Kindle Edition Amazon Not For Profit Board Dilemmas Amazon Category:  Business/Investing Publisher: Great Governance ISBN-10:  1502862387 Type: Non-Fiction Pages: 196 Copyright: November 2015 ISBN-13: 978150262389 Price: $9.99 (eBook) Case Studies for Directors in the Non-Profit Sector based on real life events and with practical solutions.  A book of practical case studies to help directors on not-for-profit boards to build skills and judgement.    Why do people join the boards of not-for-profit organisations? Enthusiastic, altruistic and generous people give their time and effort to make a success of organisations in the arts, sports, health, education, religious and other sectors. The work is unremunerated, yet rewarding; tiring yet energising; risky yet necessary.     The reasons for supporting any particular cause are many. So are the events that can, will and do happen inside the boardroom. Events that can see directors jailed, fined, and publicly vilified or praised, respected, and promoted. Good judgment can make the difference.    Nobody knows what to expect in the boardroom. Stuff happens. Directors need to react to the circumstances. They need to be aware of the people, the environment and the legal requirements of their role. They need to build success. These organisations are too important to fail. Directors need to guide them towards sustainable success by making the right decisions, in time, every time.    Working through the case studies in this book will help directors to make better decisions.    Based on real life events in modern not-for-profit organisations these case studies will help directors to identify the key legal and practical issues and craft a winning strategy for their organisation. They are fun to read but seriously educational. Written by an international expert and with contributions from forty board practitioners this book offers practical insights and clear examples to follow.       Excerpt Wanda is a director of a small charitable organisation. Last year the board approved an ambitious fundraising drive to raise several million dollars for a special project. The organisation had a list of frequent donors to campaigns but decided, as this was a large campaign, to enlist professional help. A professional firm was contracted to raise the money on a combination of a fixed fee and costs plus a percentage of the funds raised. The percentage appeared reasonable and the fixed fee was small in comparison to the target. The campaign was a disaster. The telemarketers had accents that donors could not easily understand. Donors were wary of foreigners calling regarding a local charity. Most refused to pledge anything and only one donor, who is a real friend to the organisation, gave a large amount. The contractor also bought lists of prospective new donors. These lists were out of date and, again, when contact was made very few of the targets contributed. At the end of the campaign the costs almost equalled the money raised and the organisation received only 9 cents of each dollar donated. The total retained was less than the largest single donation. The organisation discloses fundraising in its annual report and the board members are concerned because the large donor will see that the funds raised are less than the amount he personally donated. They will also have to delay the project and know stakeholders will be disappointed as this had been planned and discussed with them. What should Wanda do? Key Points: • Stakeholders must always be informed that projects are contingent upon funding. • Disclosure should remain at the same high level regardless of whether it is good or bad news that is being communicated. • Additional disclosure to major donors may be appropriate under certain circumstances. • All companies fail at some time in some areas; stakeholders will understand this if it does not happen repeatedly. • The board should have a strategic plan with clearly defined points at which strategies will be reassessed and contingency plans implemented. • The board must take responsibility for performance and review (and improve) its own role. Advice for Wanda: Jack's Answer What Wanda should have done 'at the beginning' is both obvious and irrelevant because she finds herself facing the aftermath. I would recommend that in her current situation, she does the following: • Sack the external consultant and assess their performance against the "promise" that they made in their submission and for which they were employed. If they used methods that did not align with their promise, then there may be grounds to recover some of the costs and diminish some of the organisation's 'loss' • If the decision to recommend this consultant was the responsibility of a staff member, then review their experience, performance and capability to coordinate and manage fundraising activities • Review the way the board reviewed and authorised the fundraising strategy and appointed the consultant • Bring onto the board a director with strong fundraising (and public relations) experience • Hire an external independent fundraising consultant to build an on-going fundraising strategy • Have the Chairman of the board call a one-on-one meeting with the sole contributing donor to explain what happened, what the board has done about it, and how fundraising and the project's objective will be satisfied in the future • Be honest in the annual report, and as was done with the donor, 'put it all on the table', admit error, and move on. There is no doubt that the organisation's reputation will be damaged, but it will be harmed more if it tries a 'cover up' - the truth comes out eventually. Dr Jack Jacoby is a Director of Preiss Levy Jacoby and Associates, based in Melbourne, Australia. Julie's Answer A board is responsible for strategy and ensuring the organisation fulfils its mission. Wanda's board should immediately review their cash flow projections and ensure they remain solvent. They may need to cut activities and/or reset priorities. The next issue is a strategy review. What can still be achieved without the special large project? How important was that project to the mission? They must provide management with an achievable plan for the next few months until a new strategic plan is ready. The board needs to look at their communication plan. Someone should visit the large donor and deliver news of the fundraising failure in person. The CEO or Chairman is best for this job unless another member of the board or staff has a better relationship. This is an unpleasant conversation but it is better to have it now than after the donor reads of the disaster in the annual report. Then the board should consider how they will alert stakeholders of the change in plans. Has the project been abandoned or just postponed until funds can be raised? How will they meet stakeholders' needs? Whilst admitting to the failure it is important to show leadership and have an achievable plan of action. The board should delegate someone to meet the fundraiser and if possible negotiate a reduced fee. After this, the board should look at their purchasing or procurement process and fix the weaknesses that made this course of events possible. At no point should the board consider moving away from their current excellent disclosure policy; to do that would lose stakeholders' trust. Finally the board should reflect on their role in this problem and its solution. What have they done well? What did they do wrong? What have they learned, as a group and as individuals, to help them avoid similar problems in future? Do they need to review board composition? Julie Garland McLellan is a specialist board consultant and practising non-executive director based in Sydney, Australia. Stephen's Answer This is a grave situation for any charity to be placed in, a situation that should not have occurred in the first place. Unfortunately, many small and some larger charities do not have the appropriate expertise on their Boards, nor do their Directors have sufficient time to devote to the charity...which raises another question, as to why they are there in the first place. I suspect to add another line to their CV... perhaps that is a little unkind, as they do give an ego hour a month to their cause. It is clear and obvious in this situation that due diligence has not occurred, confirming the lack of appropriate expertise on the Board. One must question the fundraising consultants that conducted the appeal; firstly, in my opinion it is unethical for a firm to take a percentage of the funds raised and secondly telemarketing is no longer a relevant or popular development strategy and will blemish the reputation of a charity considerably. My advice in this instance is for the charity to be totally transparent, act with integrity and advise all donors of the unfortunate occurrence and personally discuss the situation with the major donor. Lack of post-event communication will be disastrous; be transparent, be committed, be passionate about the cause and rectify the charity's current inadequate situation. Stephen Penberthy is an expert in community relations and public affairs, he works as a specialist consultant based in Brisbane, Australia.

John Brogden - CEO Australian Institute of Company Directors
All Directors are leaders, whether in the private, public or not-for-profit space. All organisations look to their boards for direction, mentoring, support and advice - adding tremendous value to the professionalism of organisations. NFP directors are in a unique position. They are advocates of their cause and many also contribute to their organisations on a volunteer basis outside their role as a board member. What is vital though, is that these directors understand their legal obligations as custodians of their organisation. I congratulate Julie Garland McLellan on successfully highlighting the importance for directors, specifically NFP directors, to practice good governance across all aspects of their organisation in her series of relatable and honest case studies.

Winston Marsh, National President, National Speakers Association of Australia
This is the book that those of us who serve or have served on NFP Boards have been looking for! It’s easy to read, makes what could be a dull and boring topic alive and interesting and will help directors who want to be competent supporters of their cause but not necessarily experts in governance.

Larry Taylor, PhD. - Chairman, The Creighton Group, Inc.
The Director’s Dilemma case studies are excellent brain teasers for board directors. Like crossword puzzles, Sudoku or any other thought-provoking exercise, these short case studies challenge the readers to explore alternative solutions for directors facing difficult circumstances. Regardless of individual analysis or group analysis of the case, the readers gain significant analytical benefits. Julie used several dilemma case studies to engage an entire audience of corporate directors at a recent forum hosted by the National Association of Corporate Directors in Las Vegas, Nevada USA. It provided an outstanding learning environment. As subscribers, we look forward to reading and analyzing each monthly edition of the Director’s Dilemma case study.