Category Archives: Derek Link

Assessing Results: Are You a Quant or a Qualit?

In this post, Non-profit Consulant Derek Link offers his thoughts on balanced assessment and evaluation:

In the world of social entrepreneurship the use of metrics for assessment of results has sparked an ongoing debate. The lines have been drawn between mathematically inclined folks who like to measure things using quantitative data (called Quants) and those who want to describe the social impact of programs using primarily qualitative data (called Qualits).

I would refer to myself as a hybrid, a Quali-quant. For me, the argument about which type of data is better is meaningless unless the right questions are being asked. Once you know what you want to know; in other words, once you know what will best demonstrate that your mission is accomplished, the kind of data needed to measure that reveals itself.

And the type of data is usually not one to the exclusion of the other. Typically a result is explained best by viewing it through data binoculars, not through a data telescope. I use the example of a child who comes to school on test day. The Quant will want to examine the child’s test score to see whether he has achieved to an expected level, whether he has raised his achievement from previous test administrations, how he compares to his peers, and how his test scores aggregated reflect on the teacher’s ability and the school’s curriculum and instructional program.

The Qualits, on the other hand, will want to modify the interpretation of the test score with qualitative information. Perhaps the child arrives hungry because the family was late getting up and she never had breakfast. Perhaps the child is sick or was up all night due to family violence. These qualitative factors impact the ability of the child to score well but are difficult or impossible to quantify.

In the end, I believe it is a disservice to the process/program/organization to have an imbalanced approach to assessment of results. Start off by asking the right questions.

—————-

For more resources to help you with the evaluation of your programs, read some of the articles on our FREE Evaluation Resources page or view some of our free  recorded webinars on program evaluation. For an even higher level of support, become a member of GrantGoddess.com.

Published by Creative Resources & Research http://grantgoddess.com

Assessing Results: Are You a Quant or a Qualit?

In this post, Non-profit Consulant Derek Link offers his thoughts on balanced assessment and evaluation:

In the world of social entrepreneurship the use of metrics for assessment of results has sparked an ongoing debate. The lines have been drawn between mathematically inclined folks who like to measure things using quantitative data (called Quants) and those who want to describe the social impact of programs using primarily qualitative data (called Qualits).

I would refer to myself as a hybrid, a Quali-quant. For me, the argument about which type of data is better is meaningless unless the right questions are being asked. Once you know what you want to know; in other words, once you know what will best demonstrate that your mission is accomplished, the kind of data needed to measure that reveals itself.

And the type of data is usually not one to the exclusion of the other. Typically a result is explained best by viewing it through data binoculars, not through a data telescope. I use the example of a child who comes to school on test day. The Quant will want to examine the child’s test score to see whether he has achieved to an expected level, whether he has raised his achievement from previous test administrations, how he compares to his peers, and how his test scores aggregated reflect on the teacher’s ability and the school’s curriculum and instructional program.

The Qualits, on the other hand, will want to modify the interpretation of the test score with qualitative information. Perhaps the child arrives hungry because the family was late getting up and she never had breakfast. Perhaps the child is sick or was up all night due to family violence. These qualitative factors impact the ability of the child to score well but are difficult or impossible to quantify.

In the end, I believe it is a disservice to the process/program/organization to have an imbalanced approach to assessment of results. Start off by asking the right questions.

—————-

For more resources to help you with the evaluation of your programs, read some of the articles on our FREE Evaluation Resources page or view some of our free  recorded webinars on program evaluation. For an even higher level of support, become a member of GrantGoddess.com.

How is Your Organization’s Operational Equilibrium?

This is the third and final post in a series of three posts on Organizational Equilibrium, written by Non-Profit Consultant, Derek Link. Parts 1 and 2 were posted on February 16 & 18, 2010.

Operations that are out of balance can compromise the accomplishment of the mission through waste and duplication of effort. In this post, the various activities an organization undertakes to carry out its mission are what I am defining as operations. Key factors that can lead to operational imbalances are 1) lack of adequate internal planning, 2) lack of collaboration, 3) inadequate feedback loops.

Strategic planning to accomplish a mission includes identification of critical success factors. Factors commonly include things like raising enough money, employing the right people, or recruiting the right Board members. In order to make sure that the organization has the capacity internally to accomplish its mission, all critical success factors must be identified then activities and feedback loops must be put into place to make sure each one is attended to. Missing a critical success factor can compromise the mission. For example, in planning to cook and distribute hot meals to seniors, nobody was assigned to gas up the van and by the time the gas card was located, the van taken to the gas station, and the food delivered, it all got cold or it spoiled.

An organization that operates in isolation may duplicate effort and thereby waste resources. Using the senior meal example again, what if an organization decided to deliver Thanksgiving meals to seniors this year but didn’t ask any other organizations in the area if they were going to do the same? Suddenly a senior may receive more than one hot meal on the same day while other seniors may have gone without. Collaborative planning can keep such operational imbalances from happening.

Disequilibrium in operations occurs when planning is inadequate and this can compromise the mission. A key mistake that causes operational disequilibrium is lack of feedback loops. Feeding seniors is a good thing but if food is delivered they don’t want, can’t eat, or which requires preparation they can’t accomplish, then food is wasted. But if nobody asks the seniors what they need, want, and can handle, then the mission is compromised by lack of feedback and an operational imbalance is created. In this case, the actual need isn’t being met because feedback from the recipients of services isn’t being collected and used to refine operations.

In order to have a balanced operation, the organization’s activities must be effectively executed, effectively coordinated, and accurately targeted. Organizations must engage in detailed planning that attends to every critical success factor. Organizations must collaborate with other organizations that have similar missions in order to make sure they are being efficient and avoiding duplication of effort. Finally, operations must be designed to meet the real need, not the perceived need. By attending to these three factors, organizations can successfully accomplish their mission.

Published by Creative Resources & Research http://grantgoddess.com

How is Your Organization’s Operational Equilibrium?

This is the third and final post in a series of three posts on Organizational Equilibrium, written by Non-Profit Consultant, Derek Link. Parts 1 and 2 were posted on February 16 & 18, 2010.

Operations that are out of balance can compromise the accomplishment of the mission through waste and duplication of effort. In this post, the various activities an organization undertakes to carry out its mission are what I am defining as operations. Key factors that can lead to operational imbalances are 1) lack of adequate internal planning, 2) lack of collaboration, 3) inadequate feedback loops.

Strategic planning to accomplish a mission includes identification of critical success factors. Factors commonly include things like raising enough money, employing the right people, or recruiting the right Board members. In order to make sure that the organization has the capacity internally to accomplish its mission, all critical success factors must be identified then activities and feedback loops must be put into place to make sure each one is attended to. Missing a critical success factor can compromise the mission. For example, in planning to cook and distribute hot meals to seniors, nobody was assigned to gas up the van and by the time the gas card was located, the van taken to the gas station, and the food delivered, it all got cold or it spoiled.

An organization that operates in isolation may duplicate effort and thereby waste resources. Using the senior meal example again, what if an organization decided to deliver Thanksgiving meals to seniors this year but didn’t ask any other organizations in the area if they were going to do the same? Suddenly a senior may receive more than one hot meal on the same day while other seniors may have gone without. Collaborative planning can keep such operational imbalances from happening.

Disequilibrium in operations occurs when planning is inadequate and this can compromise the mission. A key mistake that causes operational disequilibrium is lack of feedback loops. Feeding seniors is a good thing but if food is delivered they don’t want, can’t eat, or which requires preparation they can’t accomplish, then food is wasted. But if nobody asks the seniors what they need, want, and can handle, then the mission is compromised by lack of feedback and an operational imbalance is created. In this case, the actual need isn’t being met because feedback from the recipients of services isn’t being collected and used to refine operations.

In order to have a balanced operation, the organization’s activities must be effectively executed, effectively coordinated, and accurately targeted. Organizations must engage in detailed planning that attends to every critical success factor. Organizations must collaborate with other organizations that have similar missions in order to make sure they are being efficient and avoiding duplication of effort. Finally, operations must be designed to meet the real need, not the perceived need. By attending to these three factors, organizations can successfully accomplish their mission.

How is Your Organization’s Governance Equilibrium?

This is the second in a three-part series on Organizational Equilibrium, written by Non-Profit Consultant, Derek Link. Part 1 (How is Your Organization’s Fiscal Equilibrium?) was posted on February 16, 2010.

Governance as defined on http://dictionary.com is, “a method or system of government or management.” Non-profit organizations are governed by a Board of Directors who by design set policy, monitor accountability, assist with fund raising, and give direction to the Executive Director. Good governance is a team effort but bad things can happen when the governance of an organization is out of balance; that is, if there are imbalances in power, control, or understanding.

I worked in an organization once which had a publicly elected Board. This creates an interesting conundrum for the executive of the organization because they must be astute politically in order to survive changes in the Board. One particular Board member who was elected was an extremely difficult person to work with. She was smart and gifted verbally so she was able to deter all of the other Board members from standing up to her. She was also mean and enjoyed being in a position of power. She would go on the attack in Board meetings and even on an individual basis with executives of the organization. She eventually lost her seat but not before she had wreaked havoc on the leadership of the organization to the extent that several senior executives left the organization rather than suffer her unpredictable decision-making and verbal abuse.

My point in this is to say that non-profit Boards get to select their members according to the dictates of their bylaws. This puts non-profit organizations in a unique position to select Board members that can bring necessary skills, talents, and connections to the organization. This feature of non-profit organizations is a strength and can lead to excellent governance that is balanced, agile, and intelligent.

The opposite can also be true. If a Board becomes a closed society unto itself and refuses to include members outside a circle of friends, colleagues, or even a circle of thought, governance can stagnate and the same mistakes may be made over and again. Opportunities for change, growth, or reform may be lost.

Another issue with governance can be a Board that depends too much on its Executive Director and cedes responsibility for its role – a Board that becomes the proverbial “rubber stamp”.

I’ve seen “rubber stamps” in publicly elected Boards and with non-profit Boards. Non-profit organizations are frequently established by one or two people who plan to run the operation and then recruit a Board mostly because they must have one, not because they seek to build strong governance. So the founders may seek people who aren’t going to rock the boat.

Governance that relies on a strong leader can function well over time if the Executive Director is a skilled, moral and values-driven individual and, if they don’t leave. Of course as time passes everyone will move on for one reason or another so if governance of an organization has depended on one person, it can leave the organization in disarray.

I’ve found over the years in organizations reliant on one person for governance that there tends to be a pervasive fear in the organization about the person’s health, age, ability to take better offers, and so on.

Keeping the long view in mind is important so try not to depend too much on one individual for governance leadership. Stable governance of an organization is produced by equilibrium of a strong Board and strong leadership.Non-profit organizations are in the enviable position to recruit Board members that create this equilibrium.

—————-

Part 3 in this series (How is Your Organization’s Operational Equilibrium?) will be posted on February 20, 2010.

Published by Creative Resources & Research http://grantgoddess.com

How is Your Organization’s Governance Equilibrium?

This is the second in a three-part series on Organizational Equilibrium, written by Non-Profit Consultant, Derek Link. Part 1 (How is Your Organization’s Fiscal Equilibrium?) was posted on February 16, 2010.

Governance as defined on http://dictionary.com is, “a method or system of government or management.” Non-profit organizations are governed by a Board of Directors who by design set policy, monitor accountability, assist with fund raising, and give direction to the Executive Director. Good governance is a team effort but bad things can happen when the governance of an organization is out of balance; that is, if there are imbalances in power, control, or understanding.

I worked in an organization once which had a publicly elected Board. This creates an interesting conundrum for the executive of the organization because they must be astute politically in order to survive changes in the Board. One particular Board member who was elected was an extremely difficult person to work with. She was smart and gifted verbally so she was able to deter all of the other Board members from standing up to her. She was also mean and enjoyed being in a position of power. She would go on the attack in Board meetings and even on an individual basis with executives of the organization. She eventually lost her seat but not before she had wreaked havoc on the leadership of the organization to the extent that several senior executives left the organization rather than suffer her unpredictable decision-making and verbal abuse.

My point in this is to say that non-profit Boards get to select their members according to the dictates of their bylaws. This puts non-profit organizations in a unique position to select Board members that can bring necessary skills, talents, and connections to the organization. This feature of non-profit organizations is a strength and can lead to excellent governance that is balanced, agile, and intelligent.

The opposite can also be true. If a Board becomes a closed society unto itself and refuses to include members outside a circle of friends, colleagues, or even a circle of thought, governance can stagnate and the same mistakes may be made over and again. Opportunities for change, growth, or reform may be lost.

Another issue with governance can be a Board that depends too much on its Executive Director and cedes responsibility for its role – a Board that becomes the proverbial “rubber stamp”.

I’ve seen “rubber stamps” in publicly elected Boards and with non-profit Boards. Non-profit organizations are frequently established by one or two people who plan to run the operation and then recruit a Board mostly because they must have one, not because they seek to build strong governance. So the founders may seek people who aren’t going to rock the boat.

Governance that relies on a strong leader can function well over time if the Executive Director is a skilled, moral and values-driven individual and, if they don’t leave. Of course as time passes everyone will move on for one reason or another so if governance of an organization has depended on one person, it can leave the organization in disarray.

I’ve found over the years in organizations reliant on one person for governance that there tends to be a pervasive fear in the organization about the person’s health, age, ability to take better offers, and so on.

Keeping the long view in mind is important so try not to depend too much on one individual for governance leadership. Stable governance of an organization is produced by equilibrium of a strong Board and strong leadership.Non-profit organizations are in the enviable position to recruit Board members that create this equilibrium.

—————-

Part 3 in this series (How is Your Organization’s Operational Equilibrium?) will be posted on February 20, 2010.

How is Your Organization’s Fiscal Equilibrium?

This is the first post in a series of three on Organizational Equilibrium, written by Non-Profit Consultant Derek Link.

In the present economy, many non-profit organizations would probably say their fiscal equilibrium is a bit off center. Some might even say they’re wobbling like a top spinning slowly down and dangerously out of balance.

If ever there was a time for your fiscal feedback loops to be utilized and re-evaluated, this is probably it. If your fiscal stool had only one leg, you’re probably already on the floor or headed that direction. Sources of funding have dried up rapidly as discretionary income of individuals and organizations has slowed to a trickle.

A wise fiscal plan for a non-profit does not count on one source of income. It’s wise to cultivate multiple sources including grants, donors, planned giving, annual campaigns, special events, merchandising, etc. Weaving together a sustainable intelligent fund raising design creates equilibrium, and paying attention to feedback loops – like timely statistics on income from all sources – can give you valuable information to ensure that efforts to raise money are targeted toward all possible sources.

Diversification of fund raising is crucial at times when donors are struggling (as they are now), and government is giving away lots of grants (as they are now). It’s wise to have strategies for both donor appeals and grant writing. Paying attention to feedback and planning ahead can give your organization something to grab onto when traditional fund raising methods are slow or closed completely.

Another key to financial stability is to have an audit conducted each year by an accountant who knows the non-profit world and can offer sound advice and feedback. This feedback loop not only provides an external review of your fiscal practices, it also adds an important level of accountability.

So in order to stabilize your fiscal equilibrium pay attention to feedback you’re getting right now. There may be changes and adaptations your organization needs to make in order to maximize your organization’s income during this turbulent economic time. By paying attention to your fiscal feedback loops, your organization can survive and thrive while less agile organizations fold up their tent and move along.

——–

Parts 2 (How is Your Organization’s Governance Equilibrium?) and 3 (How is Your Organization’s Operational Equilibrium?) of this series will be posted on February 18th and 20th.

Published by Creative Resources & Research http://grantgoddess.com

How is Your Organization’s Fiscal Equilibrium?

This is the first post in a series of three on Organizational Equilibrium, written by Non-Profit Consultant Derek Link.

In the present economy, many non-profit organizations would probably say their fiscal equilibrium is a bit off center. Some might even say they’re wobbling like a top spinning slowly down and dangerously out of balance.

If ever there was a time for your fiscal feedback loops to be utilized and re-evaluated, this is probably it. If your fiscal stool had only one leg, you’re probably already on the floor or headed that direction. Sources of funding have dried up rapidly as discretionary income of individuals and organizations has slowed to a trickle.

A wise fiscal plan for a non-profit does not count on one source of income. It’s wise to cultivate multiple sources including grants, donors, planned giving, annual campaigns, special events, merchandising, etc. Weaving together a sustainable intelligent fund raising design creates equilibrium, and paying attention to feedback loops – like timely statistics on income from all sources – can give you valuable information to ensure that efforts to raise money are targeted toward all possible sources.

Diversification of fund raising is crucial at times when donors are struggling (as they are now), and government is giving away lots of grants (as they are now). It’s wise to have strategies for both donor appeals and grant writing. Paying attention to feedback and planning ahead can give your organization something to grab onto when traditional fund raising methods are slow or closed completely.

Another key to financial stability is to have an audit conducted each year by an accountant who knows the non-profit world and can offer sound advice and feedback. This feedback loop not only provides an external review of your fiscal practices, it also adds an important level of accountability.

So in order to stabilize your fiscal equilibrium pay attention to feedback you’re getting right now. There may be changes and adaptations your organization needs to make in order to maximize your organization’s income during this turbulent economic time. By paying attention to your fiscal feedback loops, your organization can survive and thrive while less agile organizations fold up their tent and move along.

——–

Parts 2 (How is Your Organization’s Governance Equilibrium?) and 3 (How is Your Organization’s Operational Equilibrium?) of this series will be posted on February 18th and 20th.

Organizational Entropy Part III: The Motion of the Mission

This is the third and final installment of a series by Non-profit Consultant,. Derek Link, on energy, mission, and organizational entropy. Part 1 and 2 were published on February 5 and 8, 2010.

Entropy threatens to bring the motion of the mission to a grinding halt. What are you talking about? Well, entropy is energy that is wasted in doing work. In a previous post, I compared it to the loss of energy that a pendulum experiences in the friction of the pivot point that over time will cause the pendulum to stop swinging and come to rest.

Is the motion of your mission about to be stopped by entropy? Is there wasted energy and resources that are causing friction? Are wasted resources becoming an issue that is reducing your credibility with donors or your ability to provide services?

The motion of the mission can be caused by various sources or kinds of entropy:

  1. Spending too much money on administration – Loss of motion in the mission is caused by confusion or reductions in services. As important as good administration is to the completion of your mission, it can’t become more important than the mission itself. 
  2. Lacking clarity on what the mission is – Loss of motion in the mission is caused by confused action among volunteers and staff as they pull in different directions producing strife among them when it becomes unclear about what “should” be done. 
  3. Operating without effective governance – Loss of motion in the mission is caused by confusion in leadership, poor communication, confused mission, lack of accountability, and lower confidence among the donor base.
  4. Mismanagement of finances – Loss of motion in the mission is caused by poor budgeting, disorganized fund raising, and inaccurate targeting of resources, or by missed opportunities, poor communication, and a lack of fiscal controls.

These are just a few examples of how the motion to the mission can be lost, slowed, and eventually come to rest.There is no such thing as a perpetual motion machine; it takes work to get the motion to the mission going, and it will take continual application of force to keep it in motion.

Published by Creative Resources & Research http://grantgoddess.com

Organizational Entropy Part III: The Motion of the Mission

This is the third and final installment of a series by Non-profit Consultant,. Derek Link, on energy, mission, and organizational entropy. Part 1 and 2 were published on February 5 and 8, 2010.

Entropy threatens to bring the motion of the mission to a grinding halt. What are you talking about? Well, entropy is energy that is wasted in doing work. In a previous post, I compared it to the loss of energy that a pendulum experiences in the friction of the pivot point that over time will cause the pendulum to stop swinging and come to rest.

Is the motion of your mission about to be stopped by entropy? Is there wasted energy and resources that are causing friction? Are wasted resources becoming an issue that is reducing your credibility with donors or your ability to provide services?

The motion of the mission can be caused by various sources or kinds of entropy:

  1. Spending too much money on administration – Loss of motion in the mission is caused by confusion or reductions in services. As important as good administration is to the completion of your mission, it can’t become more important than the mission itself. 
  2. Lacking clarity on what the mission is – Loss of motion in the mission is caused by confused action among volunteers and staff as they pull in different directions producing strife among them when it becomes unclear about what “should” be done. 
  3. Operating without effective governance – Loss of motion in the mission is caused by confusion in leadership, poor communication, confused mission, lack of accountability, and lower confidence among the donor base.
  4. Mismanagement of finances – Loss of motion in the mission is caused by poor budgeting, disorganized fund raising, and inaccurate targeting of resources, or by missed opportunities, poor communication, and a lack of fiscal controls.

These are just a few examples of how the motion to the mission can be lost, slowed, and eventually come to rest.There is no such thing as a perpetual motion machine; it takes work to get the motion to the mission going, and it will take continual application of force to keep it in motion.