David Williamson | Bernuth & Williamson

About David Williamson

Turning 40

November 16, 2020 by David Williamson

Some milestones resonate more than others, but turning 40 is a big one by any measure – in organizations just as much as people. Over and over, we have found that once a nonprofit institution hits about 40 staff, the people and behaviors that worked so well during the start-up phase of the organization are no longer a good fit for the needs of a larger, more mature enterprise. To sustain the growth that got them to 40, pretty much every element of organizational capacity needs to evolve: staff, skills, systems and infrastructure.

This can make for a rough transition. It can be difficult for people who have been used to wearing multiple hats to accept a narrower remit. They understand intellectually why it’s preferable to have someone with real content expertise on the team – in Human Resources, for example – but will often chafe at the more bureaucratic systems and processes an HR professional will institute. Certain personality types, as well, thrive in the somewhat chaotic, informal culture that dominates start-ups and are less suited to such management challenges as building high-performing teams and taking programs to scale. Others like the camaraderie and family feel of a small institution.

I sympathize with these perspectives, particularly because the disruptions unleashed by turning 40 are, ironically, the consequence of success. It takes a tremendous about of determination, skill, fortitude, and luck to grow a nonprofit from an idea to a thriving enterprise with 40 people and an operating budget in the millions.

So rather than focus on what’s lost, we advise our clients going through this phase in the nonprofit lifecycle to celebrate their successes and to take heart in the increased mission impact that operating at greater scale will enable them to achieve. More capacity and expertise is a good problem. New HR practices really can make life easier. More sophisticated financial systems really do add value. Professional communicators really do know more about marketing than program staff. And so on.

It takes strong leadership from the top to turn 40 successfully. Leaders navigating this transition – especially founders – need to be willing to delegate, to listen and respect the expertise of others, but at the same time to set high standards and hold people accountable. Staff need to keep an open mind and not feel threatened by changes. And instead of expecting more care and feeding, the Board, donors, and stakeholders can tamp down their expectations for organizations that are hitting this 40-person inflection point. After all, by 40 we all deserve a little slack.

Photo by Ian Schneider on Unsplash

Georgetown “Essays in Excellence”

October 25, 2012 by David Williamson

A few years ago, my colleagues on the faculty of Georgetown University’s Center on Public and Nonprofit Leadership had a bright idea: We would bundle all the course material from our very successful week-long, intensive training program for nonprofit managers and publish a book about nonprofit management. It would be good for CPNL and its wonderful director, Kathy Kretman, good for the faculty, and good for the sector as a whole. I was assigned to write a chapter on marketing and communications in the nonprofit context, based on a class I have taught for more than decade. It was fun to pull together my presentation material into article form.

When the book project foundered, predictably, I lost track of my article. (This was back in 2009, and there were more immediate client needs to address.) So I was pleased to learn recently that the good people at CPNL have repurposed a couple of the essays from the failed book effort under the rubric of “Essays in Excellence,” including my 16-page screed on nonprofit marketing and communications. In addition to my contribution, take a look at the piece by Gary Bass on nonprofit advocacy and Michela Perrone’s essay on governance. As practitioners rather than academics, we all approached our respective subjects from the perspective of the person actually having to do all these things. So we’re light on theory and long on anecdote. And most of the anecdotes are mostly true!

The biggest weakness in my piece, looking back almost four years? I totally whiffed on the potential transformative impact of social media, Facebook, Twitter, etc. on the communications landscape. But that’s another story, for another post.

(If you want to learn more about the great programs at CPNL at Georgetown, take a look here — you will also find those links to other “Essays in Excellence” penned by my esteemed colleagues in the program.)

New capacity building tool

August 31, 2012 by David Williamson

More than a decade ago, Venture Philanthropy Partners – then as now a leader in social entrepreneurship – commissioned McKinsey & Co. to develop a tool to help nonprofits assess their organizational capacity. The resulting report, Effective Capacity Building in Nonprofit Organizations, has subsequently been used by dozens of NGOs around the world, is cited in courses and textbooks, and still gets downloaded 1,200 times a month.

It is nonetheless long overdue for revision. Since the original analysis was done – back at the height of the internet bubble – so much has changed about the way that nonprofits deliver value and measure results. Partnership has become even more important. The original report did not adequately address the funding model, nor the importance of good marketing and communications. And some of the technology and systems sections sound dated. (Fax machines? Who uses fax machines anymore?)

The good news is that VPP and McKinsey are teaming up again to refresh, revise, and improve on the organizational capacity assessment tool (affectionately, OCAT), a central component of the report. They are actively seeking feedback on a new version of the tool and I would encourage anyone – NGO managers, board members, donors, consultants – to participate. You can learn about version one and take their survey. The more data, the better result, and because of the mission of VPP, results will be available to all on the open-source principle.

In the spirit of full disclosure, I am hardly a disinterested observer here. While on sabbatical from The Nature Conservancy in 2001, I had the privilege of working with Lynn Taliento, Heiner Bauman and the rest of the McKinsey team in drafting the original “Effective Capacity Building in Nonprofit Organizations” report. It was a great collaboration, and all of us have been (pleasantly) surprised by OCAT’s success. Here’s hoping that v2 meets the same tests of longevity and relevance.

Business model blues

August 24, 2012 by David Williamson

In a recent op-ed in The New York Times, a board member of Groton School asks the provocative question: Do private schools charge too little? (This with tuition at independent schools pushing $50,000 per year.) But the author makes a compelling case that the old business model for these institutions is broken and proposes instead “means-based” pricing for education.

I’m not sure if I agree with the solution, but the root problem he identifies is real enough. And it’s not just private schools, but nonprofits of all kinds that are facing existential questions about their business models. Some have grown fast on government funding (in the global health sector, for example) and now find themselves threatened by federal budget cuts. Others have relied for years on foundation support while neglecting individual or corporate donors, and now find themselves scrambling to replace funding as foundations retrench following the the financial crisis. And organizations that charge for services – theatres, museums, and kid’s programs, for instance – are trapped by same pressures that keep driving tuition at private schools and colleges higher and higher.

Faced with a broken business model, the first reaction for most nonprofits is to diversify. They approach this as a revenue problem, and look to increase the percentage contribution from each of the major sources of donations and grants: government, individuals, foundations, corporations, and earned income. And with good reason: it works in the short term. Most high-impact organizations enjoy a diverse base of support. But diversifying revenue is only a temporary fix. The larger truth is that there are still too many organizations chasing too few dollars and having too little impact. In the profit world, many of these would fold, but not so in the nonprofit sector. Until there is more accountability for result – and a more rational allocation of philanthropic capital – it will be difficult indeed for nonprofits to develop a truly sustainable business model.

Turning 40

Georgetown “Essays in Excellence”

New capacity building tool

Business model blues

Washington

Princeton

Saratoga Springs