Four critical behaviors that founders must give up as an organization grows

Organizational founders are special people - whether it be in business, in the church or in a not for profit. They get things going, pursue a dream and if all goes well grow an organization. In doing so, they do what many others cannot do or did not have the courage to do. 

However, as they see success, they also face growing challenges to give up certain practices, procedures or prerogatives they have enjoyed in the past. In fact, unless they give up these things that they are used to doing they will either plateau the organization, becoming a hinderance to its future growth, or they will sabotage their staff who will find it increasingly hard to work for the founder. 

The challenge for founders is that of letting go, learning to delegate and to trust the opinions of others as they lead their organization.  Here are four behaviors that need to change as the organization grows. Whether they can or will goes to the emotional health (EQ) of the founder. 

One: The small decisions
Founders are used to all decisions going through them. Inevitably this will become a barrier to growth as their capacity to make timely decisions decreases as the number of decisions increases. If one hires good staff one must also empower those staff to make decisions within the boundaries that have been set. If a founder cannot relinquish small decisions to their staff they are unlikely to see their organization continue to grow and flourish. Micromanagement might work when an organization is small but it becomes a barrier as it grows.

Two: Unilateral decision making
Here is my rule. Founders can make unilateral decisions until they hire additional management or leadership staff. At that point, key decisions must become the subject of discussion by the team as each member is a stakeholder and needs to carry out decisions that are made. Founders do not realize how demoralizing it is to staff when they unilaterally make decisions that impact others. If you have hired other leaders, bring their expertise to the table and give up the former practice of unilateral decision making. Good staff will not stay long term if their gifts and counsel are ignored.

Three: On the fly decision making
This is related to the second issue but with the added twist that "on the fly decisions" or "decisions made by the seat of one's pants" are often decisions that throw a monkey wrench into everyone else's day because a direction has been changed or some surprise has been announced that others are not prepared for. Rapid changes of direction without consultation with the key stakeholders is demoralizing as it often creates confusion to say nothing of now needing to redo what has already been done. Once you have a team it is imperative to engage that team in key decisions and not surprise them.

Four: Control
Central to the growth of any organization is the notion that one hires the best talent that one can and that together the team charts the course of success. That means that founders must be willing to relinquish some of their past control, trust their individual leaders to lead within the boundaries set for them and guide through metrics, coaching and relationship. How the work gets done will be different perhaps than how the founder did it. But this means that the founder needs to relinquish the sense that he/she must control everything that happens because that will strangle the organization.

The transition from a "founder mode" of leadership to a more "sustainable mode" of leadership is not easy. Certainly it depends of the quality of the team that is built. But, the most important factor is a founder who understands that they must change how they think and operate as the organization grows. What got you to here will not get you to there - it got you to here.

Anthony Bourdain, Kate Spade and depression

Unless you have suffered from depression or have lived with someone who does you will not understand how two such successful people who seemingly had everything going for them could commit suicide. But if you have experienced significant depression or lived with someone who does, you do! 

How can one describe depression to one who has never experienced it? 

Waterboarding of the soul

The dark night of the soul

Being stuck in your own head with all its fears and thoughts without a way out

Pain, pain and more pain - the kind that you cannot escape from

Brain fog where everything is a struggle, everything is hard

Darkness and sadness and hopelessness

Drowning in a vast ocean

Constant feeling of fear

If you have experienced depression you will have your own metaphors but none of them are sufficient to describe the experience. Most illnesses can be described. This one can only be felt and it feels like there is no escape. Money, position, power, family and any number of other things we often aspire to cannot free the depressed person from the prison of the mind. It is an illness and that illness needs compassion, understanding and help.

Because this illness resides in the brain, there is no escape from it. It can appear at the oddest moments and rob the brightest and most successful of their joy. It is in the brain but it is not just a matter of just "getting over it," or "thinking positive thoughts." It often requires extensive therapy and medication and ways to cope with the inner pain. 

If you cannot understand the suicides of Anthony Bourain or Kate Spade it is because it is not understandable apart from understanding the unpredictability of depression and the darkness that even successful people experience. Outward appearances can hide deep inner pain regardless of one's success in life. 

Many evangelicals and deeply religious people misunderstand depression thinking that if only one would give their issues to God all would be well and quote Scripture verses to that affect. Life is not that simple and answers are not that easy. Depression is a disease. "Just get over it," is not an answer but a deeply painful attitude to those who suffer from depression. You would not say that to someone with cancer and it equally does not apply to depression.

There are, thankfully, many good therapies for depression, as well as medications (Don't be one of those - especially in the religious community - who look down on those who take medication for depression). Sometimes it is learning how to deal with the disease rather than curing the disease. It can be a hard road but one worth travelling so that joy can replace depression, if only part of the time.

I have deep compassion for Anthony, Kate and their families. In a moment of time and in a season of depression, suicide seemed the only way out. I wish with all my heart they had chosen a different path but understanding the metaphors above I understand the pain. If you know someone who suffers from depression, encourage them to get help. It is available! Like anything else it can be a hard road but worth the effort. A life lost to depression robs the world of a precious individual made in God's image and of inestimable value.

Why boards need to change as an organization grows

Boards, especially in the non-profit world are not static entities. Unless they grow along with the growth of the non-profit they represent they will eventually stall out the effectiveness of that organization.

Consider, for instance five identifiable kinds of non-profit boards.

1. The Board of Friends and Relatives. Organizations start with the vision of an entrepreneur who has a vision to change something that needs changing.  There is nothing more natural than to find a group of friends and ask them to help you by serving as your board. The upside is that you have some advocates who will help you get the organization started. The downside is that they are friends and will not easily challenge the leader as the organization grows. Friends rarely challenge friends and certainly easily acquiesce to them. Thus while the board of friends and relatives may be appropriate for a season, it is only a season.

2. The Perpetual Board. These are boards that have no real mechanism for adding or subtracting board members and they serve in perpetuity. I have worked with these boards and they can be characterized as ingrown, a determination to hang on to power and control the staff of the organization, are resistant to change and are often led by a strong individual - perhaps the individual who had the original vision for the organization's mission. That individual often controls the board that controls the organization. There is not much upside to Perpetual Boards as they remain locked in the past while the organization needs to move forward.

3. The Controlling Board. These are boards that feel that nothing can take place in the organization without their blessing. Many church boards function this way. Rather than empowering the leaders of the organization, they essentially hold them hostage by requiring that they receive permission for anything they do. In addition, they often get involved in the affairs of the staff when in fact, staff should report not to a board but to the leader of the organization who reports to the board. Controlling boards do not understand the role of a board and the role of staff and will keep the organization from becoming all that it can become. In my view, there is no upside to a Controlling Board.

4. The Protective Board. These boards believe that it is their job to protect their leader at all costs. In the church it is why arrogant leaders get away with their behavior when the rest of the world knows something is not right. Boards are not there to simply protect the leader but the organization.

5. The Healthy Board. These are boards that empower leaders within boundaries while holding them accountable, are clear about the mission and its results, encourage robust debate and dialogue and ensure the health of the organization. This is a very different kind of board than the first four boards and unless boards move in this direction they will hinder the capacity and opportunity of the organization. 

All boards exist on a continuum between dysfunction and maturity. Healthy boards regularly access where they are and have an annual plan to up their game and governance. This starts with regular self analysis and even hiring a coach when necessary to move to the next level of maturity. Healthy boards lead healthy organizations whereas dysfunctional boards contribute to dysfunctional organizations.

The umbrella principle: Creating safe spaces for honest conversation

We have become a people divided: By opinion, politics, theology, preferences, lifestyle choices and any number of other issues. Those divisions alienate people from one another, create tribes that harbor animosity toward other tribes and prevent honest conversation that might just help us understand one another - even with our differences. What we lack are safe spaces for honest conversation.

Thus the umbrella principle. If you have a table with an umbrella in your back yard or deck, what happens when you raise the umbrella? What was before an impersonal space becomes a personal space for those sitting together underneath that umbrella, creating a more intimate and safe place for conversation. If you doubt me, try a conversation with friends with the umbrella down and then with it up. When you raise the umbrella you create a different environment. 

Those of you who enjoy an occasional cigar will understand me when I say that you cannot easily get into a fight in a cigar lounge. It always amazes me that such different people become such close friends when communing together over a cigar. Differences seem to disappear as honest conversation takes place in a safe place that encourages rather than discourages friendship. And in the context of friendship, differences of opinion can be honestly discussed. 

In every setting whether it be business, church, among neighbors and even family we ought to be looking for and creating safe places where understanding and friendship can be come more important than our differences - whatever they might be. And who knows, we might even learn something. 

In the absence of friendship, differences divide. In the context of friendship, differences create opportunities to challenge one another in a healthy way.

How do you measure the success of your organization?

I recently had an interesting conversation with the leader of a homeless ministry in the south. The city he is in has a large homeless population living in hidden places within the city. Because the weather is fairly mild it is a good place for homeless folks to congregate. The ministry he leads has a stated mission of helping these homeless folks get off the streets and into a stable living and working environment. This is also his desire.

His board however, measures something much different. They love to tell folks about the 40,000 meals they serve each year. The more meals served, the more successful they are in their view. On one level this is understandable. Feeding the hungry is necessary and it is a ministry. Helping the homeless become stable with homes and jobs is very tough, especially with the prevalence of drugs and alcohol within the population, to say nothing of mental illness. It can take years to help an individual move out of one world and into another.

The problem, of course is that focusing on the number of meals does not get to the heart of why the ministry exists. But because it is easy to count, it has become the measure of success for the board. The result is that more and more resources are focused on meals at the expense of the ultimate goal of the ministry which is to help the homeless leave the streets. By measuring the wrong thing - a good ministry in itself - the board sabotages its ultimate objective.

What you measure is what gets the attention in any organization. if you measure the wrong thing the attention is focused in the wrong direction. And it is easy to do. Everyone in leadership should regularly ask the question: "Are we measuring the right thing to ensure that we are moving in the direction of our mission and vision?" This means that we must do the hard work of figuring out what to measure and how to measure in order to determine whether one is heading in the proper direction and seeing success?

This is especially important in churches where our measure of success is often attendance, giving and buildings. But these are truly peripheral to the mission of the church which is more believers and better believers: Evangelism and Discipleship. That is harder to measure but it is possible to measure. Remember, what you measure is what gets the attention!

Five factors that can create greater employee satisfaction

Every organization says that people are their greatest asset but not all invest the effort to ensure that their work culture and practices are designed to provide employee satisfaction. In some cases, this is not even a priority which indicates that a stated value is also a neglected value. When this is the case employees become cynical and discouraged rather than loyal and engaged. In fact, the level of employee engagement is directly tied to the investment that is made to ensure that the workplace is healthy.

How do I know this? I have often interviewed numerous individuals on staff in the course of a "cultural audit" of an organization. Usually I am talking to good people who often have significant frustration in their work. What amazes me is that senior management and boards seem to have no idea of the frustrations that are articulated. This includes fortune 500 companies, non-profits, churches and other businesses. There are also plenty of examples of healthy workplaces where the staff are engaged and satisfied. What makes the difference?

While there are many factors that separate loyal and engaged employees from those who are unengaged and rather cynical, let me suggest five factors that can lead to greater employee satisfaction or in their absence, dissatisfaction.

First, there are clear expectations for all staff as to what spells success in their work. Fuzzy expectations lead to a situation where a staff member thinks they are fulfilling their job but the supervisor does not which creates frustration for the staff member and the supervisor. When review time comes around there is not an objective standard by which to evaluate the staff member's work leaving the evaluation to the subjective opinion of the supervisor.

A good question to ask each of your staff members and their supervisors is this: "Are their clear parameters for this job and objective ways to define success?" If the staff member feels that the answer is no, or fuzzy, those parameters and definitions of success need to be revisited. 

Second, each staff member has a supervisor who takes an interest in them, their work, and is committed to helping them succeed. This makes perfect sense if an organization's greatest asset is their people. In fact, if this is not the case, this stated value is not a real value. 

What this means practically is that supervisors need to be trained in how to supervise well so that staff are served well. Too often, supervisors are given responsibility to oversee staff with little or no training as to what the parameters of their job are and how success will be defined for their supervisory role. This lack of training has a huge impact on their staff who count on their supervisors to help them succeed.

A good question to ask in every organization is this: "Can supervisors articulate the parameters of their supervisory role and do they know what factors define success? Have they been trained in their supervisory role?"

Third, staff have what they need to do their job well and a supervisor who will resolve problems they cannot resolve. Few things are more discouraging to staff than to have responsibility for a task without the requisite tools to complete that task with excellence.

In one organization I worked with this frustration was articulated by the individual who was responsible for the use of facilities and reserving meeting rooms or venues for groups that needed them. What she lacked was a usable software program that would have made her job a breeze. Instead she was saddled with an antiquated program that took significantly more time.

She expressed her need to her supervisor numerous times but he resisted purchasing new software in the name of budgetary restraints (it was not really an issue). The staff member finally resigned in frustration which meant that the organization now had to find another individual to fill the responsibility and lost the valuable experience of the individual that left. It is a classic case of staff not having the tools necessary to do the job. And in the end, the organization lost.

A good question to ask every staff member is this: "Do you have the necessary tools to accomplish your job with excellence." You might be surprised by the response. 

Fourth, there is a culture of teamwork and cooperation within the staff that brings synergy and the best thinking and execution for the work at hand. The healthiest organizations have staff who work together to accomplish the mission of the enterprise. There are also work cultures where everyone does their own thing rather than working cooperatively with one another. The one who sets the cultural norm is always the leader or supervisor. 

Teamwork and cooperation does not just happen by accident. It is a culture that is intentionally created by leadership of a team, division or organization. And it is the responsibility of leadership to ensure that it is present and that staff understand the imperative of moving toward a goal together rather than separately. This may take training and dialogue but it should be an expectation of all staff. In healthy organizations you often hear the comment, "I love working with my team because we are committed to helping one another accomplish our goals." Conversely, job satisfaction of staff significantly declines when this is not the case.

A good question to ask staff is this: "Do you perceive that we work together as a team and that there is a cooperative spirit among us?" That might well spur dialogue toward a greater level of teamwork.

Fifth, staff are fairly compensated for their work. Many would wonder why this comes last rather than first. The truth is that for most employees their compensation is not the major factor in their job satisfaction as long as it is fair and equitable. Most people want to work in a healthy organization with people they appreciate over receiving a higher salary in an unhealthy organization where they don't want to come to work.

When doing a cultural audit of an organization I often ask employees if they feel that their compensation is fair and equitable. In healthy organizations the answer is generally yes and in unhealthy organizations the answer is often no - especially in church and non-profit environments.

A word to ministries and non-profits. It matters how we compensate our staff. Our compensation reflects the value we place on them. It is sad to see non-profit employees struggle with their income because in the name of meeting the needs of others we are unwilling to meet the needs of our own staff.

When compensation is fair and equitable, staff feel valued. When not, they often feel used. Non-profits love to keep their expenses low so that they can say that a high percentage of what they raise goes into services to others. But, when they are not fair to the staff who make the services happen it is not a value but rather a focus on their mission at the expense of their greatest assets. 

A good practice is to compare your salary structure to other similar non-profits in your area to determine whether your pay structure needs renovation.

Employee satisfaction is everything to any enterprise. They are the greatest asset because without them the mission will never be accomplished. When staff are happy they are engaged, loyal and willing to do whatever it takes to accomplish the mission. Pay attention to these five areas and you will increase the satisfaction of your staff.

Emotional Intelligence and it's correlation with organizational culture.

It is a given that the Emotional Intelligence of an organization is the sum of the EQ of its members. In other words, the organization's EQ reflects the general emotional health of its people. When I ask people about the culture of their workplace, they can quickly identify the positive and the negative aspects of their organization. What they often don't realize is that they are describing the EQ of those who work there. 

In effect, the EQ of the organization (which reflects the EQ of the individuals within the organization) creates the organizational culture. There is a direct correlation between EQ and culture. So, if one is going to change the organizational culture it becomes necessary to grow the EQ of its members. 

For instance, if one has a culture that is rife with gossip, back stabbing, unhealthy competition, conflict and people taking credit when they should not or blaming others when they are to blame one has a dysfunctional culture that reflects poor Emotional Intelligence among its members. The core issue is not the culture but the people who make up that culture and their level of emotional health.

The lower the EQ of the staff, the more dysfunctional the organization is. The higher the EQ of staff, the healthier the organizational culture. And the culture almost always reflects an organization's leadership as people take their cues from leaders.

Because we don't often think of organizational culture as related to the EQ of its members, we become frustrated with our inability to deal with issues in our organizational culture. However, by teaching and coaching in EQ we can directly impact the culture of the organization in healthy ways. 

All cultures have positive and negative aspects to them. Take a moment and think about the problematic areas of the culture of your team or organization and armed with that knowledge, do some teaching and coaching in the requisite areas of EQ that are involved in the problematic areas.

For examples of the signs of good and poor EQ, click here.