, where we want to go in the future, Right. Or does is this an opportunity to tweak the ORC chart a little bit and to, to really think about, you know, if we were ideally organized, what might that look like? And again, I think if you if you’re facing more than one, the person leaving, then obviously there’s more flexibility and kind of really looking at the org chart, but I, I think that’s always worth a look, you know, that’s always worth a look in the assessment, You know, does it make sense if you’re going to be changing the job description, does it make sense that this person reporting up through the right, you know, the right supervisor, for example, through the right thing. Um Yeah, so I think that’s that’s always good to look at. And in the earlier example I gave of the client who lost half her team. Yeah. One thing we talked about it, all 10 of them were reporting to her, which just was too, too many people. So part of what we we did was create a middle layer, right? Where, you know, so she had no more than four people reporting to her and just gave her a little bit of a buffer because that was very

[00:13:19.66] spk_0:
10 direct reports. I’m not sure anybody. I’m not sure anybody should have that.

[00:13:23.86] spk_1:
No, it was too many. So, you know, that was that was a chance to look at her or charts. So it just, it depends, you know, on the circumstance, but it’s a it’s a good thing to have a look at. I think when someone leaves

[00:13:41.24] spk_0:
With, with with 50% of that person’s staff leaving, uh was your client the problem.

[00:15:07.44] spk_1:
Um you know? Yes and no. So one thing that um she took the time to do at that point was to really create their core operating principles. So she, you know, took some time to create five core operating principles and this was super helpful. It was really um gave the made it very clear upfront that this is who we are, and this is how we operate. And it really was very tied into value statements, right? Like this, this is the way we will treat our clients, these are, you know, these are our principles in a sense, in terms of how we work. Um, and because she had team members that were not aligned with those core operating principles, it was definitely part of the problem. And so there was huge tension there. Um, so working on that, you know, and we’re gonna kind of start leaking into the job description, we wanted to put up front in the job description really, and we have done work on this as well as a clear vision and mission for the organization. And then those core operating principles, so that whoever’s, you know, whoever applies that is the very, very first thing you read. Um, and there’s discussion about that in the interview, so that, you know, there’s real alignment when people are coming on board, they really understand that this organization stands for certain things and if you’re not comfortable with that, this isn’t going to be the right place for you,

[00:16:37.94] spk_0:
it’s time for a break. Turn to communications, they have a free webinar coming up crisis communications, you ought to have a plan or at least the outline of a plan and that’s what they’re gonna cover in this free webinar, they will take you step by step through a crisis communications plan or protocol if you like the like the more State department sounding crisis communications you want to be prepared. I don’t even want to go through the possibilities of you know that that a crisis could uh could look like I think we know enough about yeah we know enough about that. You want to be prepared. They’re free webinar is on March 24 naturally if you can’t attend live you get the recording so you sign up they’ll send you the link to the recording and where do you sign up at turn hyphen two dot c o slash webinars. Now back to get off the recruitment merry go round. You you started to talk about, you started to mention you just mentioned that the attributes of the job. How does that I mean they need to be aligned with where you see the organization going to definitely be aligned with your organization. Chart. What what else, what

[00:16:53.94] spk_1:
else? Yeah. Yeah. So you know most job descriptions that I read are elongated to do list. That’s what they would say. Well there’s

[00:17:13.14] spk_0:
the responsibilities and the and the qualifications basically introduction about the about what what the organization does that is the key responsibilities and of course the last one is always and other duties as assigned

[00:17:16.59] spk_1:
by.

[00:17:35.34] spk_0:
You could have just you could just put that you could just have the job, the key, the key responsibilities one bullet everything we tell you to do. You know, you do, you need to do it again, condensing condensing down. But um, and, and then there’s the, and then there’s the skills, skills required, skills optional skills, preferred skills required,

[00:17:41.04] spk_1:
Yeah, yeah. And experience. Right. Right. Right.

[00:17:45.27] spk_0:
All right. You don’t care for that.

[00:20:31.24] spk_1:
Well, I wouldn’t say that those things are not important, but they are, we give those things way more important. I think in the hiring process than is actually the case in terms of what will produce, you know, a highly productive, highly engaged person that has the skills you need and we’ll be there for a long time. Like putting all the emphasis on the to do list man and especially post covid that is not the way to go. In my experience. Um, you know, people are really tired of being treated like widgets. I think that’s a big part of what we’re seeing in the great resignation and the great, great resignation is certainly affecting the nonprofit sector as well. Um, and so what I would, I would I suggest is folks, I think you’re gonna have plenty of time to develop to do list. Right? That’s really not a problem. The, the, the, the, the thing that I encourage people to think about job descriptions is it’s a marketing tool. This is a way to attract the right people to your organization that are going to be committed to it that see it as more than a job, right? That see it as something that they they have a role in creating something that is bigger than the sum of its parts essentially bigger than themselves. Um, and this is, you know, I I think people, this is we’re really craving for this now as a culture and a society for deeper meaning in our work again, you know, this is what is really getting reflected in in in folks who are part of this great resignation. And so um, you know, like as I said, we we I like to see people start with mission. Mission vision corp takes some time to develop core principles and then you get into the meat of the particular job description. But I want to I like to see folks right? The job description from the perspective of helping the applicant understand how will this role play a part in helping the organization meet its vision. Like what’s how are they contributing to that? Right. How are they contributing to the bigger picture? A lot of stuff that’s never discussed even. You know, again, we just kind of like hire people like we buy toilet paper. I mean at least that’s what we’ve done in the past. Um, and you know, you just put yourself in a real competitive disadvantage doing that. Um,

[00:20:32.20] spk_0:
I’m not sure which is more scarce sometimes toilet paper or the people or labor. Yeah,

[00:20:38.34] spk_1:
it’s true. Yeah, that’s really true. They’re both really scarce, aren’t they?

[00:20:57.54] spk_0:
Yeah. I’m sure you would say that it’s right. You’re smart to hold out for the right candidate. Not just take somebody who you know is pretty close. You know they came early. I’ve got this job. I got to fill it. You want us to hold out for the right Absolutely. Mission and values. Core principles.

[00:22:26.34] spk_1:
Yeah. Yeah. I mean in an ideal world the Ceo or executive director is not talking to anybody except the final applicants that rise to that level. You know, honestly, even if you don’t have an HR function, I strongly encourage that you get a hiring buddy. You know hiring partner, someone in the organization that’s going to help you with the hiring process. And um, that can really help weed out all the folks who are not going to be a good fit, right? And and and attract the folks who are going to be a good fit. So um, one thing that’s really nice to do I like doing is having an application that folks fill out in addition to providing you with a resume where you’re asking them questions up front in the application. Um, Again, you want to put all that good juicy stuff up front around your vision mission. The core values. You can put that there in the application and then ask the questions. Um, you know, I would, I would like to see people ask questions around culture and mission honestly. And uh and and this helps to first to know that gives it really telegraphs quickly to the applicants that you’re serious about that. Um

[00:22:38.44] spk_0:
The other like what like what how would you how do you ask questions around culture? Are you committed? Are you committed to or we’re committed to something or you like Yes, check yes or no or or I’m I’m oversimplifying.

[00:24:35.94] spk_1:
Yeah. Yeah. So, you know like again it depends a little bit on the organization and its values. But let me give you some examples of questions that I’ve seen in applications. So one is, you know, what is your commitment to um professional growth as an individual? What’s your commitment to that? Um How do you see, you know how do you see your um yeah. You know your individual growth contributing to the wider organization? Um what is what attracted you to our organization? Why do you want to work for us? Um um what’s you know, how how important is collaboration to you? You know, you can ask questions if you want to have a strong collaborative team, you can ask questions around collaboration. Um how closely have you collaborated with others? Can you give me an example where you were working on a team project? And there was miscommunication around the direction that the project was going. What did you do? How did you handle it? Those kinds of things? So it it causes people to stop and actually have to think right about how they would handle something like that and what’s most important to them this process. I mean first of all, a good number of people will never fill out the application, right? Because they’re not really serious about the job or they’ll fill it out in a very cursory way right there, kind of half fill it out and they’ll give one or two quite, you know, kind of three sentence answers kinds of things or three word answers I should say. Um and so those, it’s just easy that way. It’s like, no, no, no, don’t know. And then folks who are sincerely engaging with the application, they’re serious, right? They’re serious about the job,

[00:25:05.24] spk_0:
right? So, so it serves a screening purpose, but also you’re even just starting to onboard the person you are, you’re showing them what’s important and you’re making sure that they’re aligned with with with, with that culture with. Yeah. All right. So it has a practical purpose as well as uh practical immediate purpose as well as a midterm purpose for for helping screen and on board and on board I should say that’s the that’s the midterm.

[00:25:10.20] spk_1:
It is, it’s the beginning of the on boarding

[00:25:12.07] spk_0:
socialize them to the organization. Yeah, I love that tony

[00:26:36.64] spk_1:
I thought of it that way, but that’s very true. Yeah, yeah. And then I like to see your hiring buddy is handling the applications right? Um if if at all possible. So you want to make sure that you’re on the same page with that person about the culture that you’re trying to create in the organization. And that’s really kind of a culture test. Um you know, based some, you know, basic skills are important, but you want to remember that skills and experience are actually the thing that we can get the fastest, like a person’s motivation and um kind of their, you know, Yeah, their motivations and their preferences. Those things don’t change very quickly, but skills and experience, we really, in a year’s time, you can gain a lot of skills and experience if you’re very focused right? In in in something. So, I mean, you can’t obviously become a brain surgeon in a year if you’re hiring a brain surgeon, but there’s a lot, I mean, given our information age, there’s an awful lot of experience and knowledge that people can gain really pretty quickly. Um of course it’s it’s great if you can get someone who has solid experience that you can benefit from. But I just, I feel like we really give that a little bit too much weight. Um okay,

[00:27:08.24] spk_0:
let’s talk a little about some diversity and equity in the, in the job description. Uh, you know, there’s there’s there’s a focus now on, you know, less traditional education, but, but life experience being enormously valuable and equivalent to formal education? How do we how do we convey that? And also, you know, how do we encourage communities of color, underrepresented folks, you know, to apply for what may look like an all white organization?

[00:30:54.24] spk_1:
Yeah, that’s a really, really good question. Really good question. Um I always like to see um an affirmative statement in that regard. Um you know, in in the job advertisement for sure. You can also put it on the application something to the extent that you you know, you your organization really values inclusion and that people from all backgrounds are very welcome to apply. And so this gives essentially um you know, this is a signal to folks from different backgrounds that they’re welcome there, you know, that they’re welcome to apply. So that’s I think one thing that can be very helpful. Um and I think, yeah, you know this this idea that life experience has real value as well is certainly true. Um It depends on the obviously to the position that you’re hiring for. But if you think carefully about the qualities, this is another piece actually. That’s really important. If you think about the qualities that are required when you’re doing the job? Like the the patterning that’s involved when you’re doing the job. For example, does the job require a lot of research? Um Does your job require a lot of follow through or does the job require you to sort of sort through bureaucracy quickly and find a solution to things, right? Which is a little different than follow through. It’s like kind of the other end, does it require that you be fast on your feet and be able to kind of speak to people that may be comfortable speaking to people that you don’t know. Um and and be asked questions that you’re not going to know ahead of time, those kinds of things or is it more of a position where you know, you’re um ensuring um that the organization doesn’t take too many risks that it you know, that it doesn’t fix what’s not broken, you know, like accounting for example, you know, might be more in that realm, you know, these are these are ways of behaving in jobs that are actually um we are wired to to act in different ways just by virtue of who we are and everybody is wired a little bit differently in terms of how they do their job when they’re striving. And I’m sort of giving you some examples of of different kinds of patterning. So um it can be very helpful to also put that in the job description and there are some assessments that also will help that can really help you be able to measure things like that, but just to think carefully through that right? Like and that also will attract, you know, for example, if the job requires a lot of follow through if it’s really a process or repeating process that you’re asking someone to manage. You know, you want to put that kind of language into your advertising and into the, you know, into the job description so that you attract people that have that quality. Um And of course that has nothing to do with education or experience necessarily. It’s more how people are wired to work. If that makes sense. As we become more aware of that. We also tend to get a wider diversity of folks applying because it has nothing to do with, you know, um with any kind of physically born attributes like gender or race or ethnicity. Does that make sense?

[00:31:27.54] spk_0:
Yeah. Um Well, you know, it also raises the question of um salary ranges for for equity. There’s there’s there’s a lot of concerned that not putting a salary in uh salary range um discourages folks or disadvantage is folks who might end up being offered a lower salary because because of their background, you know, because of their their skin color or their background. Yeah, putting a salary range in you like that as well.

[00:33:14.74] spk_1:
I do like to see that. Yeah, I definitely like to see that. I think that that does create um that does create more equity. It’s not, you know, it’s not to say that you’re going to pay everybody the same because you’re not um And pay, Yeah. And pay, you know, pay needs to be very much accorded to value, right? The value that’s being created in the position. Um So I think it’s totally fair game. You know, to pay fundraisers potentially more than you might pay somebody else. Um, you know, that’s, I think totally reasonable, but where the, where the equity thing comes into play. And I have seen this where organizations have not posted salary ranges and they will, they will get an applicant in this honestly, particularly well. I think it happens with race and gender certainly happens with gender. You know, they’ll get somebody. And I remember an executive director saying to me, man, I think she’s, you know, she’s given us writing examples and she’s going to be the communications manager and I can get her for $15,000 less than the guy who left. And he jumped on that. And there was no salary range posted, you know, and now that, you know, especially the nonprofit sector, it takes a long time Right to make up $15,000 cap like that. She’ll have to jump organizations to do it. Um, and if they’re, if they’re bringing the value right, then it’s worth the investment in that person. And it’s worth, it’s worth it really, is it is worth it to be equitable because that means she won’t have to jump right to actually meet the value that she’s creating.

[00:33:29.64] spk_0:
She probably knows that people know if they’re being lowballed too. I think, I think people have a sense of that. And you know, it’s just sometimes,

[00:33:55.14] spk_1:
and sometimes not, you know, especially young people, you know, and I don’t know sometimes, and sometimes I think especially if you’ve been trapped in in low salary bands which you know, I think my people of color and women have been for a long time. You don’t necessarily, you know, it’s just tricky. It’s just really tricky.

[00:33:57.24] spk_0:
You think people don’t generally know then that there

[00:34:14.94] spk_1:
I don’t think that they yeah, that they’re being undervalued. No. And it’s sort of the sense of like I’ve been undervalued for so long that you don’t and on some level you don’t you don’t necessarily, you know, it feels normal I guess.

[00:34:21.84] spk_0:
You know that we have what you started right? The normalizing of of of pay disparity.

[00:34:24.18] spk_1:
Yeah. Exactly. Yeah. I mean I think it has been normalized

[00:34:34.04] spk_0:
maybe you know, maybe I was projecting my own. I mean I I have a good sense of what I’d be worth, not that I want employment. You know, we’ve talked about that you made that clear. I’m not

[00:34:41.74] spk_1:
right. Yeah. Yeah. I know. But I imagine you do have a good sense of what you’re worth, but I’ve done in the past

[00:34:46.73] spk_0:
But I’m also a white guy who’s 60 years old. So you know, I know what my value is to clients as well as to potential employee employers, but only the former is

[00:34:59.31] spk_1:
feasible.

[00:35:24.64] spk_0:
Alright let’s let’s go to some on boarding besides you know we uh we said that the job description is sort of an entree to on boarding as you’re as you’re exposing, socializing, inculcating people too important in the organization and where it’s headed. But what, what’s more more formal on boarding do you like to see in? Yeah six months is on boarding? six months. Is it six

[00:36:01.93] spk_1:
weeks? Oh man, it’s so nice if it could be six months, you know, if that’s unusual I would say. Um there was a, there was a company in the Research Triangle Park. It was a startup pharma company that has now been brought up by some huge thing. But they were so intentional in their on boarding that they literally, they didn’t hire anybody and give them a job. They completely hired based on cultural aspects that we’ve been talking about and then they spent six months in kind of the university of the, of the company just, you know, just like immersing them in the culture and the values of the organization. And then at the end of six months they evaluated where they should go in terms of a job

[00:36:23.93] spk_0:
that’s, that sounds extraordinary, valuable. Extraordinarily valuable but very not practical

[00:36:26.18] spk_1:
for non small non profit. No, but they created huge value,

[00:36:31.23] spk_0:
huge value.

[00:38:47.92] spk_1:
Absolutely. Yeah. And it was reflected in their market value as well and what they mean just the quality of what the, the work that they were doing. So that’s obviously like way gold standards, we’re not gonna be able to do that and most probably any nonprofit. But um, so it gives you a sense though of really how important it is and that it certainly should be more than just throwing the employee manual down on the desk if you have one, that’s not enough. Right. That is, that is really not enough. First is, do you have an employee manual? Many nonprofits don’t. So that’s kind of a whole nother topic, but it’s, it’s very nice to have your processes, your procedures, you know, your policies written down in some shape or form so that, you know, you’re starting to some assurances around equity and treating people fairly right. That is, that is important. And that is something. So let’s say that you do have that, that’s something to spend some time with the person with. Not just ask them to read it and sign it, but to actually walk through it and talk to them about what does that mean on a day to day basis? What do these things mean for us? The other thing I really love, um, for there to be and you can plan this over several weeks. It doesn’t have to be like all in the first day, but taking the time to really make the introductions for a new employee. Like it’s great if you know what? There are one or two board members who are willing to serve on kind of the on boarding committee, so to speak. You know, maybe this is part of your governance committee, something that they do where they get to meet members of the board and understand that there is a board, there is a governance board and you know, have some personal, a little bit of personal interaction with a couple of board members can be very inspirational right from, you know, then they can talk about what drew them to the organization, why they volunteer their um, meeting volunteers is another one. If your organization has volunteers certainly needing the staff right? Taking the time for that person to spend a few minutes with with um, each staff member is at all feasible. Is it is another really great way for people to start to get comfortable, right? Because then you, you have a name with the email and that kind of thing.

[00:40:44.51] spk_0:
It’s time for Tony’s take two, it’s time to register for 22 N. T. C. You heard AMY sample ward talk about the conference last week on the show. I’m not sure, I’m not sure that the biggest feature is 180 Workshops that you’ll get the video links to, you know, that you can, that you can, if you can consume that much. I think she said the record was 50 some last year that that somebody watched. I’m not sure that’s, I’m not sure that’s the biggest feature that’s big, you know, 180 different topics to choose from. All smart speakers. You know, that’s why this is the only conference that I affiliate with On nonprofit radio I’ll be capturing 25 or 30 different interviews from the conference speakers. But you know, it’s more the it’s the vibe. It’s the the inclusivity, the planning that they do that make, it’s not just their planning because you could do planning and it could still suck but it’s a planning that makes it fun. It’s a it’s a lively place. I’m looking forward to next year’s which will be back in person. But even virtual they put a lot of thought they’re very intentional about the feel the vibe of non profit technology conference. So I recommend it March 23 – 25. You register at 10:10.org if you want to see what people are talking about. Of course there’s the hashtag 22 N. T. C. I recommend it. I hope you’ll be there. That is Tony’s take two. We’ve got boo koo but loads more time

[00:40:48.45] spk_1:
for get

[00:41:11.11] spk_0:
off the recruitment merry, go round with terry Beckman and probably better done one on one or maybe two on one and this is the staff. Okay, everybody introduce yourself to the new employee. Okay, new employee, tell us about yourself. Okay everybody sign off now you know, go back it’s all done in an hour. You know, you don’t get to know, you don’t get to know folks that way, especially in a in a virtual workspace.

[00:41:16.41] spk_1:
Especially in a virtual workspace. Right?

[00:41:18.72] spk_0:
But even so you know, you want one on one. You want one on one or maybe two on one.

[00:41:23.35] spk_1:
Yeah, we’re starting to build relationships, right? Yeah.

[00:41:27.78] spk_0:
You live what, what, what do you have family? What? You know what movies? You know, what do you love music? You know, what do you do when you’re not with us? Yeah.

[00:41:38.61] spk_1:
All of that. Yeah. But what about the idea of real exchange?

[00:41:42.07] spk_0:
I’m sorry, what

[00:41:42.97] spk_1:
I said there can be a real exchange.

[00:41:54.11] spk_0:
Yeah, for sure. Right? Spend an hour getting to know somebody. Yeah. Um what about the idea of like an onboarding buddy? Maybe not so much a mentor, but somebody that, so I have one person I can ask. How do we do that? Well how do I get access to the shared documents? You know, I feel stupid. But you know, I can’t get the wifi to work on my company laptop or you know, whatever.

[00:42:06.50] spk_1:
Right? Yeah. Somebody that can point you point the new person in the right direction.

[00:42:10.62] spk_0:
Yes,

[00:42:37.80] spk_1:
I was, that was the next thing I was gonna say is to have like an an on boarding buddy who’s who’s willing to do that. And that can be a really nice function that can rotate right around the organization and anybody at any level can do that. Right? So it’s a, it’s a really nice way also of just kind of leveling the field in a way that everybody can have a role in in bringing on new people, which is really, you know, very nice and, and helps, I think in, in just continuing to create that, the stronger bonds across your team,

[00:42:46.20] spk_0:
anything else we should be talking about onboarding before we move to keeping people.

[00:44:31.69] spk_1:
Um, I would say that that may be the most important thing is to have, you know, think through the on boarding process, I think we’ve given folks some really good ideas, um, but to think through it and write it down so that it becomes an actual process in your process, you know, um and then it’ll then it’s much more likely to actually get done, so right down the steps, the timing on it, how long the onboarding process will last, Maybe it’s a couple of weeks, you know, and then the cadence of the different things like every couple of days or whatever. There are different meetings that this person is exposed to. Um the last piece probably tony that I would say and, and this bleeds into the next topic is um, with their supervisor to set some really clear goals for their 1st 90 days, so that, you know, there’s no misunderstanding the employee knows where to focus and um there’s no miscommunication that the supervisor, well you may be disappointed, but there’s a much higher chance of success if you’re both on the same page around what you, you know, what, what do you expect from this person in their 1st 90 days and then at 90 days, talk about it, right? So, You know, and it’s, it’s really nice actually to even have little check ins right? You say even 30 days around those goals, every you know, so that if the person is having trouble or they’re not quite focused, right? Or they have questions around those goals, they have a chance to ask you and that can just provide, you know, a really smooth um kind of, you’re really kind of greasing the skids for that person’s success coming

[00:44:44.19] spk_0:
in. It’s also scheduled devoted time with the, with the new supervisor, which should be at least monthly, I would say. Maybe maybe every other week.

[00:45:16.79] spk_1:
Yeah, yeah, you know, absolutely, it depends. I think a little on your structure and hopefully if you’re a manager, you have a schedule of one on ones not, you know, I shouldn’t assume that because I’m always surprised that people are not meeting one on one with people that report to them, but I am, this is, I’m assuming a little bit that you have a schedule for doing that right? Maybe it’s every other week. Um yeah, I like that cadence myself. Um, but this, this would be um kind of extra meetings or maybe a little bit longer of a meeting monthly to really focus in on those goals.

[00:45:41.09] spk_0:
Um Yeah, very good, excellent advice. Um seeing the onboarding and retaining on boarding. Okay. We started to bleed into uh keeping, yeah, keeping your good folks.

[00:47:02.18] spk_1:
Yeah, yeah, that’s a great, that’s a great topic. I think, you know, keeping good people is all about your relationship with them, you know, um, and their alignment with your vision of where you want to take the organization. So, you know, if you, if you’re clear about the vision and you know, even if you’re not the executive director and you’re the supervisor, you know, you still need to have a vision for your team, right? Even if somebody else is setting the bigger vision, you want to have a vision for your team. Um, and you know, depending on what it is, maybe it’s, you know, we’re gonna, you know, we’re gonna have, you know, we’re, we have, we have great customer client satisfaction, Right? And we respond to clients, we want to consistently respond to clients within 24 hours or you know, whatever it is. You know, if you, you have kind of a vision and standards for your team, that’s really important to develop in your own mind and then to be able to share that clearly right with your team. Um, and then it’s, it’s all about developing and supporting the people that are working for you to meet those bigger goals. Um, and I think that those are, that is why one on one meetings are important so that you really understand what it is. They need to be successful in meeting the goals. Um, and and being able to get them the resources they need to do that work

[00:47:19.18] spk_0:
resources including professional development budget, right?

[00:47:22.71] spk_1:
You

[00:47:23.41] spk_0:
want to sponsor? You want to be supporting your folks for classes conferences. I don’t know, certifications.

[00:48:10.47] spk_1:
So they keep learning. Yeah. And, and understanding to what are their goals? What are their professional development goals? You know, maybe would they do they aspire to become a manager one day or an executive director one day, um, and, and encouraging that? Right? So that we’re not, you know, then we’re then we’re actually getting off the merry go round, right, when we were starting to develop actually, a pipeline of folks within the organization that want to grow up in the organization. That, you know, want to have bigger roles and um, creating a pathway for them to be able to do that, you know, is that’s really the ultimate,

[00:48:45.27] spk_0:
it’s a, it’s investment in the, in the person. It shows that there’s promise, uh, there’s a future for the person in the organization, make, you know, these things all make it less likely that they’ll leave. I mean, they may still leave, but if they, if they, if they feel supported, they see a future in the organization for them for their own growth, both in responsibility and salary. You know, they’re, they’re less likely to leave will be explicit, you know, you want to, you want to lay that out. Not when they, when they say, you know, then they give the two weeks notice you you know right at the secret plan but

[00:48:53.62] spk_1:
you don’t know the secret.

[00:49:05.97] spk_0:
Yeah there’s a growth development plan. You’re gonna miss out on all this. Yeah right. That’s not the time. Um At what point maybe maybe I’m you know you’re stuck with a lackluster host. I’m sorry maybe this is going back to on boarding. But

[00:49:09.97] spk_1:
that’s the point

[00:49:10.94] spk_0:
at what point should you or should should there be should there be a formal point at which we say yes, this relationship is working? No, this relationship is not working. Yeah. That should that should there be a formal like I think it’s a probationary period or something like that.

[00:51:12.36] spk_1:
Yeah, that’s a good question. That is a really good question. And I have seen Organisations have formal like a 90 day, You know that’s it is a little bit implied in that, right? So you’re setting the expectations for this is what we expect in 90 days. Yeah. Yeah. And you can be even more explicit and you can say, you know this is this is a trial in a sense. We’re gonna, for both of us we’re gonna we’re gonna see how this goes in 90 days and then we’ll evaluate, I mean you’re kind of doing that right? Anyway um you know, so there’s a couple of questions that kind of come to my mind is from that like so what if they’re not meeting, You know what if they’re not meeting their goals in 90 days and I think, you know, if if you’ve been meeting with them monthly and you’ve been talking about it and you’re giving them the support they need, but you’re sort of sensing like, mm mm mm mm they’re not able to do this like they’re not fully engaged or they’re distracted for some reason. You know, it’s whatever is going on. Um, you know, you’re, what’s really good is you’re having the opportunity to regularly have open honest conversations about it. And then when you get to the 90 days, if there’s really some clear gaps you know, I think that’s an opportunity for, um, you know, a more honest conversation that maybe, you know, maybe this isn’t the right fit. Um, and, and they may, They probably will also sense that, right. They may sense that also at 90 days, maybe this isn’t really the right fit for me. Um,

[00:51:16.76] spk_0:
plead where they plead though, I can do better. Give me another 90 days. I I swear I can do better

[00:51:22.14] spk_1:
without

[00:51:37.66] spk_0:
Any, without any concrete reason why they didn’t, like, you know, if there was illness, you know, there was something in the family, it was a crisis, you know, putting that aside, there was no real reason why they didn’t they didn’t measure up in the 90 days, they’re pleading for another 90, right? Well, I need the job. I can do it

[00:53:41.55] spk_1:
Right? I think another 90 is probably too long. You know, if you were really in that situation because that then puts you at six months with somebody who may not work out. Um of course it depends on the situation and you’ll want at that point, you know, you’ll want to be talking to other professionals about that situation, right? So if you have an HR person in your team, you want to be talking to them. Um if you don’t have an HR person, you want to be talking to the executive director um the best um executive directors honestly, or the best organizations have very solid relationships with employment attorneys so that, you know what the laws are in your state doesn’t mean that you have to do anything in particular necessarily. But if you do move towards potentially terminating somebody, you wanna, you know, you want to know what, what the rules of the road around that are right before you enter into those waters. That is very important. Um for especially for um this is also, you know, a lesson that is a very painful one for people to learn. You know, if you’re if you’re hiring at a senior level, right? So if you’re aboard hiring an executive director or if you have like a, you know, a chief operating officer or Chief HR marketing marketing person, yeah, Director of Development, anybody at that level. You know, when they come on, you’re gonna want to have um, agreements around um, you know, non um, that they’re not going to speak badly about the organization when they leave and that the, and that they’re not going to take sensitive information out of the organization, essentially. So that should be part of the agreement that they signed when they’re hired. Um,

[00:53:47.22] spk_0:
because

[00:53:48.75] spk_1:
when they leave and they’re unhappy, that inevitably happen. Well, not inevitably, but that can often happen that they’re kind of trashing the organization. They’re going to donors saying bad things like you want all of that to be an agreement up front that they are not allowed to do that. And it’s a binding legal agreement that you can have a lawyer read a letter if they start doing stuff

[00:54:10.74] spk_0:
like that. Especially I haven’t thought about that. But especially talking to donors, right? Maybe talking to board

[00:54:19.54] spk_1:
members. Yes. Yes.

[00:54:24.64] spk_0:
I guess volunteers could, you know, volunteers could be just as serious. Yeah, Bad mouthing.

[00:55:47.54] spk_1:
Bad mouth generally no bad mouthing. Like, and it’s mutual. So the organization doesn’t bad mouth the employee that’s leaving and the employee doesn’t bad mouth the organization, it goes both ways. Um, so that’s, yeah, that’s important to standardize, especially when you’re hiring at a higher level, you know, for, for other levels. It may be not less necessary. I mean, you can just, you have to sort of evaluate that right across the organizational structure. Um, but you still obviously, you want to, you know, be aware of what the laws are in your state and um guidance from an attorney around how to handle terminations if it comes to that. But I think, you know, if, and again it really so depends on the situation, but if you get to 90 days and you feel like this isn’t really a good fit, you know? Um I would, you know, and somebody is wanting more time and you know, so you have to use your judgment around that too, right? Do I want to give them another month? I wouldn’t go more than 30 days, though right before you seriously evaluate again and you would want to be very clear about what you’d want to see change right in that period of time. And if it doesn’t, if it doesn’t change, then, you know, then it’s probably time to um to let them go. Um But you know,

[00:55:49.84] spk_0:
well then we’re back where we started with uh

[00:55:52.94] spk_1:
yeah, we

[00:55:53.67] spk_0:
are back where we started. Don’t don’t don’t stress assess.

[00:56:30.43] spk_1:
Yes. Yeah. And hopefully, hopefully you’ve gone through a process where, you know, you developed a pretty strong pool of applicants, so maybe some of them are around um still, but if not, then you go through the process again. Um I, you know, I like the the adage hire slow fire fast. Um I just I think that that’s wise, you know, to take your time to get the right people and if it gets to a point where it’s not the right person, then you make that decision quickly.

[00:56:58.63] spk_0:
You also have to put ego aside that you know, maybe you that that it appears you made a bad hire if the person goes after three months or four months, you know, that that reflects that poorly on on the ceo, on the hiring buddy, if there was, you know, whoever was involved in the process of board members involved, that we all made a bad choice, well, okay, maybe we did, but but maybe we didn’t, you know, remember and in the interviews and the application of the person looked like the right person. So we have to put ego aside I guess. Yeah,

[00:57:59.63] spk_1:
very much so, you know, and I think any time that someone either voluntarily or involuntarily leaves the organization, you know, it’s never like one person’s fault, so to speak, you know, because there’s just too many interactions and too many. It’s just complicated, right? There’s way too much that goes into that mix. But I think it’s also really helpful when something, you know, like that happens, especially if it’s somewhat unexpected is to evaluate, you know, and especially if it was like a 90 day point evaluate. Well, let’s look at our process, you know, what’s missing, what went well, what did we miss, what would we do different, you know, what would we want to do differently and and do that as a team. Um, and I can feel, you know, I think as a leader it can feel scary to do that because you sort of, you know it feels like you’re being somewhat vulnerable to talk

[00:58:02.35] spk_0:
about what

[00:58:03.47] spk_1:
didn’t work.

[00:58:16.32] spk_0:
It’s introspective thought, you know, what what did we do wrong? What could we do better? What maybe some of my you know, maybe my contributions weren’t, maybe the goals were not Uh maybe the 90 day goals were not fair or although clear, I would hope that you’re clear that you would hope that you would figure that out in the 90 days and assess, you know? Yeah. Yeah, introspection is is a big challenge. It’s hard.

[00:58:31.44] spk_1:
Yeah. But it’s so good.

[00:58:33.67] spk_0:
It is vulnerable, it makes you

[00:59:07.02] spk_1:
Vulners, you’re right. It does make you vulnerable. It doesn’t take long. That’s the other thing. I mean you can really do a good evaluation in 30 or 45 minutes if that’s what you’re focused on with your team. And the insights from it are just invaluable. You know, just invaluable and this, you know, you want to create an environment where this is not about blaming people. It’s totally not about that, it’s really about looking at the process and what could we have done better. Not tell you, I mean that’s what you get out of that is worth. You know, tens of thousands of dollars of some consultant telling you it really is.

[00:59:33.32] spk_0:
Okay, okay, so leave us with some closing thoughts uh terry. What about the process, overall importance of, of assessment, etcetera. You know, leave us, we just fired somebody, you know, so leave us leave us in an uplift. We just fired somebody. So leave us in an uplifting spot.

[01:00:59.81] spk_1:
Okay. Yeah, So you just fired somebody that’s, oh man, it’s always you and I you and I know it’s a tough, tough place to be in. Um but I think um you know, if you’ve gotten to the point where you’ve had to to take that kind of action, then one door closes and another always opens, always always opens and what you’re looking for. Like with actually every single thing that we talked about today, you’re really looking at how can you unleash the potential of your organization, right? How can you unleash the potential of your vision, That’s what you’re doing, that’s what all of this is about, right? It’s it’s taking methodical intentional steps to unleash that potential and sometimes letting somebody go, it actually unleashes their potential to because they may honestly be in the wrong position, right? Like if it’s not working for you for the organization, it probably isn’t working for them either if they’re honest about it. Um So it’s all good. You know, I think the key is to be is to not panic to not react to really be intentional and to be thinking about some of these questions that you know, we’ve come up with Tony and you know, how how can you make the organization the best that it can be and really just get a, you know, a team that is working together like a fine oiled machine.

[01:01:19.51] spk_0:
Terry Beckman outstanding. Thank you. The company high goal H I G O L. Remember high impact growth oriented leaders, high gold dot C. O. And terry is at Terry Beckman. That’s Terri with an I and one are, thank you very much. Terry.

[01:01:20.80] spk_1:
Terrific. Thank you tony It’s such a pleasure to be with you today.

[01:02:19.81] spk_0:
Thank you. Thanks for sharing your good ideas. Thank you very much. Next week. I’m working diligently on that. If you missed any part of this week’s show, I beseech you find it at tony-martignetti dot com. Responsive by turning to communications pr and content for nonprofits. Your story is their mission turn hyphen two dot C o. Our creative producer is Claire Meyerhoff shows social media is by Susan Chavez. Marc Silverman is our web guy and this music is by scott stein, thank you for that affirmation scotty be with me next week for nonprofit radio Big nonprofit ideas for the The other 95 go out and be great.

Special Episode: POC Underrepresented In Nonprofit Leadership

My Guest:

Sean Thomas-Breitfeld: POC Underrepresented In Nonprofit Leadership

Sean Thomas-Breitfeld

The willingness and skills of people of color aren’t represented in leadership circles. That’s the main message coming out of Building Movement Project’s report, “Race To Lead Revisited.” We visit the report’s conclusions and recommendations with BMP’s co-director, Sean Thomas-Breitfeld.

 

Listen to the podcast

Subscribe to get the podcast
Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Google Podcasts | Stitcher

Get Nonprofit Radio insider alerts!

I love our sponsors!

Turn Two Communications: PR and content for nonprofits. Your story is our mission.

 

Dot Drives: Raise more money. Change more lives.

We’re the #1 Podcast for Nonprofits, With 13,000+ Weekly Listeners

Board relations. Fundraising. Volunteer management. Prospect research. Legal compliance. Accounting. Finance. Investments. Donor relations. Public relations. Marketing. Technology. Social media.

Every nonprofit struggles with these issues. Big nonprofits hire experts. The other 95% listen to Tony Martignetti Nonprofit Radio. Trusted experts and leading thinkers join me each week to tackle the tough issues. If you have big dreams but a small budget, you have a home at Tony Martignetti Nonprofit Radio.

View Full Transcript
Transcript for 506_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20200914.mp3

Processed on: 2020-09-14T16:06:51.665Z
S3 bucket containing transcription results: transcript.results
Link to bucket: s3.console.aws.amazon.com/s3/buckets/transcript.results
Path to JSON: 2020…09…506_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20200914.mp3.110759374.json
Path to text: transcripts/2020/09/506_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20200914.txt

[00:01:48.24] spk_1:
Hello and welcome to tony-martignetti non profit radio big non profit ideas for the other 95%. I’m your aptly named host. This is a special episode of non profit radio to help you be the change around racism, people of color underrepresented in non profit leadership. That’s the main message coming out of building movement projects Report. Race to Lead Revisited We visit the report’s conclusions and recommendations with BMPs co director Sean Thomas Brett felled, responsive by turn to communications, PR and content for nonprofits. Your story is their mission. Turn hyphen two dot CEO and by dot drives, raise more money, changed more lives for a free demo and free month. It’s my pleasure to welcome to the show. Sean Thomas Bright Felled. He is co director at the Building Moving Building Movement Project. He previously worked in various roles at community change, developing training programs for grassroots leaders and worked in the communications and policy departments where he coordinated online and grassroots advocacy efforts and lobbied on a range of issues including immigration reform, transportation, equity and anti poverty programs. Building movement project is at building movement, or GE, and at B L. D. I N G movement. John Thomas Bright felt Welcome to non profit radio

[00:01:51.64] spk_0:
Thank you so much for having me.

[00:01:53.33] spk_1:
It’s supposed

[00:01:53.87] spk_0:
to be here with you.

[00:01:54.83] spk_1:
It’s good. It’s a pleasure. Thank you. So why don’t you start by describing the work at Building Movement Project?

[00:02:02.44] spk_0:
Sure, so building movement projects been around for over 20 years, and from our founding we’ve had three main areas of focus. One is what we call movement building, looking at how organizations collaborate, how nonprofit organizations can be part of movements for social change and social justice, and what it takes for organizations and non profit leaders to really be on the forefront of making big leading some big structural changes in our society. We’ve also looked at what we call a non profits and social change or service and social change because we think there is a particular role for human service organizations in bringing about structural and systemic change in our society and that that’s really important to support on. Also encourage organizations like that to get involved in advocacy. Listen to an uplift, the voice and on power of the communities that are being served, and then the third bucket of work has always focused on leadership, so recognizing that leading a nonprofit organization is a very hard job we’ve always looked at What does it take for leaders? But also, what does it take for non profit leadership? Thio really have aligned both the practices of leadership with the values that organizations hold. And so over the last several years, we’ve been particularly focused on issues of race and leadership in non profit organization. That’s what the race to lead work comes out of.

[00:03:41.14] spk_1:
Okay, right? And the This race to lead revisited report is really comparing a 2016 survey for the original race to lead with a 2019 survey for this report. Exactly.

[00:04:04.84] spk_0:
Yeah, so we surveyed people working in the nonprofit sector both in 2016 and 2019 on these issues of race and leadership. So this report race to lead revisited at some comparisons between the findings from 2016 and 2019 to see how the sector’s been evolving

[00:04:55.34] spk_1:
and you did have some new questions as well. We’ll have time to get to some of those, um, you talk about Well, first I got to say, I realize the contrast here I have long white hair and you have short, dark hair. We are. We know in the hair. We are. We’re not similar in hair. My God. Uh, yeah, OK, Sorry I couldn’t help notice. Um, you talk about we’re gonna have fun on non profit radio. I mean, it’s a serious subject, but we have fun nonetheless. So you talk about white advantage in the report versus white privilege? You mentioned white privilege once or twice, but predominantly. Talk about white advantage. What’s the What’s the difference there? What? What? What are you trying to say? A little different than the the more seems more common, you know, white privilege.

[00:05:05.24] spk_0:
Yeah. So what’s the term white advantage? What we’re trying to focus on is some of the structural advantages that accrue to non profit organizations based on, you know, multiple people in positions of power being white. So particularly thinking about the composition of boards and the composition of senior leadership teams. Um, because, you know, I think oftentimes the analysis is very individualistic, right? So, like, there’s an individual white person in the executive director role of the organization that only paints part of the picture on DSO we wanted to have a more complicated and nuanced analysis of what’s actually happened. An organization s O, that it became less about, like, the it one person at the top of organizational hierarchy. And think about it, uh, in a way that encompasses both the board leadership and senior staff.

[00:06:04.44] spk_1:
Okay. And then the structures as well, it seems thio less focused on an individual or individuals and mawr, uh, levers of power and processes policies.

[00:06:27.04] spk_0:
Exactly. And it also became a way thio understand and sort of unpack. Um, how, uh, sort of whiteness of organizations that, like in our sample, right, like, 45% of respondents work for organizations where both more than 75% of the board is white and more than 75% of staff and top leadership are white on. And, you know, I think that for me, that was actually somewhat startling in surprising um, And then we also saw that those organizations tend to have bigger budgets at least was being reported by the staff. Um but then, at the same time, we’re seeing that staff were reporting more negative experiences in those types of organizations compared to organizations with more diverse leadership on both the board and senior staff levels.

[00:07:29.64] spk_1:
And so the overall message that I got from this is that the power remains in boards and at the sea levels of nonprofits, and those are predominantly white. And that and that that really hasn’t changed from 2016 to 2019.

[00:07:35.24] spk_0:
Yeah, that hasn’t well, it’s hard to know because we actually didn’t ask the question in this way back in 2016. But I think that this, um, sort of puts our data in the context of some of the research that board source has done that shows that boards are overwhelmingly the majority of non profit boards are overwhelmingly white

[00:07:59.14] spk_1:
and also not reflecting the communities that they’re serving. Absolutely. Yeah,

[00:08:01.54] spk_0:
yeah, because I think what has happened is that the function of non profit boards very often is less a function of accountability to the organization’s constituency and mission on, because organizations often have a lot of responsibility for fundraising and raising the resource is for the organization to do its work. Um, that as a result of that sort of demand, organizations often have, um, prioritized recruiting from people who holds wealth in their communities and because of racial wealth gaps that tend to be white people

[00:08:41.04] spk_1:
on dhe. That’s recruiting for both leadership and volunteer position board with talking about boards and you make it very clear we’re talking about boards as well as C suite. You know, CEO, executive director level.

[00:08:54.14] spk_0:
Absolutely.

[00:08:56.24] spk_1:
So let’s go into the three. I guess main conclusions that the report identifies first one is that things really haven’t changed that much. We’ve already alluded to it. Things haven’t changed that much in the three years.

[00:09:14.44] spk_0:
Yeah, and you know, I’m not sure how surprising that should be. Um, for our sector. You know, I think the change is often particularly in organizations. When we’re talking about organizations where we’re talking about the composition of the staff, that kind of change is incremental, right? I think that what has shifted is that, particularly in the last year is much more consciousness raising much more awareness on the part of organizations that these imbalances, these inequities exist and needs to be addressed. Um, but recognizing that there is a problem is not the same thing is taking action to address the problem.

[00:10:18.34] spk_1:
So you are seeing mawr alright, consciousness raising awareness. It seems like predominantly because of the diversity equity and inclusion work that Ah lot of organizations have done. But it’s just sort of, you know, I’m I gleaned from the reports, just sort of scratching the surface. I mean, ah, lot of it is trainings that raise awareness, but we’re not seeing much action flowing from that consciousness raising.

[00:10:23.84] spk_0:
Yeah, And so one example of the increased consciousness was that in both 2016 and 2019 we asked survey respondents what impact to their race had had on their career advancement. And, uh, for white respondents back in 2016 roughly half indicated that their race. They recognize that the race had a positive impact on their career advancement. So this sort of classic recognition of white privilege that increased to two thirds of the white sample in 29 so one from half to two thirds. So you know that is e think progress, right? In terms of like people having a recognition and understanding that white privileges riel and that it’s positively the benefits of that privilege are accruing to white people in nonprofit organization. Um however, the same question also revealed that back in 2016 a third roughly of people of color felt that their own race have negatively impacted their career advancement, and that then increased almost basically half off the sample of people of color in 2019. So the increased consciousness is both, you know, I think leading people to recognize the ways that they have been disadvantaged as well as for white people the way that they have been advantaged on DSO. You know, we’re still left with this challenge. This problem. That race is clearly having an impact on people’s advancement. And so it needs to be addressed in organizations in ways that I don’t think training is sufficient. Thio thick

[00:12:04.14] spk_1:
right? But you acknowledge consciousness, raising an awareness that that is the first step. But we have a lot more, a lot, a lot further to go. I mean, you know, it’s just

[00:12:14.61] spk_0:
absolutely

[00:12:50.24] spk_1:
widely recognized that, you know, you don’t just do trainings a couple of trainings over six months and then check your box. You know d e. I is covered. Let’s move on, Thio. Let’s move on to the gala. You know it za process. It’s a journey, you know we’ve had other guests say the same thing. It takes time. Thio, uh, change the policies, the practices, the traditions Even if they’re not written down, that our advantage ing white folks over people of color, This takes time. But you gotta You’ve got to start somewhere.

[00:12:52.74] spk_0:
Yes, and I think consciousness raising is is an important and legitimate starting point.

[00:13:42.54] spk_1:
Right? And we’re just getting started, okay? It’s time for a break. Turn to communications relationships. The world runs on them. We all know this turn to is led by former journalists. So you get help building relationships with journalists. Those relationships, they’re gonna help you when you want to be heard so that people know you’re a thought leader in your field turn to specializes in working with nonprofits. One of the partners was an editor of the Chronicle of Philanthropy. They know the non profit space they’re at turn hyphen two dot c o. Now back to P. O. C. Underrepresented in non profit leadership. Are you going to do this in three years again?

[00:13:45.94] spk_0:
It’s a very good question. You know, it’s hard

[00:13:48.15] spk_1:
to

[00:13:48.28] spk_0:
know, uh, in terms of, like, capacity funding, all of those things um, but yeah, I think that it seems worthwhile to keep revisiting thes issues, given the pace of change. Um, having been pretty slow just in the time that we’ve been collecting this data.

[00:14:24.14] spk_1:
All right, Um, anything else you want to say about you know, how the the findings from 2016 are pretty similar? Uh, yeah. Continue through to 2019 before we go on to the next. Well,

[00:14:24.49] spk_0:
sure. I think the reason that we felt like it was worth restating on pointing out the similarity in in terms of the findings between 2016 and 2019 was because, um, you know, from our perspective, it was really important to state very clearly to the sector. But there are people of color who are in the pipeline that the pipeline is not necessarily the problem. Uh, there’s, I think, different metaphors that people have used unpack and try to understand what the problem is of why we’re not seeing more representative leadership at the top levels of nonprofit organizations. And our view has just been that it’s not a pipeline issue per se. There are people of color who have the skills training credentials to be in those top roles, but they face racialized barriers to actually moving into those top jobs to being hired for those top jobs. And so we just felt like it was important to remind the sector of that finding, Um and sort of not lapse back into, ah narrative that, like we need to train more people of color because somehow people of color are not ready toe lead. People of color are ready to lead, but are often too often not given the opportunity.

[00:15:38.84] spk_1:
Not only have the skill sets already, but are willing to, in fact, what willing Thio want. Thio want to advance the leadership in greater numbers than the and the white respondents?

[00:15:51.94] spk_0:
Absolutely.

[00:15:53.03] spk_1:
E guess. There’s narrative that, you know there’s a lack of interest in in people of color advancing toe leadership. But you’ve dashed that.

[00:16:01.74] spk_0:
Yeah, absolutely. And I think that part of the reason that’s important is because if people hold this mental model that who wants to be a leader is, uh, not a person of color, then they’re going to ignore the leadership potential of people of color in their organization.

[00:16:26.64] spk_1:
Yeah, it’s very convenient. Well, you know, the folks of color don’t really aspire to leadership. So no need to consider them. So Okay, so you’ve you’ve dashed that it’s not so in two respects. It’s not a pipeline issue. The skills air there and the willingness Is there a ZX? Well,

[00:16:36.24] spk_0:
absolutely

[00:16:42.44] spk_1:
desire Thio advance and to lead. Okay, Um right. So remember your second main main conclusion, I guess, is there is white advantage. We were talking around it. Now we come right out and say there is white advantage in the nonprofit sector.

[00:18:59.24] spk_0:
There is. And, um, you know, I think that the the white advantage takes multiple forms, right? So I think that there have been over the last several months Mawr written about like, what happened? What’s called now? Philanthropic redlining, right, that organizations that are led by people of color, particularly black led organizations, are don’t get access to the same kind of resource is as the white led organizations focused on or serving in communities of color. And so there’s really interesting research both from organizations like Abssi A ZX, well as echoing green and bridge span that really dug into that funding disadvantage. And I think that our data also showed similar findings, particularly when it comes to, for instance, e. D s of color. And this was reported on Maurin a report from based on the 2016 data but E d s of color feeling like they don’t have, they don’t get grants of comparable size to peer organization or that they don’t have access Thio relationships with funders. And so those kinds of advantages in terms of like, who funders trust who funders will give bigger grants thio all of those benefits than accrue to white led organizations that then create this financial gap between organizations, nonprofit organizations based on who’s in positions of power in that institution. And so other ways that the white advantage showed up were in terms of the sort of composition of organizations and the greater comfort that white people, uh, seem tohave in. Those organizations, for instance, on questions like Do people feel like they have a voice in their organization for people working in white, dominant organizations were both the board and senior staff are more than 75% white. That’s where we saw the biggest gaps between people of color and whites in terms of their their agreement with that statement, right? And that gap decreases as you have mawr diverse organizations. And it’s also interesting to note that the average the mean increases. So both people of color and white respondents are more likely to say they have a. They have a voice in their organizations when they work for POC lead groups. So if you know, funders want to invest in organizations that are cultivating that kind of leader full ecosystem inside of their organization that, you know, make it possible for staff to feel like they have a voice and can help to set the direction for the organization, then you know foundations would be wise to really take a hard look at their own investment and the composition of organizations that they’ve been funding on. DSI. You know, like, are these organizations largely white run or are they POC lead on. And if there are largely white one, they should start investing in more organizations that are POC ledge.

[00:20:06.94] spk_1:
You identify five opportunities which we’ll get to, and one of those is put your money where your mouth is. You just say, put your, uh, you

[00:20:08.83] spk_0:
know, money

[00:20:54.04] spk_1:
where mouth is for sure. Yeah, I mean that’s a critical lever of power is funding for any anyone, whether it’s whether it’s corporate or non profit access to capital access to markets. Um, you know, what I thought was really interesting is, um, when you were identifying whether an organization was white lead or POC lead you, you chose as a threshold for white lead, whether more than 75% whether the Board of Leadership is more than 75% white. But then for for people of color lead, the threshold was just 50%. Is that because there just aren’t enough that are that are at the 75% level? So you had to reduce the yet to reduce the threshold to define it as person of color lead? Was that the reason?

[00:21:02.45] spk_0:
Yes. I mean, I think that it reflects the sort of composition of the sector, right. So 45% of respondents reported working for organizations where more than 75% of the board and senior staff were white on then it only 14% of respondents reporting working for organizations where it was over 50% of board and senior staff where people of color, you know, like it’s

[00:21:30.25] spk_1:
hard to have

[00:21:30.98] spk_0:
a comparison between Yeah, exactly.

[00:21:34.02] spk_1:
75% shoulder, 75% for PFC. Lead was gonna be too small a sample You

[00:21:40.57] spk_0:
a

[00:21:41.99] spk_1:
handful of Okay, uh, e suspected. Okay. Um, yeah. The experience was a little more about the experience. How people experience how people of color experience work in a in a white led organization.

[00:21:58.84] spk_0:
Well, I have to say, this was surprised, Not surprising. But it was interesting that the data was so clear, um, that the these racial gaps were so much larger for respondents working for white run organizations compared toa the POC led groups. And, um, you know, I think that it reflects what we’ve been hearing from the focus groups that we’ve been doing across the country in terms of the frustration, particularly on the part of people of color working in organizations that, um, you know, I think often feel somewhat alienating. And where people feel like they, um their leadership potential is not recognized or supported on dso. It was just a really, uh it was nice to have the data show, uh, and really reflect what we’ve been hearing anecdotally through focus groups and interviews around the country,

[00:22:59.54] spk_1:
You mentioned three organizations that have contributed to this work. One of them was bridge span. And then what were the other to save them. Save them a little slower theater, too.

[00:23:03.21] spk_0:
Sure. So a few months ago, bridge span and echoing green partnered on a report that looked at the going echoing green,

[00:23:14.57] spk_1:
echoing green

[00:24:50.44] spk_0:
green. Yeah, they partnered toe look at the funding that had accrued to organization organizational leaders who had gone through echoing Green’s programs. And so they were able to then really track and demonstrate that black leaders compared toa white leaders who had gone through the same kind of leadership development programs were getting very different levels of financial support on So that report came out at, you know, the earlier in the spring and last winter, an organization called Absi, which is the Organization for African Americans in philanthropy. On DSO, the acronym is a B E, and they put out a report looking at what they call the philanthropic redlining, this phenomenon of financial support from foundations accruing to white led organizations rather than to POC lead or black led organizations. So they use this terminology of redlining because it’s evocative of historical policy that led to very dramatic differences in terms of what sort of development and investment was possible, uh, in cities and neighborhoods based on this policy of redlining. And their point is that the imbalances, the inequities and where philanthropic dollars flow leads toa completely different prospects for organizations. And because some organizations grow because they get the funding and other organizations sort of. Whether on the bun

[00:25:06.34] spk_1:
isn’t the large majority of the smaller organizations I think you’re special was under a million dollars aren’t Isn’t the majority of those POC lead?

[00:25:08.44] spk_0:
It was, Yeah, it was striking to see that a much larger share of POC led organizations had budgets under a million

[00:25:30.34] spk_1:
dollars compared to, for instance, what led organizations? And, ah, large, large majority of those are a million dollars or under in funding or annual budget.

[00:25:31.18] spk_0:
Yes, okay, yeah, in terms of the annual budget

[00:26:27.24] spk_1:
annual budget. Okay, time for our last break. Dot drives drives engagement dot drives relationships. Dot drives walks you through donor engagement. It’s a tool that’s simple, affordable and focuses you on building donor relationships and trust. There’s a free demo, and for listeners a free first month. Go to the listener landing page at tony dot Emma slash dot We’ve got but loads more time for POC, underrepresented in non profit leadership. And then the third main point is that d I. Efforts are widespread, you say, and their effectiveness is uncertain, I would say, but but their effectiveness is uncertain. You’re a little more optimistic. Um, so, yeah, we were scratching the surface of this before, but you know, say same or about what’s being done, but what the limitations of it are.

[00:26:35.74] spk_0:
Well, first off, I think it’s important to acknowledge that three quarters of the sample reported that their organizations were doing something related to diversity equity inclusion. And so the ubiquity of D I efforts is, you know, I think good. And I think it’s a relatively new phenomenon, right? Like it’s become the topic at a lot of conferences over the past five years. And so all of which is to say that like organizations are getting started right now, Um, and maybe it’s long overdue, but this is a moment when organizations are getting started. I think that the challenge, the frustration, particularly on the part of people of color. And the younger staff of, you know, diverse diversity of younger staff is that I think for far too often it feels like organizational checklist. It feels like a sort of double. Organizations are saying the right things, but not actually changing anything about their recruitment practices or internal hiring and promotion strategy. So, yeah, I think that that is the the frustrating in that, like the ubiquity does not equal impact.

[00:28:43.94] spk_1:
I just want to remind listeners the report is called Race to Lead Revisited and you can get it at building movement dot or ge. All right, Sean, how do you feel about talking? Oh, there’s there’s a quote. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. You You pepper the report with quotes in the margin on Dhe there. Ah, lot of them struck me that. I’m just going to read one that was probably half a dozen or so that, you know, sort of stopped me a little bit. But, uh, Pakistani woman, I don’t believe I’m taking us seriously in the workplace because I am a young woman of color. I often question things which doesn’t always go over well in majority white organizations. I’ve been used as a token brown person that za harsh reality Thio Thio read and for her to admit in a survey that, you know, I’m a token. Um So I thought the quotes were very evocative.

[00:28:55.84] spk_0:
Well, yeah, thanks. I mean, we we really think it’s important to balance the quantitative data with, you know, hundreds upon hundreds of right and responses from survey respondents and then also the focus groups that we do. We also gain a ton of insights from those conversations as well.

[00:29:16.34] spk_1:
You feel OK, go into the five opportunities or is there Is there mawr anything more you wanna bring out about the the report itself? Well, this is part of the report, but about the conclusions, conclusions and findings.

[00:29:40.34] spk_0:
Well, I guess I would just add in terms of the sort of d I and, uh, there’s the both the skepticism, but also the impact, right? I think that, um, there’s, you know, I think there’s a lot of skepticism about training, often times. But our data did show that for reserving respondents that reported that their organization trained on a variety of topics. They had more positive views on the impact of training on their organization. I think that just speaks to the importance and need for organizations have, like, multifaceted well around D. I initiatives so that training is not again, like just the check box on or sort of like. Okay, we did the training on white privilege, and so we’re sort of done that the training is a way of both sparking but also sustaining critical conversations in organizations. And that’s why it’s useful for organizations to do training repeatedly and on a variety of topics.

[00:30:59.64] spk_1:
Yeah, I think it was. It was forearm. Or if organizations had had training on four or more topics than both white, the white respondents and the people, people of color respondents, um, felt it was it was more advantageous. So they got there was more valuable training than if it was three or fewer. Could you just take off a couple of different topics that that folks should be looking to training? I mean, not not exhaustive, but you know, what are some of the some of the topics that people should be thinking about training wise?

[00:31:07.27] spk_0:
Sure, yeah. So eso in terms of the topics that we tested for in the survey people indicated that whether the organization had done training on white privileged, specifically whether they had done training on implicit bias because that is a concept that I think has gained mawr currency in the sector. Structural racism, for instance. Um, like do people think of racism as just about interpersonal dynamics or as or as the result of structural, um, and systemic forces that are being replicated by policy? A. ZX well, as implicitly, um, also racial trauma and healing. I think it’s a training topic that is becoming more popular and developed, so there’s a variety of topics, and I think the important thing is just for organizations to be open to having and doing training on a wide variety of topics.

[00:32:07.74] spk_1:
And again, the more topics, the more valuable people will feel. Three outcomes are, um So let’s go to the opportunities. Then why don’t you once you start us off?

[00:32:19.04] spk_0:
Sure.

[00:32:20.17] spk_1:
I’m sure. Wait. I put you on the spot. Do you know that you may not have him off the top of your head? I have notes I haven’t written down, so I don’t need thio Put you on the spot memorized? I don’t know do you?

[00:32:32.07] spk_0:
Yeah, I’ve got it.

[00:32:33.81] spk_1:
Okay. Okay.

[00:32:47.44] spk_0:
First in the first one was focused on structures as well as the experiences of staff. Right on DSO. You know, I think it’s pretty straightforward, but I think the the reason that we felt felt like it was really important toe lift up lived experience of staff working in organizations is because of what we saw in terms of those experience questions, right? Like, do people feel they have a voice in their organizations or not? Right. We also thought it was important to point out that policies have to actually be in force, right? Like organizations can’t just say this is our policy. But if people don’t see evidence that actual behavior and practices air changing as a result of the policy, um, then you know, I think there are real questions about whether that has real impact.

[00:33:22.08] spk_1:
There is, as

[00:33:23.32] spk_0:
we said earlier,

[00:33:35.84] spk_1:
you’re not walking the talk. Then if you have ah, policy on anti discrimination and someone says something derogatory and it doesn’t get dealt with according to the policy. Yeah, that’s a joke. Absolutely. Yeah.

[00:33:39.94] spk_0:
Um, we also thought it was important toe, you know, really, focus on the funding dynamics, so particularly for grantmaking organizations. But put your money where, like your mouth is essentially right. Like there are increasing number of foundations, that air saying that the I is important. Ah, nde sort of signaling to their grantees. But those organizations need to take d. I seriously need to diversify their boards and staff things like that. But if the foundations have not taken similar steps, if the foundations have not to diversify their own or internal institution, or the foundations have not sort of critically examined their portfolio of grants like are there racial disparities in terms of what the amounts of funding, which organizations get access to funding that sort of thing? All of that is about foundations being very serious on reflect about being reflective in terms of their own commitments to D. I.

[00:35:24.04] spk_1:
And you have reflecting reflecting your community, which we touched on a little bit, that that was really striking, how you know it’s intuitive. I mean, I realized it, but to see the numbers of, um, Whitelighter organizations that are serving POC communities, eyes like two thirds or something, I think, um, it’s startling that leadership does not reflect the communities that they’re serving, and that includes the board. I mean, you you wanna have voices from the from the folks you’re serving contributing to your contributing to your you’re you’re major decisions a ZX the board should be doing

[00:35:28.54] spk_0:
Yeah, and again, like, as I said earlier, like, if organizations see the function of the board as about accountability as about setting the direction for the organization, then I think those organizations will see the need and value of having a board that is reflective of the community that’s being served. But if organizations have the sort of rationale for maintaining the board is to have access to people with wealth and connections, and there’s obvious reasons that organizations go that route. Then they’re going to stack. They’re bored with wealthy people in their communities on again because of racism. Those wealthy people are not likely to be people of color from the constituency that’s being served

[00:36:15.53] spk_1:
and your last one responsibility and results.

[00:36:26.79] spk_0:
Yeah, I think our sense was that organizations air pushed to track a lot of things nowadays and so, like what gets measured is often what then matters. And so our sense was that organizations should be very clear about what their commitments are going to be to race equity. And, um, you know, really track those commitments and then track the results of that come out of, like, what kind of organizational change strategies they pursue. And so, you know, if organizations they’re doing like an annual review or annual reports, are they reporting on their goals and objectives around race equity? That is one way to sort of ensure that organizations are staying on track on dhe, that its multiyear commitment

[00:37:13.58] spk_1:
it’s gonna take

[00:37:14.84] spk_0:
multiple years of change.

[00:37:38.03] spk_1:
Uh, you know, just pay attention. You can move the needle on things. If you start paying attention to them, you’re saying, if you measure it, you’ll you’ll you’ll be. You’ll be accountable to it. So high attention to it. If your If your statements say that you value racial equity, then measure it, hold yourself accountable and commit to those years of change.

[00:37:41.23] spk_0:
Yeah, and I think it’s even better if organizations do that. Make that accountability public, eso that they’re the sort of reporting is to their staff. It’s to their board. It’s to their community so that, like the statements of the organizations stand with. For instance, black lives matter, then backed up with organizations being able to say. And here’s how we lived into that commitment. Here are the things that we did over the past year that made that riel,

[00:38:10.82] spk_1:
Sean, anything, anything at all that we didn’t cover that you want to talk about.

[00:38:16.52] spk_0:
Um, no, I think we covered a lot.

[00:38:34.22] spk_1:
Okay, well, we did. You know, it’s not profit radio. We cover a lot of ground, but, you know, we can only scratch the surface. I mean, we cover a lot, but what you want to read the details, So just get the damn thing. Uh, the report again is, um race toe lead racing. No race race, the lead race, the lead be visiting

[00:38:38.27] spk_0:
the lead revisited.

[00:38:49.92] spk_1:
Used to lead you visited. You’ll find it at building movement or GE. That’s where you’ll find building movement project. And Sean Thomas Bright felled. Who is co director, right, Sean, Thank you very much. Thank you.

[00:38:52.07] spk_0:
Thanks so much for having me

[00:39:32.72] spk_1:
absolutely appreciate your time. Thank you. Reminder were sponsored by turn to communications, PR and content for nonprofits. Your story is their mission. turn hyphen two dot ceo and by dot drives raise more money changed more lives. Tony dot Emma slash dot for a free demo and a free month, Our creative producer is clear, Meyerhoff shows Social Media is by Susan Chavez Mark Silverman is our Web guy. This music is by Scott Stein and with me next week for non profit radio Big non profit ideas for the other 95% go out and be great.