How charities can gather images ethically?

by Rachel Erskine

Amref Health Africa might be the biggest NGO you’ve never heard of. Headquartered in Nairobi, we’ve been around since 1957 and work in 35 African countries. When I joined the organisation’s UK arm in September 2017, I was struck by the breadth and variety of that work.

elephant.jpgIt’s like that school assembly staple, the parable of the blind-folded men and the elephant: if you asked my counterparts in Ethiopia or South Sudan what Amref does, their answers would bear little resemblance to each other’s, or my own. None of us would be wrong – but you’d need them all to see the truth.

The elephant in the Zoom

I soon came across another elephant; the one everyone avoided in in our bi-monthly video calls. While we had access to thousands of striking photos illustrating the impact of our work, we didn’t always have proof of informed consent from the people who featured. By missing out that stage of the image-making process, we had strayed from the principles that underpin our work. We had made ourselves vulnerable – and rendered much of our beautiful photography unusable.

Recognising the need for change, colleagues from across the organisation undertook a far-reaching review of consent-gathering. Eighteen months later, we’re at the stage of rolling out a new policy and toolkit. This is how we did it…

Assigning responsibility

globalWe started by creating a taskforce from across Canada, Kenya, the Netherlands, Tanzania, and the UK – all with the shared goal of establishing a global policy on image consent and a set of practical tools for implementation. At each stage we took our drafts back to a bigger working group representing every Amref office. Once we had achieved broad agreement as a group, we took it to senior management at global level.

It wasn’t easy – taskforce members were doing full-time jobs in parallel and many are one-person teams. Had we taken a more centralised approach, the work would have been finished much sooner but, as my Canadian colleague pointed out, it wouldn’t have made for such a rich and comprehensive policy.

Involving everyone

Informed consent protects the rights and dignity of those whose stories we have the privilege of sharing.  Although the ethical argument is by far the strongest one, it was crucial that everyone understood the potential repercussions (legal, financial, and reputational) when we don’t respect the process. Framed like this, it’s everyone’s business.team.jpg

We consulted the communities we work with to determine what they thought was reasonable and practical and sought advice from our Legal, HR, and Programmes colleagues, who often find themselves tasked with taking photos.

 It wasn’t always easy

This process forced us to have important, and sometimes uncomfortable, conversations. It has revealed other areas that require further attention and work. For example, the new policy needs to be backed up by, and reflected in, our safeguarding and child protection policies; our staff handbook and code of conduct; the contracts we ask freelance photographers to sign; our project feedback mechanisms; the way we’ve configured our online photo library. (All of this work is now underway, with clear deadlines for completion.)

Embracing complexity

Amref has offices in a dozen African countries, and another dozen in Europe and North America. Attitudes and expectations around the act of taking a photo vary from one context to another. Trying to reconcile these was complicated. There were times when conversations threw up more questions than they answered.

Camera.png

The charity sector is still smarting from recent, very public examples of what not to do. Our use of imagery ties into broader conversations about race, representation, and power dynamics; it was important not to shy away from this in our calls with colleagues from all over the world.

In the UK, the public demands increasingly better from NGOs and they’re willing to hold us to account when we fall short.

Letting it take up time and space

This work is important. Developing and implementing a thoughtful, rigorous consent process says a lot about who we want to be as an organisation.

midwifery-students-gambela-crop_999x784-743330914-1568711270433.jpgLike many things, it all comes back to relationships: between NGO and community members, between photographer and subject. At Amref, we’re lucky to have strong relationships with the communities we work with; many of them built and maintained over several decades. Whilst these relationships don’t allow us to ever assume consent, they do enable us to have frank and open conversations.

Thinking ahead

Our next step is to develop guidance on the ethical use of imagery. In reality, much of the groundwork for this has already been done. If you’ve already had those conversations by the time the picture is taken and the person is clear on what their image might be used for, where it might appear, how it might be framed and who might see it – you can be reasonably confident that your use of it will align with their wishes. This being so, we do try to ask people for feedback once they’re ready for publication. They can revoke consent at any time.

Zooming out

When it comes to representation – stories, films, photography – it’s not about us. It’s about the people who allow us to share their stories; the people our organisations exist for. Their needs should always come before our own. It’s part of a broader commitment to putting respect for the rights, dignity and preferences of the people we work with above everything else: a principle that guides our project work and should underpin our communications, too.

__________________________________________________________________________________

Resources we’ve found useful

—————————————————————————————————————-

Rachel Erskine is Communications Manager at Amref Health Africa UK. The views expressed here are her own and not those of her employer.

www.amrefuk.org / @amref_uk / @erskinerachel

 

Is it okay to have fun at work…or is “fun” a dirty word?

by Katie Duckworth

So, politics has gone mad. Injustices are multiplying. Poverty is on the rise and the funds to fight it are tighter than ever. And to cap it all, the reputation of the charity sector has taken some big knocks recently with a string of scandals. All this, and Boris too…

So, how should the serious, responsible charity respond to the challenge?

How about having a bit more fun? Yes, fun. And no, I’m not being flippant.

There’s a growing body of evidence that fun not only makes for happier, healthier such funemployees (obvs!) – and more productive ones too, less likely to get stressed into sickness or look for another job (slightly less obvious) – but, and this is crucial, fun helps charities fulfil their mission even more effectively.

Within reason, the more fun you’re having, the more you’re able to help those causes and people you exist for.

That’s why some of the most effective charities in their field have embraced fun as a core organisational value – alongside more familiar ones such as respect, equality and accountability.

Sean McCallion, head of fundraising at The Back Up Trust, shared with me that he remembers arguing passionately for fun as a value in a heated staff debate some years ago. He won; it’s still there, and, says Sean, has become core to everything Back Up does to support those with life-altering spinal cord injury.

Sustainability NGO, Forum for the Future, was an early pioneer in adopting fun; it’s since changed it to ‘Playful’, but the message is the same – “Fun is good”  as Dr Seuss famously said.

SO WHY DOES FUN WORK?

Fun at work has a whole host of benefits which come together in a beautiful virtuous circle. Here are some:

  • Top of the list is that fun allows staff to have a laugh and let off steam. This is steamimportant for everyone, but even more so when the issues they may be working with are deeply upsetting or difficult. This doesn’t mean taking those issues lightly. Quite the opposite; by lifting staff spirits, it acts as a refresher, helping them tackle those challenges with renewed vigour and optimism. Staff with a smile are a lot more pleasant for clients and colleagues alike than ones with a frown.
  • When people are having fun, they experience less stress and tend to be happier with a greater sense of well being. Better for them, better for the outfit as a whole.
  • There’s strong evidence that happier people are more productive people, more engaged with work, more capable of simply getting stuff done. It’s obvious really. If work drains the life out of you, you’re not going to be doing a great job, are you?
  • Fun builds trust and encourages positive relationships between colleagues, vital for the successful collaboration and problem solving the sector needs.
  • Creativity and innovative thinking, so important for tackling the tough challenges we face right now, thrive in an atmosphere of play and fun, where people are allowed to experiment rather than be constrained by the idea that there are institutional right and wrong answers.
  • Having fun helps people to learn more effectively (just think about young children learning through play – it’s true for grown-ups too!)

What’s not to like?

FUN FOR ALL?

‘Fun’ as a core value isn’t right for all charities, I know. It can be seen as frivolous and trite. And most charity workers don’t exactly have fun in their job title. But bringing fun into work doesn’t have to be a big cringe. As a coach and trainer, I support leaders experimenting with new approaches to bring out the best in their staff, and I’ve found that bringing an element of fun into work can often be a surprisingly effective means of doing so.

Here’s how some are going about it:silly

First up, creating a culture where fun is acceptable, has got to come from the top. Leaders need to be on board. Staff will find their own fun (which is actually the best way to let it develop) but only if there is trust that they won’t be judged or made to feel silly or bad. And a leader who can relax and enjoy some fun – when appropriate – from time to time can do wonders in putting staff at ease.

  • That said, lowering the barriers to fun, such as tackling poor working conditions and staff conflict, is also key. As Louise Wright, CEO of Action for Pulmonary Fibrosis told me,

“Fun comes out when people are able to get on, when they’re not grappling with silly issues such as office politics, and there is a fair and equitable workplace which allows them to be empowered and facilitated. It’s my job to make sure that happens.”

  • Planned fun (sports day, bake-offs, ‘bring your dog to work day’) is good. Organic fun that bubbles up from happy, supported staff is even better. Warm chats with colleagues, spontaneous lunches out and birthday celebrations all add up to a ‘fun-positive’ culture.
  • Fun doesn’t want to feel overly scheduled or formal. You can’t force feed fun! And, please, don’t make anything obligatory. That really gives fun at work a bad name. I still remember Christmas lunches in my early working days at a big non-profit which were hosted by a team leader I couldn’t bear. I can tell you, that was extremely unfun. (Needless to say, I didn’t last long there!)
  • Make sure fun is inclusive. Gender, cultural and age-related differences mean that what constitutes fun can vary hugely. Lena Staafgard, Chief Operating Officer at Better Cotton Initiative, told me she’d love to start a spoof newsletter, which worked so successfully in her previous workplace, but fears it will fall flat at the more international organisation where the jokes won’t necessarily translate.3-ways-to-improve-your-powerpoints
  • Make sure you bring fun into your learning. No boring blah, blah-ing in front of a PowerPoint. When I was invited to run management training at Aspire Charity recently, the brief was very much about making the learning fun so it would stick, but also to encourage participants to see that management itself could be fun. I didn’t go in there banging a drum shouting ‘let’s have fun!” (that would have put some people right off) but through the use of games, funny graphics, and a squeaky green frog, plus warm, honest conversation, we all had a very fun time.
  • Having said all that, fun really doesn’t have to be a big deal. Fun at work isn’t necessarily complicated or expensive. Look for the tiny things – taking it in turns to join in with #FridayFunDay on Twitter. Breaking for communal tea-time. Small informal celebrations for everyone’s birthday. You name it – small can be very beautiful when it comes to fun.

So, despite the doom and gloom. Despite, or maybe, because of Boris, I shall carry on encouraging fun in the sector and celebrating all that’s playful and light-hearted. I may get some flak for it, but I truly believe that however tough our tasks, however difficult the issues we face, there is always time, and very good reason, to have fun.

Want to play?

At The Royal Star and Garter Homes, fun is highly valued inside its three Homes for veterans and their partners. Caley Eldred, Director of Supporter Engagement, loves that when she goes into one of the Homes she gets to express her fun side.

Fun makes us who we are. If you aren’t prepared to go into one of our Homes and jump about in a tropical shirt or do the conga then working here is probably not for you. It’s not just in the Homes, where fun is part of the service, that staff have fun.” – Caley Eldred

Encouraged by leadership with a strong understanding of how to nurture a happy, engaged team, there’s lots going on at head office too, both organised and spontaneous, from cake sales to sports days.

“We try to make a positive, fun environment. We do a job that’s centred on difficult things and challenging issues, but we do what we can to always make that pleasant.” – Caley Eldred

Dogs_RSGH.jpeg
Alfie and Barnie help out the Fundraising team at The Royal Star & Garter Homes

———————————————————————-

Katie-01-1-1038274325-1568063986447.jpegKatie Duckworth is a coach, trainer, speaker and writer helping leaders with purpose and their teams to change the world and have fun at the same time. She is the founder of informal networking and support group #LeadersWhoBrunch.

 You can connect with her on Twitter, by emailor visit her website.

Fostering a feedback-friendly culture could save your charity from extinction

by Susheila Juggapah

Hearing feedback is hard. It’s challenging to hear what other people think about our work, the way we operate or our ideas. But feedback fuels change. It super powers creativity and speeds up impact. Yes, it can be uncomfortable at times. But it keeps us accountable to the people we serve. 

The third sector already knows transparency is important, particularly for building donor confidence. Organisations can use transparency to improve trust with staff. They can also use it to create more inclusive organisations. But this only works with a commitment to openness.

It’s time for charity leaders to harness this superpower for all aspects of charity business. To do it successfully, charities should aim to create an open and transparent culture that embraces giving feedback, receiving feedback, and making it part of the organisation’s culture.

Listening is our only option

We now live in a world that simply won’t tolerate products that don’t suit our specific needs.

Tales of Blockbusters and Kodak are frequently used to remind us that even household names cannot rely on their legacy. They must deliver products customers want.

We’ve also have enough of inauthentic brands that don’t walk the walk because we can see right through them. This goes for charities too. The Charity Commission’s 2018 Trust in charities report says,

“The public want greater authenticity not just more transparency, they want to know that charities are what they say they are.”

And it’s not just your external audiences. Staff have had enough too. For example, on pay transparency, a YouGov poll found the majority of Brits (56%) would back pay transparency measures to tackle income inequality

There are also indications younger people expect to be able to see what’s going on inside organisations before joining. In a survey by PwC of millennials in the workplace, 76% of those in the financial services sector said they considered the employer’s record on equality and diversity when accepting their current role. 

Critically, people really want to know their opinion is valued. Former Baxter International CEO and now a clinical professor of leadership at Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management Harry Kraemer believes good leaders listen to the people around them. Leaders, he says, “establish trust because they demonstrate they really care about what each person has to say.” Without trust, the people around you will not give you honest feedback. 

The technology is there. It’s only a matter of time before users, supporters, staff and volunteers give up on established charities to set up their own campaigns, movements and networks. If charities don’t become more inclusive, they risk becoming redundant. 

How to do it: lessons from a bank 

Like a conversation, open cultures need someone to listen and ideally act on the feedback. One way to show you’re listening to be honest about what you’ve heard. 

The fastest growing companies are putting transparency at the heart of their business. Take the digital challenger bank Monzo which has seen phenomenal growth recently. In 2016, it set the record for quickest crowd-funding campaign in history when it raised £1m in 96 seconds on Crowdcube.

Monzo differs from traditional banks because it openly expresses the relationship it has with its users. It prides itself on transparency and community, aiming to meet the needs of the Monzo tribe in ways traditional banks have failed to do for so long. Referencing its community, Monzo, says: 

You hold us accountable and help us focus on what matters

Monzo has published a lot on its internal culture. The bank regularly publishes data on how representative and diverse it is internally, looking at things like gender identity, ethnicity, age, disability, caring responsibilities, education, religion, sexual orientation and more. It has also shown its progress over the years and laid out an action plan. 

The bank also uses lots of techniques to prioritise transparency. For example, meetings are open to everyone, even if you just want to listen. The organisation also has email transparency, which means by default, every email that is sent can be read by anyone in the company. They also give everyone access to documents and encourage everyone to question the decisions made in governance meetings with the board of directors and the executive committee. 

The result: Monzo isn’t just telling you it’s open and honest, it’s being open and honest. Its rapid growth is testament to the faith the community place in it. But ultimately, Monzo is a bank, not a campaign or movement. So if a bank can create a culture of openness and honesty, a charity certainly can. 

Tips for building feedback-friendly organisations

There are a lot of examples of how to make your organisation more open. Here are some easy reads:

The idea behind this, is that it prevents problems from staying hidden in one small part of the company, and makes sure everyone’s thinking about how to solve the problems we have.”

Embracing feedback could radically change your organisation. It could mean you recruit more diversely, get closer to your audience’s needs and build trust with all aspects of your organisation. Or you could wait for something like Monzo to swoop in and leave you obsolete. 

——————————————————-

Susheila Juggapah is a digital professional and former editor at CharityComms, the membership network for charity communicators. She writes about diversity and representation in the third sector. 

What does fundraising ethically even mean?

by Ruby Bayley-Pratt

The recent Game of Thrones petition to have a disappointing ending re-written by “competent writers” is a beautiful, if frivolous, example of how our relationship with the things we consume has changed. We feel we have not only a personal stake, but a right to challenge and question. And we have the means to do it…

I’ve been thinking a lot recently about how supporters would react if, as a sector, we were totally transparent about where our money comes from – particularly when it comes to major donors and corporate partnerships. Whilst there is some research and guidance out there, there doesn’t seem to be a consistent approach to ethics across fundraising and I fear this could cause problems down the road.

In a world where trust in charities continues to decline, ethical consumption is on the rise, and our fundraising thought leaders are stressing the need to move away from transactional fundraising products to values-led supporter engagement, I don’t think we can leave this out of our conversations about the future of fundraising.

The fact that our approach to ethical fundraising across the sector is inconsistent has been acknowledged time and time again. At best, we have a list of industries we won’t work with and a screening process to mitigate against any reputational risk. At worst, we have nothing in place at all and rely on the judgement and, often, politics of individual members of staff.

In my experience, I have found that there tend to be two camps of fundraisers when it comes to this issue: those that believe we shouldn’t take funds which could compromise our mission and our responsibility to wider societal good (assuming we have one) and those who believe that what matters most is that we do good for our beneficiaries* with that money regardless of where it comes from or how we get it (‘robbing the rich to feed the poor’).  There is, of course, nuance in all of this and pragmatically, I think charities should probably position themselves somewhere on a spectrum between the two. That said, if you were to ask me what I truly believe, I struggle to swallow the latter.

Firstly, I think taking money from an industry or individual which undermines your mission – whether that’s through the work they do or the behaviours they demonstrate – does as much, if not more, of a disservice to your beneficiaries in the long-term than taking the money in the first place. For example, at Bloody Good Period, large period product companies are desperate to partner with us and we could make a healthy sum accepting their offers. But these companies play a huge role in perpetuating the stigma and shame which contributes to menstrual inequity – the very social issue we are trying to solve – in the first place. By taking their money, we enable them to continue doing that and make them look good in the process. So, we don’t. And we’re doing alright.

Secondly, I would like to see us questioning how our decisions about how and where we source our funds from are linked to things like climate crisis, gender inequality, and racism. We are increasingly being asked and asking others not to separate themselves from these issues as individuals; should we not be asking the same of our organisations?

Finally, there’s the question of poverty porn – a subject which I could write a whole separate blog about. Time and time again I am told “yeah, but it works”. And I know that’s what the research tells us. But what it ‘works’ at is bringing in cash and the starting point for that is a focus on growth rather than what’s best for our beneficiaries. Much like my first point, my fundamental belief is that the long-term damage of using tactics like this far outweighs the short-term good we can achieve as organisations. Again, at Bloody Good we refuse to use images or stories from the people we work with in our communications or fundraising…

All of the above is my personal opinion. What I would love to know is how charity supporters feel. Do they care if we respond to natural disasters over here but take money from extractive industries over there? Or if we campaign for women’s rights but take money from a reported sexual harasser? I don’t know and I think we might be a little bit afraid to ask them…

 

*I have used the word beneficiaries throughout for ease of understanding but I’d like to categorically document that I hate it. At Bloody Good Period we refer to “the people we work with” instead.

@RubyBayleyPratt

So…they hired another white man.

by Mandy Johnson

This Thursday was one of those complicated days for me. In the morning I took part in a panel discussion at the “Women in Civil Society Leadership Conference”, hosted by Inclusive Boards. It was an inspiring morning full of speakers who had an interest in inclusion and diversity. I wanted to stay all day to soak up the wisdom of the people in the room. Sadly, I was not afforded that luxury.

EXPERT SPEAKER TO “MUMMY” IN ONE TRAIN RIDE

I snuck out of the conference early so that I could take my son to an appointment. I scoffed down a sandwich on the train and went from “Mandy Johnson” back to “Mummy”. Later that evening I received a message from a friend of mine,

So NCVO has announced its new CEO… Lots of gushing tweets but also some surprise behind the scenes and talk about missed opportunities.”

I turned straight to Twitter to see what they were talking about and there it was…

NCVO announcement

Karl Wilding has been appointed as the new CEO of NCVO. The sector’s largest infrastructure body has chosen another white man as its leader. I couldn’t ignore the irony; I had missed the announcement because I’d been tied up with “mummy duties” and a conference about increasing female leadership in the sector.

ANOTHER WHITE MAN

Over the last two days I’ve had more messages from more people questioning NCVO’s choice. One friend wrote the following to me,

“…with all due respect to Karl Wilding, it’s incredibly disappointing that the largest support body in the UK did not place diversity at the heart of the CEO search. While they have published their process in order to claim transparency, Karl was hired by white male institution in 1998 and was virtually groomed to take Stuart’s place. What an incredible waste of resources and opportunities. Am I nuts to think this??”

 Of course, I reassured her that I didn’t think she was nuts… yet there was something stopping me from outrightly agreeing with her.

THE BEST PERSON FOR THE JOB?

Part of my dilemma was that, from my limited experience of Karl, whilst he lacks some of the characteristics some of us are so desperate to see represented in his sort of job, I think he’ll make an excellent CEO in many ways. He’s a man who cares deeply about the sector, is an active volunteer for local charities and keeps himself very well-informed. He’s also a nice bloke, without any airs and graces. He does his best to champion diversity and inclusion and he’s got twenty years of experience in navigating the complex world of NCVO – and doing it well. What if he really is the best person for the job?

SHOULD WHITE MEN BE STEPPING ASIDE?

A question from the conference earlier that morning has been reverberating round my head. A woman of colour asked the white, female CEO of the Charity Commission whether we should be encouraging white men to step aside to leave space for a different type of leader to be given a chance. Stephenson (the CEO) responded by saying that she didn’t think this was necessary. She suggested that, now the conversation about equality, diversity and inclusion in the charity sector has started, change would happen naturally over time.

IS CHANGE COMING?

As we were hearing that change is coming, on the notepad in front of me, were some of the stats that showed little evidence to support this:

  • 92% of all charity trustees in the UK are white[i]
  • 91% of charity sector employees are white[ii]
  • 3% of people in senior leadership teams are BAME[iii]
  • 64% of charity trustees are male [i]
  • 25% of senior leadership teams are female [iv].

With Karl’s appointment failing to contribute a change to those statistics, we remain the worst sector in the country in terms of racial diversity.

SHOULD WHITE MEN BE STEPPING ASIDE?

The second interview panel (who recommended Karl’s appointment to the Board) was an all-white panel. The charity’s Board didn’t recognise what they would miss out on by not have a more diverse range of people making recommendations to them at this point. So, if Karl had stepped aside, would it have really made any difference to the statistics above?

The reality is we will never know. But the chances are that, if Karl hadn’t put himself forward, another white man probably would…and he may have been less qualified. Perhaps an organisation that has twenty-five years’ experience of employing a white, male CEOs may need just one more, with an understanding of diversity and inclusion, in order for it to drive the change required to become a truly diverse and inclusive organisation.

I hope that Karl will be that man – and I believe he might be. But in order to truly to deliver on this goal, perhaps he should be willing to move on when he’s delivered the changes that will make it possible for a different type of leader to take the reins?

[i] Charity Commission Taken on trust: awareness and effectiveness of charity trustees in England and Wales (2017)

[ii] NCVO Civil Society Almanac (2018)

[iii] Inclusive boards, Charities: Inclusive Governance (2018)

[iv] Inclusive boards, Charities: Inclusive Governance (2018)

Goals Gone Wild – Women Strategically Helping Women Succeed

You’re strategic about your fundraising. You’re committed to your cause. But are you deeply invested in your career advancement?

If you answered yes, we applaud your dedication. But if the answer to the last question is no, why not? What is holding you back?

For most women discussions around gender equality and pay equity in our sector are difficult ones to have. The Association of Fundraising Professionals Women’s Impact Initiative (WII) recently highlighted a 2017 study demonstrating that gender accounts for a 10% pay gap between male and female fundraisers.   The source of this gap? It’s long been thought it’s because women don’t ask, but a 2018 McKinsey & Company Women in the Workplace study is tracking a different reality: women negotiate for raises and promotions as often as men, but they do not always get the same outcomes.

The reason we started Goals Gone Wild was as provocative as the title. As the famous feminist writer Roxanne Gay once wrote, “If you and your friends are in the same field and you can collaborate or help each other, do this without shame. Men invented nepotism and practically live by it. It’s okay for women to do it too.”  So that’s exactly what we did.

The group started socially. We were four women who without close ties who came together to teach a fundraising course. What started out as regular meetings to discuss course instruction slowly evolved into an informal networking group. What we came to realize is that we were at varying stages of professional development and had ambitions to grow in our careers. We wondered if other women in our sector felt the same way we did, and if so, how were they planning the next stages of their career advancement? It became an opportunity to lift one-another up and to see more women leading organizations in the non-profit sector in our region.

The model is simple. You spend some time considering the questions of fit and what’s important personally before you set your next three career goals. One that you could achieve right now, one that is slightly out of reach right now and a final goal that would be where you see yourself in 5-10 years. With those three goals in mind, you set out to build a plan that would position you for those changes. You consider the current gaps in your education, experience and relationships to decide what opportunities you need to embrace to be successful. The three-stage process is done independently with check-ins with your group to raise new ideas and solutions.

The process itself is simple and the goal is to push it out beyond our current community by helping other small groups embrace the Goals Gone Wild approach to career planning. We’ve learned along the path that there is some magic that you work to create. If you’re ready to give it a try you need the following:

  • a small group of four (4) to six (6) like-minded women with distinct networks.
  • to create an atmosphere of trust and compassion.
  • to make a commitment to move through the process and support each other in a timely method.

We want this model – or any model – that moves women upward on the career ladder in fundraising and non-profit. It’s important that we see gender equality at the most senior levels of our profession, on our boards, as the speakers at our conferences and the lead consultants in our industry. It’s time.

As stated by feminist G.D. Anderson: “feminism isn’t about making women strong. Women are already strong. It’s about changing the way the world perceives that strength.”  Help lift each other up and give each other a voice.

Are you interested in learning more about the Goals Gone Wild model?  Reach out and we will help you set up a similar network in your community!

 

Authors and Goals Gone Wild Founders:

Liz LeClair

In January 2019, Liz LeClair wrote an op-ed for CBC News about the MeToo crisis in the non-profit sector.  Liz brings more than 15 years of experience to her role as the Senior Development Officer at Dalhousie University. She has had the privilege of working and living coast-to-coast in Canada.  She has worked with a variety of non-profits, helping to build strong fundraising programs and extensive experience in managing and leading teams, the development of strategic plans, and a genuine passion for raising funds for important causes in her community.

Twitter: @liz_hallett

 

Sarah Lyon

Sarah was hired on the spot for the fundraising department at the Alzheimer Society of Nova Scotia. Her previous fundraising experience being door to door cookie sales for Girl Guides. Since then she has studied the fundraising greats and earned a CFRE, became the ASNS Director of Philanthropy, spoken at the AFP Congress in Toronto and currently sits on the Association of Fundraising Professionals Canada Foundation for Philanthropy Board.

She is the founder of the Giving Tuesday Canada Civic Movement, Nova Scotia Gives More, just celebrated her ninth year at ASNS and, she continues to this day to sell Girl Guide cookies.

Twitter: @SAPL

 

Marni Tuttle

Marni Tuttle is invested in non-profit success. She believes philanthropy makes the impossible possible. Marni is a strategic fundraising professional skilled at partnering philanthropists and visionary ideas to make our world a better place. She has what a volunteer once described as 20-year ‘gold-plated’ fundraising resume with leadership roles in education, health care and environmental philanthropy.  She has built a career around progressive roles in annual giving, community engagement, major gift, campaign strategy, planned giving, prospect management and now focuses on helping charities grow. Marni is currently the Director of External Relations for the Nova Scotia SPCA.

Twitter: @marnituttle

 

Lisa Weatherhead

Lisa is the Regional Executive Director for the Atlantic Region of Cystic Fibrosis Canada. Based in Dartmouth, she and her team work with eight remarkable volunteer chapters and partners across the Region. Her career has led her from corporate sales and sales training to a career in the charitable sector, including roles at Xerox and Dalhousie University Faculties of Dentistry and Health Professions external relations team. She is also one of three Dale Carnegie Business Coaches in Nova Scotia. Lisa graduated from Saint Mary’s University with a Bachelor of Commerce. In addition to board roles with Big Brothers Big Sisters and AFP NS, she has been an active volunteer for many years working with various events and organizations in the Halifax area including Big Brothers Big Sisters and Halifax Relay for Life as well as a facilitator for the Fundamentals of Fundraising.

Twitter: @officiallisaw

An anonymous letter from a charity CEO to the Board…

Foreword written by Mandy Johnson

I was recently contacted by the CEO of a small charity. Like so many other small charities, her organisation has been struggling financially – they have not been awarded grants they were expecting and contracts have been cut over time. To address these issues, she requested an extraordinary board meeting.

After the meeting she felt even more concerned than when she went into it. Her Board had interrogated her, rather than helped her find solutions. She stopped feeling part of a team and started feeling like a naughty school girl who needed to be reprimanded. I have heard similar stories so many times from other small charity CEOs.

This week, the same woman was kind enough to share the follow up letter that she wrote to her Board. I have changed a few of the details in order to anonymise the charity (and the CEO) but the bulk of the original letter is included below.

Her words articulate so well things that I know many of us have experienced at a Board meeting. I hope you find the letter therapeutic in the way that I did – it made me feel that I was not alone. It also left me with questions – Why does this happen? How can we change this? I’d love to hear other people’s thoughts…

“Dear Trustees

 First, I want to say thank you. I approached all of you individually and asked you to join the board of this organisation, and without hesitation, you all agreed and that for me was very humbling. You all joined because you strongly believe in the work we are trying to do. It doesn’t matter whether it affects you directly or indirectly; you connect with the people we serve and you gave your time and expertise to want to make a change. For that I will forever be indebted to everyone single person on the board, past and present.

 The journey of this charity has not been easy. It has been a struggle from day one and, with the support from the board, we have been able to weather the storm. We heard things, we have been called out on many things, some justifiable and others out of sheer pettiness, but we stayed focused on why we are here. As an organisation, we have operated on very small budget but have achieved things beyond our wildest dreams. We have capitalised on the passion of both the board and staff to drive a dream that sometimes is even scary for us, but we have also come out strong and determined.

 This is why the event of this week shocked me. I came to the board meeting last week expecting us to find a solution to the financial challenge that we have. I call it a “challenge” because I see it as just another hurdle that we need to find a way of jumping over.

 At last week’s Board meeting, what I needed was support, what I got was reproach.

 There was no acknowledgement of the work the staff and I have put into the charity. There were no words of encouragement whatsoever about where the organisation is currently. There was no concrete plan from the board on how to solve the challenges that we are faced with.

What I heard were people trying to save themselves as fast as possible.

 I have no objection to this, as I think it is important, but I felt I was being thrown under the bus.

 For two weeks, my mental health has taken a deep toll. Leading up to this meeting, I was having severe panic attacks. But I kept working. I kept the staff working.

 To be so unappreciated, was a big slap in the face. I have sacrificed good jobs for this organisation, because I don’t want what happened to me to happen to someone else. I always have the interest of this charity at heart. I strongly believe in the principles upon which it was founded. I will always be passionate about this issue.

Yesterday I sent an email to you all from an expert. I was expecting a response from the board but not a single person replied.

As the CEO of this charity, I face lot of struggles every day. I wish that, once in a while, someone from the board would touch base to ask how we are doing and coping. This rarely happens – some of you have never done it.

This email is not sent to lay blame, far from it. I will never do that. I know none of you have to serve on this board; you do it because you care. The intention of this email is to say that last week’s board meeting should not have gone the way it did. It has achieved very little and put all of us under stress. We are left with a challenge and no solutions. I just feel it should have been better.

I have learnt a lot from this experience and from working with the organisation. I now think it would be better for someone else to take charge. Someone who can do the work even better than I am doing but without the deep, emotional connection that I have.

I will be writing to the board officially to tender my resignation letter.

Once again, thank you for your support, your love, your service and your passion.

 Yours sincerely

A small charity CEO