Am I being obnoxious

Fox

Thu, Feb 11 2016, 1:30 pm

Stories like this are why I know G-d exists.

If Hashem weren't keeping organizations like this one afloat with His active intervention each moment, they would simply collapse due to incompetence, laziness, and arrogance.

5*Mom was correct. I missed the part that you, OP, had initiated this data collection project yourself in an attempt to diminish your work load.

The reason this is all a little confusing is because you are 100 percent wrong . . . and 100 percent right.

Yes, your motives were obnoxious -- you were annoyed by extra work. You didn't undertake this project to help the organization or the people it benefits. You weren't even doing it to show your employer how savvy and smart you are.

It's hard to claim the moral high ground when your basic motive is to make your job easier. If you have been legitimately overburdened, then you need to ask for help -- not look for ways to undercut the organization's activities.

However, despite your dubious motives, you uncovered a pretty serious issue of mismanagement that goes far beyond whether a single independent contractor's work is truly needed.

I think what 5*Mom is trying to say (correct me if I'm wrong, 5*Mom) is that your data might be useful as part of a complete review of fundraising efficiency. On it's own, though, it doesn't provide enough information for your executives to make a decision.

If I sound harsh, I don't really mean to. A lot of good things can come from less-than-stellar motives, and I think you have a real opportunity here, OP, to do well while doing good. In fact, a very interesting career path may have opened up for you through this situation.

I suggest you do a little reading about how fundraising results are evaluated. No need for school, etc. -- just read articles online. After this campaign is over, go to your bosses with some suggestions for the kinds of analysis they might consider doing. Show them a case study or two of how they might be able to raise more money while spending less to do so.

Show them technological solutions that might cut down on the labor needed -- and make it possible for you to concentrate on higher-value work. Suggest that they talk with their fundraising software vendor for ways to streamline office procedures that will reduce labor costs and boring work.

Do all this, and you will likely have more work -- and harder work! -- than ever before, albeit more interesting work.

If your executives are as arrogant as many in the non-profit world, they may pooh-pooh your suggestions. But there are plenty of responsible non-profits out there that would jump at the chance to hire an administrator who was serious about running a lean operation -- and those non-profits would be happy to pay you more than you're earning now!

chaiz

Thu, Feb 11 2016, 2:20 pm

Fox wrote:

If your executives are as arrogant as many in the non-profit world, they may pooh-pooh your suggestions. But there are plenty of responsible non-profits out there that would jump at the chance to hire an administrator who was serious about running a lean operation -- and those non-profits would be happy to pay you more than you're earning now!

I find this statement mildly offensive as I have family members who work for or operate non-profits and no they are not making big bucks and I do not think they are arrogant.
Also, this video I think makes a very good point about the wrong way we think about overhead in charity and I think it extends to the general non-profit sector. Yes, I know many think TED is only pseudo intellectual material. But, I do not think it takes away from the message that is true.
http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_p.....wrong

Fox

Thu, Feb 11 2016, 3:40 pm

chaiz wrote:

I find this statement mildly offensive as I have family members who work for or operate non-profits and no they are not making big bucks and I do not think they are arrogant.

Of course, not all are arrogant, and I don't mean to give that impression. However, I deal all day, every work day, with executive directors and other non-profit executives in the Jewish world, and I can assure you that the problem is very, very real.

The reason for arrogance in the non-profit world is not connected to how much individuals earn -- it's connected to the daily pressures they must face; the nature of the people who become non-profit executives; issues of status; and burn-out.

Want to know if someone who runs a non-profit is really a mentch? Don't ask his donors or the people he helps. Ask the vendors to whom the organization owes money.

Part of it is a cyclical problem: people who do fundraising are often treated condescendingly by those whom they solicit. Just as the abused becomes the abuser, some of these people then repeat the behavior when they feel they are in a position of power.

Another problem in the world of Jewish non-profits is that often the executives -- frum men -- believe that their mastery of Gemara and their "seichel" is a substitute for learning the basics of their role as administrators. This is what leads to situations like the one at the OP's organization.

Learning the various ways that fundraising activity can and should be evaluated is not that difficult -- but it's also not intuitive. Nobody automatically knows what a LYBUNT report is, how often one should be produced, or how to calculate the rate of return on a rented mailing list based on demographic characteristics and which demographic characteristics might be important.

Some executives -- the good ones -- are eager to learn. They ask lots of questions, read a lot, and try to find people who can help them learn. Plenty, though, want to do exactly what their predecessors did or exactly what their friends at XYZ organizations do. And they are quick to dismiss anyone or any idea that challenges them even a little. The fact that the OP's executives don't -- at least to her knowledge -- evaluate their fundraising is a bad sign.

chaiz wrote:

Also, this video I think makes a very good point about the wrong way we think about overhead in charity and I think it extends to the general non-profit sector. Yes, I know many think TED is only pseudo intellectual material. But, I do not think it takes away from the message that is true.
http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_p.....wrong

First of all, I think TED lectures are great. People who complain are just being obnoxious -- they're not supposed to be all that deep!

But I think the examples I gave were perhaps misleading: I'm not saying that anyone should be single-minded about reducing the cost of fundraising no matter what. It's often more complicated than that. For example, for a lot of outreach organizations, over-the-top fundraising campaigns are actually part of the mission -- they're a primary way that the targeted audience finds out about the organization.

The problem occurs when nobody is reviewing or analyzing what's going on. It's perfectly okay to say, "We spend 30 percent of our revenue on overhead, and here's why." It's not okay to say, "We're not really sure what we spend on overhead and we've never sat down and really thought about it."

Sadly, and I'm sure your relatives don't fall into this category, there are a lot of Jewish non-profits -- including some very big, well-known ones -- who just figure that if they bring in more than they spend, they're doing their jobs.

chaiz

Thu, Feb 11 2016, 4:10 pm

Fox wrote:

Want to know if someone who runs a non-profit is really a mentch? Don't ask his donors or the people he helps. Ask the vendors to whom the organization owes money.

Or his priority in paying his staff.

Fox wrote:

Happy to hear this. Too often I hear complaints by people that too much of the money is going into overhead or that employees of a certain organization are getting rich of the clients' backs, which was not true.