Build Your Jobs Around Your Volunteers

Meeting People at their Highest Level of Contribution


On a beautiful, mid-western morning in Spring, I was enjoying breakfast with my friend, Jay Hein. At the time, Jay was the Executive Director of Civil Society Programs at the Hudson Institute, a ‘think tank’ and public policy research organization in the U.S. I had a lot of respect for his position and experience, thus valued any opportunity to glean a bit of wisdom. A dilemma I was facing at the time was with the number of talented and well-connected people who were leaving the congregation of the church where we both attended, and in which we were highly invested. We had heard the stories of some of these people and had noticed a similarity that would almost be funny - if it weren’t so damn serious. They were bored. Not with the sermon....not with the people or the classes.....But as educated and intellectual men and women, there was simply no appropriate outlet for their talents.

Now, if you know Jay, you understand that when he speaks, you listen. He spent the last two years at the White House as the Deputy Assistant to the President and Director of the Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives. Without question, he’s a smart guy. On that sunny morning at our small breakfast table, Jay defined the problem that had plagued me for months, “Chris,” he said, “we’ve got to meet people at their highest level of contribution.”

With that phrase, “highest level of contribution,” my perspective changed. Rather than try and shape a volunteer around the ill-fitting form of a “need”, fit the “need” to the shape of the volunteer. This way, volunteers find that they are acting out of who they are, and the sense of “becoming” that we’ve spoke of before begins to take place.

Ok, so let’s just pause here for a moment of realism. There are essential roles in every organization that simply need to be filled. We need those roles to enable programs and projects to happen. Volunteers make what we do possible. In fact, in a Whitepaper prepared by LBG Associates “Can Corporate Giving Support The Bottom Line,” the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics is cited as estimating that the amount of time Americans spent serving their communities in 2004 may be valued in excess of $58 trillion. We need volunteers if we’re ever going to accomplish our goals. If they’re not feeling challenged enough, if they’re “bored,” we just need to clarify our expectations, specify roles and job descriptions, and provide the support they need to do the jobs we need. Right?

Actually, um....no.

Admittedly, certain types of organizations do need volunteers simply to fill allotted roles. These usually boast a large administrative support staff with access to high numbers of eager volunteers. For example the Vancouver Winter Olympics is in need of some 30,000 volunteers and have received 50,000 applications from around the world. The Toronto International Film Festival, regularly turns hopefuls away who want to give their time. Situations like these aren’t directly applicable to our discussion because of their unique nature. Our focus is on the normative; the long-term struggle.

This “long-term struggle” is where many NPOs are stuck. We want something that works, but we’re not sure where to start. Creating a volunteer experience that meets people at their highest level of contribution takes concentrated effort. It means stepping back and, like most of the elements of “creating a great volunteer experience,” it means reevaluating the basic functions of your program. At times this process can be a challenge, but just wait - the payoff is more than worth it.

The first step is automation (Automatic Volunteer Management: How to Offer A Great Volunteer Experience). This is the method we discussed a few weeks ago. It welcomes people to a “First Stage Experience” where they self-select ‘in’ if they feel a personal connection. We did this by meeting people “where they were at.” We never asked them to be someone other than themselves. At this point, the highest level of contribution had nothing to do with skills, talent, experience or availability. It had everything to do with value. “Do you see the value here? Do you believe in what you can bring to this?” This is the first stage of “realized worth.”

As people connected with the value of the opportunity we were offering them, and returned on a repeated basis, we began to spend more time getting to know them. We wanted to know who they were. We asked questions about their lives, and why they were regularly making the 1/2 hour trip to spend their afternoons with us. We spent some time telling them more about us, the work, and what we believed was important about what we were trying to accomplish. With these questions we began to understand who we could become together. Of course, we eventually got around to discussing what they did for a living, their experience and background, their skills and connections. These ‘doing’ questions always followed ‘being’ questions.

This is the essential departure point between the Realized Worth approach to volunteerism and the typical ‘need bodies to do tasks’ mentality of volunteer management. As we understood who our volunteers were, it became natural and effective to build our positions around the unique talents, life-skills, passions and abilities of each one.

John McKnight of Northwestern University founded an approach known as Asset-Based Community Development and Asset Mapping. He believes that absolutely everyone has something to contribute. These contributions can be arranged into a map of assets. I enthusiastically endorse McKnight’s approach; it is sustainability at its finest. Everyone has a ‘highest level of contribution’, whether you work at the Whitehouse, or you’re illiterate and living in subsidized housing.

Margarite is a beautiful friend of mine. A middle-aged women with a formidable physique and a personality to match, she has lived a colorful and difficult life. Upon our first meeting at the Sunday Suppers in Halifax, I was warned to be careful of her. As if the weekly crowd’s collective fear of crossing her wasn’t enough, her strong street “cred” and even stronger connections virtually flashed a “warning” sign over her head. The second time we met, she marched up to me with a greasy mess of governement-issued papers in one outstretched hand. She announced what the papers were for: I was to document the 1200 hours of community service that she had been ordered to perform. She stated that she planned to serve all 1200 with me at the Sunday Suppers and not only that - I could pick her up on the my way to the City each week and she would help me set up before our guests arrived. Despite my confusion, I agreed. I figured I would speak later to whoever had ‘okayed’ all of this. Turns out no one had - she just decided.

Margarite and I grew to be friends over those 1200 hours of community service. While she was no less trouble than I had been warned to expect, she also proved to have more to give than I dared to predict. Within a year she had move from helping orient new volunteers (in her own unique style), to actually playing supervisory roles with a number of community projects. In one of my finest moments of brilliance (or insanity) I decided to put some of her ‘street smarts’ to use with the people who regularly came in to ask for financial assistance. It was often difficult to decide whether or not the stories of hardship and need were legitimate - a middle class status could render a person a bit naive. Margarite, well, she knew what she was talking about. She had her own stories of winning over the gullible hearts of the financially blessed. So, when the requests came in I happily asked them to wait a sec while I grabbed “the person in charge of that.” Many times, when they saw Margarite walking over they would roll their eyes and shuffle away mumbling something akin to, “forget it.” They knew Margarite could speak their language, and they had heard that she was unassailable in her ability to identify a legitimate request. When we could not offer assistance, she offered alternative solutions for late rent or power bills. More often than not, she would request a higher amount than the individual thought they could ask for because she knew the whole situation.

It was a delight to see Margarite acting at her highest level of contribution. Even Jay Hein, with his education, skills and intelligence, could not do what Margarite did at the Sunday Suppers. Had I never taken the opportunity to get to know Margarite, I wouldn’t have been able to see that she was capable of the roles we ended up giving her. But who she was became clear to us over time and we were able to fit our needs to Margarite’s specific shape. Other needs were fit to other volunteers, based on their unique talents, life skills and passions.

At times the volunteers that come to your organization will easily line up with the current needs. Other times, probably more often than not, the expeditious method for moving the cause forward will not be so direct. It will take the effort to meet people at their highest level of contribution. Pay attention to who your people are, give them a chance to discover the value of the opportunity offered, and maximize the skills, connections and experience they bring. Your priority may simply be to get a job done, and that’s your prerogative. But if you’re after something more, if you want to see your cause succeed in more substantial ways than getting through the day, try meeting people at their highest level of contribution. It’s a vital step on a rewarding path.

• 0 Comments

A story from the UK's Third Sector periodical highlights the plight of social entrepreneurs trying to choose a suitable vehicle for their enterprise.

You either have a corporation, which opens up the prospect that eventually you will risk the socia purpose of the enterprise being compromised by new owners, or you have a non-profit/charity, in which case finance issues become hugely problematic.

• 0 Comments

au·to·mat·ic:
Having the capability of starting and operating hands-free.

Prior to the Industrial Revolution, which began in Great Britain in the 18th century, almost 80% of Agrarian (agricultural) societies were focused on self subsistence, which roughly means “just enough to get by.” There was no ‘middle class’ and very little new revenue - with the exception of the gold bullion coming across the Atlantic from ancient civilizations. But with new ideas about technology and innovation, the world began to change. By the time electricity, the combustible engine and the assembly line came about in the 19th century, the possibilities of automation were endless. Soon, handfuls of people would produce more goods and services than entire nations would have been able to produce over hundreds of years.

If you will allow the analogous stretch, most NPO’s operate as agrarian societies. With a tremendous demand on resources just to provide basic services to their clients, we function with near equivalence to subsistence. The occasional influx of new bullion via generous donors enables some growth in infrastructure, but what is gained is soon consumed by the demands that inevitably follow. The answer to this quandary is, of course, to mobilize an army of volunteers. But developing an army demands amounts of time and personnel which are already in scarce supply. We are due for a change that, so far, remains all too elusive.

The Volunteer Management Cycle (VMC) has done it’s best to offer a caveat to this change. While most NPOs will acknowledge the logic behind the VMC, they admit it is virtually impossible to effectively implement due to limited time and personnel. Frankly, the VMC seems to be intended for use only by organizations with numerous support staff and strong financial support. Without these guarantees, the Cycle is neither realistic nor practical. In fact, as I mentioned in the first of this blog series, if you’re in charge of the volunteer program, you are probably the E.D. and in charge of....well, everything. (Except your salary, eh? Bummer.)

So, your time is limited - too limited to find the people you need. You need Board and committee members, fundraisers, mentors, program helpers, project coordinators, counselors, custodians, outreach workers, administrative support, special events personnel and so on. If only a few of these positions were up and running, you just might be able to find, train, place and retain more volunteers. But you don’t and that makes it all feel like subsistence living - peasants of the middle ages.

I know, I’ve been there. I remember, after a particularly long and discouraging Board meeting, saying goodbye to each member and trying hard to hide the fact that I was nearing the end of my rope. Those last few lingerers must have regretted their pace when they became the lucky recipients of my frustrated sputterings. “There’s no time!” I began, “There’s no time to get the help I need.....to make the time.....to find the help I need!” (It made sense to me.) I was spinning my wheels, inches away from the solution to my traction-less work. The Chairman stood in the doorway listening with sympathy registered on his face. It felt good to say (however ineloquently), “Its not my fault...arrrggghhh!” Then, in an act of wondrous problem solving that I will never forget, he said, “You know what your problem is, son?” (I’m sorry, what?) “You need to delegate!” (I’m sorry...wait....WHAT??).

Wow, just writing this brings back some un-dealt-with emotional baggage.

It would be years before I realized that the answer to both issues (lack of time and personnel) had been within reach since the 18th Century. The key was automation. Manage the process, not the volunteer.

I had taken a position at a large church as the guy responsible for engaging the congregation in local expressions of social justice. This was no mean feat, considering this particular congregation numbered up to 7000. They had been mobilizing hundreds into the community, but the leadership wanted to see that number increased. I came in with high ambitions and decided the number should be increased by several thousand per year. One problem: there was just one me, and one part-time assistant (who, incidentally, was the best assistant I could have asked for at the time).

Needless to say, the VMC wasn’t an option. I didn’t have the time to Plan, Recruit, Organize, Train or Supervise anyone. And I didn’t have the help I needed in order to mobilize thousands. If I focused on the few that I could handle, it would be years before we saw the numbers increased and I simply didn’t have the patience for that. I wanted to ramp up the numbers fast. Specifically, the goal was to see 1000 new volunteers in 12 months. I had to make a decision and it looked like I would be required to step outside the ordinary boundaries and try something unconventional. Mentally I tossed the VMC aside, and in the end, it wasn’t much of a decision because I only had one option: Forget about volunteers. Offer an experience. Automate.

My Industrial Revolution happened the day I created the Stage One experience. This was the first piece of what I now call the Stages of Realized Worth. A Stage One experience is all about offering people who want to volunteer a chance to see what we were all about. Because I needed to automate everything, and find enough time for everyone, I simply took myself out of the process. I let the space I was inviting people into do all the work for me.

First, I found an organization offering an opportunity to serve a meal on the weekend. I met with them and described what I was hoping to achieve. In one meeting we agreed that I could bring in a handful of volunteers each Sunday to serve the meals. This offered them a connection with the community (potential donors) and me a basic entry point for potential volunteers. In order to automate the process I would need to achieve the following;

RECRUITMENT. Eliminate repeat promotional events, large activities or organization of any sort and thereby move to a passive (hence automatic) recruitment process. By making the Sunday Suppers a regular, identical, weekly event, all project management implications were removed. I also had a continual entry point that would eventually fit anyone’s calendar.

SCREENING. Use the space where you invite volunteers to do the screening for you. With so few available resources, I could only afford to invest in people who would eventually be able to return on the investment. If they came back a number of times, I figured they were someone I should start spending a bit more time with.

TRAINING. Create opportunities that don’t require training. Beyond a simple brief, I didn’t have time to train or orient anyone. The space itself needed to be structured to communicate what most training events aspire to. For us this looked like one-on-one time with our guests, and a quick de-brief after the event to learn from each other.

FOLLOW-UP. We pretty much need to eliminate follow-up all together. Besides a simple database entry process to prevent unnecessary risk, I didn’t have time to call anyone or explain much of anything. My focus was on the weekly rhythm of the Sunday Suppers; the process, not the people. If people came back a number of times I would invite them to the next opportunity or training event (which we’ll talk more about when we get to “stage 2” opportunities).

DEVELOPMENT. Allow the space to self-select people in or out of a development process. I only wanted to work with the most interested, the most dedicated and the most committed. Again, with a week after week event, it was pretty easy to know who these people were.

Automating everything is just one step towards leaving the agrarian reality behind. Subsistent living is not good enough for NPOs - not anymore. If we are willing to take a few, innovative steps toward our own, personal Industrial Revolutions, we will soon accomplish in days what is currently taking us years. Most importantly, the world will begin to change. And you and I will be an integral part of that change.

Don’t forget, this is the first of a 6-part series. “Automate everything” does not address your immediate needs (for example, those boxes of letters on the floor of your office that need to be collated and stuffed this week), but don’t worry - we’re getting there.

Realizing Your Worth Blog; realizedworth.blogspot.com
LinkedIn Profile ; http://www.linkedin.com/in/chrisjarviscan
Twitter; @RealizedWorth

• 0 Comments

Where do you draw the line with the organization you volunteer for? There is always so much work to be done, and if you respect and believe in the cause, how do you know when you need to say ‘no’ to the next request?

So, you’ve signed up to volunteer with a great organization, for an important cause. You’ve put your best effort into the work, and you’ve discovered it to be more rewarding than expected. So far, so good. Now, 6 months later, you hate to admit it, but these days you’re just not as enthused. Like the monotony that settles into some relationships after the honeymoon period, you wonder if the “glow” of this once new and exciting endeavor has worn off. It doesn’t make sense really, because everyone is so nice and you’re constantly being thanked, but still....the doubt keeps nagging.

Frankly, you wonder if anyone at the organization really understands the value of your time. And it’s not that you can’t handle the more mundane work. You understand mundane - sometimes it’s just what needs to be done. What you can’t handle is being asked to do everything. Everything. If there’s an empty slot, they call you. Someone needs to stay late? Yup, you. Oh, and arrive early? Yours truly. Every time. You have a distinct sense of your dependability being taken advantage of. Even with all the “thanks,” you’re feeling a little used.

Here’s an idea: maybe you should do a time assessment and assign a dollar value to the hours you’re spending at the organization? Except....that feels a little dirty. It’s like telling your best friend how much he’s worth to you and expecting him to respect you for it. Yeah....never mind. It just feels wrong. Still, how do you know where to draw the line?

The good die young

In my experience, it is the best, most loyal and invested volunteers who ask these kinds of questions. And usually, you ask them because you volunteer with a passionate, cause-driven, mission-focused non-profit. We all love to work for this type of organization. What they do matters enough that they’re able to make believers out of anyone who stands still long enough to hear what they have to say. Unfortunately, the tremendous importance of their cause can potentially obfuscate the value of the people who are there to help achieve it.

You, of course, start out entirely ignorant of this recipe for burnout that awaits you. You dive in with absolute abandon. You find respect and admiration growing in you for the people you work with. You fall in love with the mission. You’re invigorated by the seemingly endless need for your personal contribution. Each day there is more work to be done, new milestones to achieve, greater good to give. But somewhere in there, that nagging feeling begins to creep in as you realize that the demand far exceeds your resources. And yet, you really believe in this thing, so you tell yourself to find a bit more time, create a wider margin, give just a little more.

Next thing you know, the thanks you’re receiving just isn’t enough. Even the plaques and public acknowledgment are beginning to come across a little insincere. Do they really understand why you’re there or what you’ve been giving? You feel a pair of unwelcome and conflicting emotions building inside of you: guilt and resentment.

Setting limits or creating a meaningful gauge can help a little, but it will always feel like you’re selling out, giving up, losing the faith. Eventually the time will come where the stress is no longer worth the effort, and you’ll take a break or decide to leave. Maybe a more suitable opportunity will present itself down the road.

It’s all about give and take

Okay, here’s what you do: Start taking rather than giving.

I know, I know, it’s better to give than to receive, right? Well, yes, that’s right. But what I am advocating is sustainable giving. When you decide what, why and how much you’re willing to give, both you and the non-profit will experience long-term benefit. Giving for these reasons is healthier and longer-lasting than giving for banal praise or general appreciation. You didn’t get into this thing so that everyone would think you’re a great person. (Ok, maybe you did - but I guarantee you that’s not why you’re still there after all this time.)

Sit down and think through why you got involved with volunteering in the first place - and specifically why you chose the organization you’re with. What was it that you connected with? What ideas reached something meaningful inside you? Who moved you to become involved? In what ways did you hope volunteering would change your life? Focus on these things and strictly limit the rest. Your enthusiasm for serving on the soup line does not obligate you to chair the board. If you came to participate in the river clean-up, you don’t have to stay late to clear out just because you’re known as the “go-to” guy. Do what you love. That’s it. This is your highest level of contribution. When you step outside of who you’re meant to be, you will inevitably diminish your contribution and begin the path to burn-out.

I promise you this: If you focus on what you get out of the experience and give yourself permission to remain faithful to it, you won’t have to ask these kinds of questions anymore.

It’s not that non-profits don’t benefit from new volunteers who arrive full of passion and enthusiasm. They certainly do. I mean, at the beginning, it’s mutual euphoria! The non-profit has renewed hope with someone positive and dependable to send work through, and the volunteer feels like a god with all the gushing praises like, “How did we ever make it without you?” It’s wonderful! And....it’s the beginning of a perpetually damaging cycle of enabling and codependency. When the euphoria wears off, both parties feel betrayed. The nonprofit feels their volunteer is ungrateful for the privileged work they provided, while the volunteer feels conned into bearing the weight of the organization’s survival.

Both sides are responsible to work for the solution. Organizations must begin to acknowledge that the health and growth of the volunteer is vital to their own health and growth. Volunteers have got to stop giving so damn much, and take a little. It’s only when they are confident of the value of what they are receiving that volunteers will have anything meaningful to give.

It is always better to give than to receive. As long as we’re giving at our highest level of contribution.

• 0 Comments

Merck & Co retains the option to partner with the not-for-profit, Medicines for Malaria Venture (MMV) after testing.

According to the Reuters report, Merck has granted the Medicines for Malaria Venture (MMV) an exclusive, royalty-free license to develop a compound discovered by Merck's scientists.

It looks as if Merck is simply outsourcing research to an organisation that is specifically funded for that purpose - an organisation which does not have to demonstrate market level investment returns on its research expenditure. Is this a smart way of bringing drugs to market aimed at the world's poor?

• 0 Comments

• 1 Comment

• 0 Comments