Sheherazade and I were in the middle of the first meeting with a potential client recently, discussing an innovative idea that he wanted us to assess. We asked if he had a strategic plan for the organization as a whole to provide context for this project, and he said, “Oh yes, I’m one of those people who need a roadmap.” Two thoughts collided at the same time. First, we wouldn’t have described him as someone who needs a detailed roadmap, he’s a pretty dynamic and accomplished guy; and second (as new GPS converts) we wondered if the notion of GPS wasn’t a better metaphor for planning than roadmap – more fluid, adaptive and end-focused. We three had a little fun with that for a while, but later Sheherazade and I gave it a more thought because we are always looking for new ways think and talk about strategy.
So what would be different if we thought ‘GPS’ rather than ‘roadmap’? Well, the most obvious difference is that with a roadmap the journey is integrated with the arrival: it’s generally plotted out in advance, leaving not much room for chance: the assumption being that success requires compliance. With GPS you have to know where you want to end up, but the route itself can vary depending on traffic, detours or whether you decide to take a little side trip on your way. Or, of course, miss your turn because you are busy looking at the view, sipping on your low fat, half-caf latte (does the voice that says ‘recalculating’ for the third time sound a bit slower and louder each time, or is that just me?). The point is that you can look around, maybe even follow the sign to an unexpected museum, farmer’s market or scenic view where you can peer into the distance with a telescope for just a quarter. And then still have a route that will get you to where you are going, wiser and fresher.
So it is with good planning.
Continue reading ‘Roadmap vs. GPS: Thoughts on planning’
I am excited to report that Sheherazade received the North York Women’s Shelter 25th Anniversary Hope Award at its annual Mother’s Day Hope Gala. The Hope Award recognizes extraordinary women who have led the way in inspiring others to take action. Sheherazade was presented with the award for her outstanding commitment to advancing the cause of women and girls, a cause that runs deep in her family as this excerpt from her acceptance will attest: “My grandmothers were pioneers who, in their 20’s, left India in the early 1900’s to follow their entrepreneurial husbands who had settled in Africa. They broke every known assumption or stereotype I have ever heard about the role of Muslim women. They adapted to their new environment with energy, fought snakes and lions, helped to establish new settlements, lived their lives out loud, and advocated vigorously for their daughters and for those less fortunate in their communities so their families could have a better quality of life in their new homes. They understood the very fundamental truth of the interdependence of individual, families and communities.”
Anyone who knows Sheherazade knows she lives the truth of this interdependence. As Executive Director of the Royal LePage Shelter Foundation she helped transform the company’s charitable impulse into a national community investment strategy in support of shelters serving women and children fleeing violence. As well, Sheherazade is a long-time volunteer and board member of the Canadian Women’s Foundation, supporting their work to end violence against women, move low-income women out of poverty and empower girls with confidence. She is also a member of the National Committee of the Aga Khan Foundation Canada that seeks to address the root causes of poverty through gender equity.
Congratulations, Sheherazade.
We’ve been through some exciting times with evaluation in philanthropy over the past decade. A multitude of factors converged to both propel the imperative to evaluate and at the same time, to open up the space to look at evaluation in a different light. How thrilling it was (yes, there is thrill in evaluation!) when the limits of traditional evaluation thinking and methods to inform philanthropic efforts gave way to new definitions. Evaluation evolved to include the ability to generate learning and build capacity to improve, rather than just prove what was working and what was not. It invigorated evaluation with a whole new approach in enabling a balance of science and art in asking a broad constituency for input, understanding results, and interpreting them in an appropriate context.
Fast forward to now, and we see some dramatic changes in how we think about evaluation. We know that without strategic and effective organizations (whether the funder or an applicant/grant recipient), good intentions and programmatic efforts yield limited results. The work of Grantmakers for Effective Organizations and Centre for Effective Philanthropy focus on the organizational effectiveness of funders. Their efforts have helped funders strengthen their governance, their responsiveness, programs, and operations.
So given the dramatic growth of evaluation in philanthropy, what have we learned to help improve our knowledge and practice? Here are a few things we have learned:
Continue reading ‘Evaluation – three lessons about the things that really count’
News last week that two ‘lions’ in our field – Patrick Johnston of The Walter and Duncan Gordon Foundation and Charles Pascal from Atkinson Foundation – are stepping down from their posts gave Sheherazade and me pause for thought.
First, of course, is what wonderful contributors both have been to our sector. Patrick’s national leadership is well known and pervasive, and his experience strengthened Gordon Foundation’s role in water sovereignty among other important issues Gordon addresses. Sheherazade and I are fortunate to have the Foundation as a client, so we know first-hand the reach and impact their work has had on behalf of all of us. We know that Patrick will bring the same thoughtful perspective to his next challenge of examining the role of CIDA.
What can be said about Charles? His work at Atkinson has been both broad and deep, and a whole generation of children in Canada will benefit from it. We agree with him that his next steps are bound to be interesting, and we expect to hear the drumbeats alerting us to wherever he goes.
Charles’ comment that he is ‘leaving the space for someone else’ is provocative. We all know that leadership turnover is important and healthy for individual organizations (as well as for individuals, for that matter) and for the sector as a whole, but it raises serious issues for organizations.
Continue reading ‘Leadership change and risk management’
