Hi Deena, thanks so much for this series. I find it fascinating! I'm not a leader/manager myself (although that's a path I'm considering, that is why I'm attending your current webinar series), but I've been working in project management for 5 years, at different nonprofits, and I recognize so much of what you describe...!! The comparison with VC is brilliant, very insightful, and pragmatic.
Loving this series. I have always thought that emulating VC support in philanthropic funding was an uninformed idea. It's great to see it formalized in this series.
One question I need help resolving is that the for-profit sector has more visible feedback loops. I.e., broadly speaking, if an organization is succeeding, sales go up, and if it's not succeeding, the reverse is true. This tight feedback loop makes it easy to signal deepening the relationship to VC funders. Given that the nonprofit sector has longer feedback loops, where it often takes years and many indirect variables to reveal the impact of a program, what are some signals for success you recommend philanthropic funders use?
Thanks for the comment! It's a very true statement - I often say that it's easier for for-profits to get money because there's a clear ROI. For nonprofits, I still use the ROI term, but I call it "return on impact." That requires setting up clear success metrics, both short and long term, and measuring those data points frequently. That will tell the story of the impact. To do that, I like orgs to:
-have a well thought out theory of change
-clear KPIs (key performance indicators) that align with the outcomes on the theory of change
-clear OKRs (objectives and key results) that they're using to determine what programs are in alignment with their mission.
Most importantly - anything they're using as a metric needs to be both strongly aligned and easily measurable.
Hi Deena, thanks so much for this series. I find it fascinating! I'm not a leader/manager myself (although that's a path I'm considering, that is why I'm attending your current webinar series), but I've been working in project management for 5 years, at different nonprofits, and I recognize so much of what you describe...!! The comparison with VC is brilliant, very insightful, and pragmatic.
Loving this series. I have always thought that emulating VC support in philanthropic funding was an uninformed idea. It's great to see it formalized in this series.
One question I need help resolving is that the for-profit sector has more visible feedback loops. I.e., broadly speaking, if an organization is succeeding, sales go up, and if it's not succeeding, the reverse is true. This tight feedback loop makes it easy to signal deepening the relationship to VC funders. Given that the nonprofit sector has longer feedback loops, where it often takes years and many indirect variables to reveal the impact of a program, what are some signals for success you recommend philanthropic funders use?
Thanks for the comment! It's a very true statement - I often say that it's easier for for-profits to get money because there's a clear ROI. For nonprofits, I still use the ROI term, but I call it "return on impact." That requires setting up clear success metrics, both short and long term, and measuring those data points frequently. That will tell the story of the impact. To do that, I like orgs to:
-have a well thought out theory of change
-clear KPIs (key performance indicators) that align with the outcomes on the theory of change
-clear OKRs (objectives and key results) that they're using to determine what programs are in alignment with their mission.
Most importantly - anything they're using as a metric needs to be both strongly aligned and easily measurable.