Stakeholder Engagement: A Guide for Grantmakers

August 27, 2010

Do Nothing About Me Without Me, a guide for grantmakers on increasing stakeholder engagement, begins with a simple but inspirational African proverb about the importance of working together:

“If you want to go fast, go alone.  If you want to go far, go together.”

Grantmakers for Effective Organizations (GEO) partnered with the Interaction Institute for Social Change (IISC) on this report because there is a disconnect between grantmakers’ sentiments around stakeholder engagement and their perceptions of how inclusive they are in decision-making. 

And this perception is not without merit: while a slim majority of the surveyed grantmakers believe that it’s very important to solicit outside advice and collaborate with external groups, only 36 percent of respondents said they seek advice from grantee advisory committees or solicit feedback from grantees through surveys, interviews, or focus groups.

Why don’t more grantmakers involve external stakeholders in decision-making?  According to the survey, many grantmakers are comfortable with the status quo, prefer to get their information from experts rather than community members, or think it takes too much time and effort to involve outside constituents.  Valid or not, these excuses prevent many grantmakers from letting more diverse voices influence their work.

Yet, the benefits of stakeholder engagement are evident; inviting external constituencies to the table results in:

  • Deeper understanding of problems;
  • Truer sense of grantee needs and challenges;
  • Improved strategy;
  • Greater effectiveness;
  • More accountability and transparency; and
  • Increased buy in.

So how do grantmakers involve stakeholders in decision-making?  Do Nothing About Me Without Me provides several case studies of organizations that do this work successfully.  The report also offers a range of activities for grantmakers, depending on their current level of stakeholder engagement. 

Minnesota also has its own examples of foundations involving communities in their organizations:

  • Getting started: If your foundation is just beginning this work, surveying grantees for feedback and input is a great first step.  Some foundations also commission Grantee Perception Reports from the Center for Effective Philanthropy.  The McKnight Foundation published its report online for greater transparency and accountability.
  • Gathering input: Other grantmakers involve grantees and community members in focus groups, listening sessions, and community convenings around public problems.  For instance, the Central Minnesota Community Foundation has convened community meetings around important local issues, such as ways to promote collaborative planning with St. Cloud, Sartell, and Sauk Rapids.
  • Sharing decision making: For grantmakers that are able and willing to share decision-making authority with a group of constituents, they may consider either adding nonprofit and community representatives to their board, or appointing a panel of nonprofit staff and community members to decide on grants. Family foundations can expand their boards to include non-family members.  The Sundance Family Foundation has benefited from assembling a small, talented board of directors made up of several people from the community. At the Women’s Foundation of Minnesota, the Social Change Fund and girlsBEST Fund each has its own committee that is charged with making funding recommendations to the board of trustees. Committee members include staff, board members, and community volunteers that participate in reading proposals, conducting site visits, and evaluating applications. The process incorporates perspectives of many different decision makers.

Join the conversation: How does your foundation involve stakeholders?  If you are with a nonprofit, how have funders engaged your organization in their work?

-Stephanie Jacobs, MCF director of member services

1 Comment | boards, collaboration, community foundations, diversity, family foundations, leadership, nonprofits | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Stephanie Jacobs

Crucial Conversations: Tools for Talking When the Stakes are High

July 30, 2010

Earlier this week, I attended a conference for the Forum of Regional Associations of Grantmakers.  The Forum is a network of associations from across the country, so I was glad to connect in-person with our colleagues. 

The conference planning committee did an excellent job providing relevant content.  For me, our most interesting plenary session was on Crucial Conversations, delivered by Ron McMillan from VitalSmarts. The stage was set for this session as we talked about how the field of philanthropy is changing.  Transitions like these often require staff and members of regional associations to engage in difficult conversations about future directions and the role associations play in supporting grantmakers on their journeys.

McMillan and his team call these discussions “crucial conversations” (which also happens to be the title of their best-selling book). Crucial conversations are those that have high stakes and opposing opinions, and that trigger strong emotions.  They are crucial because decisions about our future are often on the line.  In other words, these are conversations that matter.

Unfortunately, when it matters most, we often do our worst.  Others judge us by the way we handle these conversations.  While crucial conversations make up only about 10% of the conversations we have, they are the conversations that people remember us by.

When the stakes are high and there are disagreements on what to do and our emotions are coursing powerfully through us, people tend toward two reactions:

  • We go silent and cave in without effectively communicating our point of view, or
  • We go violent (sometimes physically, but most often vocally) and let our emotions get the better of us, so that the content of the discussion becomes clouded by the outburst.

There are consequences to both of these reactions.  When we “go silent” and shut down, the problem that we are trying to solve only gets worse, because we fail to be honest and open about our thoughts on the matter.  When this happens, organizations get stuck in old ways and old ideas.  When we ”go violent,” other people react by getting defensive, or worse, getting even.  Problems don’t get solved because the conversations are so volatile that we lose sight of what we were arguing about in the first place.  

Master communicators neither “go silent” or “go violent”.  They remain calm.  They ask probing questions.  They encourage dialogue, or the free flow of meaning.  And they make it safe for others to join them in crucial conversations by creating mutual purpose (“You know that I care about your goals”) and mutual respect (“You know that I care about you”).

Crucial conversations are hard, but they happen every day in foundations and nonprofits.  Think about the conversations that take place in your organization: When do crucial conversations come up?  How are they handled?  What can you do to make your organization a safe place for these kinds of conversations?  Please comment on this post with your tips and tools for how you engage in crucial conversations.

-Stephanie Jacobs, MCF director of member services

4 Comments | communication, leadership | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by Stephanie Jacobs

What I Wish I Knew . . . with Dave Ellis

July 21, 2010

It is a pleasure to listen to Dave Ellis, Community Impact Manager at the Greater Twin Cities United Way, talk about how he got started in the field.  In this last video in MCF’s “What I Wish I Knew . . .” series, Dave questions whether he got started in the field or if the field started in him.  In his long career of working in corrections for the state, Dave had the reputation of being able to make lemonade out of lemons, but he most enjoyed finding funding for innovative programs.  He knew that some day, he wanted to be able to “write that check.”  As Dave’s long and winding path in the philanthropic sector demonstrates, he says that you need to trust and believe where you are headed, and then just run with it.

Dave says the greatest lesson he learned is that “a bureaucracy is a bureaucracy is a bureaucracy.”  Everything has a system and it takes time to change.  But Dave also believes there is nothing that can’t be fixed.  He encourages funders to be willing to take a chance.  Dave thinks that he wasn’t bold enough when he started out, and hopes that new people in the field are more willing to take risks.

Dave doesn’t think that people should think outside of the box.  He says, “Don’t believe in boxes”.  He feels the sector constrains itself in silos.  But, people don’t live in silos, and Dave sees now how the issues that funders are trying to solve are all interconnected.  That means that funders not only need to see the big picture, but also that new people in the field need to rely on their connections to their colleagues to be successful in this work.  Dave says to listen to “your head, your heart, and your gut.  Those things will get you through this.”  Thanks, Dave!

View the video of Dave Ellis on Vimeo.

View other videos in MCF’s “What I Wish I Knew . . .” series:

  • Ellis Bullock
  • Claire Chang
  • Jeneen Hartley Sago
  • Joan Cleary
  • Patrick Troska
  • Trista Harris
  • Becky Erdahl
  • Martha Field

    • MCF would like to thank these members again for sharing their stories and advice.  If you have an idea for another video series featuring MCF members, please contact Stephanie Jacobs at sjacobs@mcf.org.

    -Stephanie Jacobs, MCF director of member services

    Leave a Comment » | community foundations, leadership | Tagged: , , | Permalink
    Posted by Stephanie Jacobs

    Capacity, Culture, Commitment and Comfort: Finding Public Policy Strategies That Fit Your Foundation

    July 20, 2010

    How much change can a foundation catalyze by simply – albeit generously – writing checks? Not as much as it could if it also engaged in public policy activities. In fact, public policy work should be viewed as an essential part of a foundation’s efforts, say several members of the Minnesota Council on Foundations.

    In our Summer issue of Giving Forum, “Public Policy and Philanthropy: Many Roads Lead to the Same Destination – Change,” John Larsen, trustee and administrator of the John Larsen Foundation, says, “Ultimately, the work of our foundation is about creating real, systemic change, and that can only happen when we start talking to government. Whether you’re a small family foundation like us, or a very large foundation, we all need shifts in public policy in order to achieve really significant lasting social change.”

    The challenge is that working to achieve shifts in public policy is often equated with lobbying. And the thought of walking up the steps of the Capitol or testifying before a legislative committee is more than many funders can fathom.

    Lobbying, however, is not the sole avenue to influencing public decision making and advocating for causes. Although it is the most recognized public policy engagement tactic, it is only one of 18 distinct policy strategies that Julia Coffman outlines in “A User’s Guide to Advocacy Evaluation Planning,” published by the Harvard Family Research Project.

    A “Framework of Public Policy Activities,” which we include in Giving Forum, also includes using electronic outreach and social media, coalition and network building, grassroots organizing, briefings and presentations, polling, pilot projects, research investigating issues and identifying solutions and policymaker education, among others – all of which can impact public decision making, which ultimately shapes policy development, approval and implementation.

    A foundation can engage anywhere along the continuum, pursuing those activities that fit its capacity, culture, commitment and comfort levels. A public policy activity that feels right for one foundation may not fit another.

    Many foundations choose a combination of strategies, leveraging their resources to: raise awareness of where the public stands on particular issues; bring together divergent points of view to first converse then collaborate; empower community members to advocate on their own behalf by providing technical assistance; increase the capacity of nonprofits to mobilize others; identify messages that resonate with policymakers and the public; determine what would happen if the status quo was allowed to prevail; aggregate what is known already about an issue and put that to work to further discussion; or identify possible solutions and best practices.

    These MCF members have each chosen distinct strategies to impact public decision making that fit their capacity, culture, commitment and comfort level. Read more about their work in our just-published Giving Forum:

    Lead article:

    Southern Minnesota Initiative Foundation: An outgrowth of its grantmaking and programmatic activities, community dialogues and business loan work, SMIF’s public policy activities, including building coalition and networks and partnering with the media to draw attention to the issues and how public policy could impact the success the foundation seeks.

    The Minneapolis Foundation: As part of the School Readiness Funders Coalition, a group of funders with diverse strengths and abilities in advocacy work, The Minneapolis Foundation brings to the group its ability to lobby and testify at legislative hearings to advocate for the coalitions “Agenda to Achieve Learning Readiness by 2020.”

    John Larsen Foundation: When awarding grants supporting work toward LGBT equality, the foundation  considers if educating policymakers is an end goal of the nonprofit’s work and if the organization has a research plan and a track record of communicating those findings to policymakers.

    Indian Land Tenure Foundation: Striving to ensure that lands within the original boundaries of reservations is acquired, owned and managed by Indians, the foundation views education about land issues a priority, as well as identification then pursuit of strategies for achieving legal reform.

    Women’s Foundation of Minnesota: The explosion of social media has created a new landscape for the foundation to leverage its expertise to educate, engage and broaden its reach to shift attitudes, behaviors and institutions that limit equality for women and girls.

    Voices of Philanthropy articles:

    Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation: Identifying partners best qualified to successfully implement strategies and measuring what’s important to guide future initiatives drive the foundation’s advocacy work.

    Initiative Foundation: Based on the belief that local people are the key to strengthening communities, the foundation increases civic engagement by providing training, technical assistance, resource referral and grants to help citizen-based teams develop and carry out strategic plans.

    While these efforts are diverse, the common thread amongst them is the recognition by these foundations that strategically developing goals to influence public decision making and intentionally engaging in public policy activities and advocacy work can move systems change forward.

    - Chris Murakami Noonan, MCF communications associate

    1 Comment | Greater Minnesota, children, collaboration, communication, community foundations, conference, diversity, economy, education, family foundations, giving forum, government, leadership, nonprofits, private foundations, public policy, social justice, youth | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
    Posted by Chris Noonan

    What I Wish I Knew . . . with Martha Field

    July 14, 2010

    When I went to interview Martha Field, manager of community relations at Thomson Reuters, for MCF’s “What I Wish I Knew . . .” video series, I was blown away by the size of the corporation’s campus.  As Martha says in the video, the Eagan location has upwards of seven thousand people.  As we walked up to the meeting room where we would sit down for the interview, we looked out the window at the sea of cars in the enormous parking lot.  It struck me what an important role a small community relations department plays for of such a large business.

    Martha says that anyone working in community relations within a corporation has to be very dedicated and committed.  You will not be successful “unless it matters to you.”  When it does matter, there are important contributions a person can bring to the corporate sector on behalf of the nonprofit community, including educating corporations on the unique challenges facing nonprofit organizations.

    When Martha started at Thomson Reuters almost 8 years ago, she really had to dive in to do the work as she was the only person in her department at the time.  While she says it was the best way to learn, she wishes she would have understood that she would be working simultaneously in two cultures: the corporate culture and the culture of giving within the corporation.  But, she connected with her colleagues in the field to help her navigate through this process.  She says there is a “commitment from those in the profession to do it well,” and they are more than willing to help people knew to the field.

    Martha encourages people who are new to philanthropy to utilize every option available, but in particular, “it’s all about the relationships.”  She says its crucial for philanthropic professionals to reach out to others within their organizations, within the field as a whole, and within the community.  Martha says ”you can never stop reaching out,” no matter what your role is within the foundation world.  Thanks, Martha!

    View other videos in MCF’s “What I Wish I Knew . . .” series:

  • Ellis Bullock
  • Claire Chang
  • Jeneen Hartley Sago
  • Joan Cleary
  • Patrick Troska
  • Trista Harris
  • Becky Erdahl

    • 3 Comments | corporate, leadership | Permalink
    Posted by Stephanie Jacobs

    What I Wish I Knew . . . with Becky Erdahl

    July 7, 2010

    Becky Erdahl, executive director of the Carolyn Foundation,  thought she had landed the easiest job in the world when she was asked to run the community relations department at the Pillsbury Company.  She shares in this “What I Wish I Knew . . .” video how she quickly found out that it was a lot harder to give away money respectfully and responsibly than she thought.

    Becky wishes she had better understood the importance and power of guidelines in grantmaking.  She found that she had to say “no” a lot less often when they were able to tighten up their guidelines and give nonprofits a better chance at receiving a grant.

    Becky advises new foundation staff to reach out and learn from their peers, as working in foundations with few staff members can be very isolating.  She also encourages people who are new to family foundations to remember that family philanthropists are volunteers; this is not their full time job and they look to the staff at their foundations to guide them to make informed decisions.  Thanks, Becky!

    View other videos in our “What I Wish I Knew . . .” series:

  • Ellis Bullock
  • Claire Chang
  • Jeneen Hartley Sago
  • Joan Cleary
  • Patrick Troska
  • Trista Harris

    • - Stephanie Jacobs, MCF director of member services

    2 Comments | corporate, family foundations, leadership | Tagged: , , , , | Permalink
    Posted by Stephanie Jacobs

    What I Wish I Knew . . . with Trista Harris

    June 30, 2010

    Trista Harris, Executive Director of the Headwaters Foundation for Justice, thought she was going to run a nonprofit organization after graduate school, but her mentors gave her some great advice that changed the path of Trista’s career.  In this “What I Wish I Knew . . .” video, Trista explains how her advisor from the Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs suggested that she take her interests in nonprofit capacity building to philanthropy, where she could spread her insight and energy to multiple organizations.

    Trista says that affinity groups have been incredibly important to her professional development, as have resources from groups like GrantCraft.  But, she says one of the most important things to remember when taking a position in the field is that ” you didn’t get smarter, prettier, or funnier” when you started working for a foundation.  Trista says there are two ways to approach the work: you can either be a steward of community resources or you can act like you’ve won the lottery.  Trista encourages grantmakers to approach the work with humility and honesty for greater effectiveness.  Thanks, Trista!

    View other videos in our “What I Wish I Knew . . .” series:

  • Ellis Bullock
  • Claire Chang
  • Jeneen Hartley Sago
  • Joan Cleary
  • Patrick Troska

    • - Stephanie Jacobs, MCF director of member services

    3 Comments | community foundations, leadership | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
    Posted by Stephanie Jacobs

    « Previous Entries