Monthly Archives: May 2010

Nonprofit Hiring Trends and Implications for Gen Y and Their Employers


Posted by ajlovesya

I had a chance to look at the 2010 Nonprofit Employment Trends Survey, sent to me by Heather Carpenter (thanks, Heather!). It is rich in data about the current trends and predictions in the hiring practices of small (budget under $1M), medium ($1M-$10M), and large nonprofits (more than $10M). I wanted to highlight some interesting facts and explore what they mean for young people looking for careers in public service.

  • 34% plan to add jobs and only 10% plan to eliminate jobs.  On average small organizations plan to create two new positions, medium organizations plan to create four new positions, and large organizations plan to create nine new positions in 2010.
  • The majority of these new jobs (34%) will be in direct service, a 10% increase over the past year.
  • For entry level positions, 49% of organizations look outside of the sector, for mid level positions 39% of organizations promote from within, for experienced positions 53% of organizations look within the sector at other nonprofit organizations
  • 57% of young people whose first job is in the nonprofit sector will have a second job in the nonprofit sector.
  • Small organizations tend to be more racially diverse, although racial diversity in general decreases as the position level increases.
  • When it comes to social media, 53% use LinkedIn, 34% use Facebook, and 13% use twitter. However, the majority still rely on personal networks of colleagues and friends to fill positions.

What could this mean for millenials interested in careers in the nonprofit sector and their potential employers?

For organizations:

Retention has to be a priority: A concern about the sector is the lack of mobility and a clear career path. Yet time spent developing such career paths and providing support could help with retention, especially with employees of color.  Additionally, the reliance on current employees to meet the growing demand for services could result in burnout if not properly addressed.

For young people:

Now is a great time to explore the sector and build your skill set: The increase in demand of services for nonprofits means both the creation of new jobs and the expansion of responsibilities for current employees.

Start to build your offline and online networks: Social media is being used in addition to personal networks to find candidates for positions so putting time into both could be beneficial.  In fact social media is, in many ways, an extension of offline relationships.

Questions I have:

What kinds of positions are being filled using social media?

What positions have the highest level of turnover?

What are the hiring trends based on type of organization? (art, education, etc)

Have you read the survey?  Share your thoughts below or click here to get the survey.


Are We Really Paying Attention to the Needs of the Poor?


Posted by ajlovesya

Change.org

Recently the folks on Aid Watch challenged New York Times Columnist Nick Kristof’s assertion that poor families doom themselves because of their “shortsighted private spending decisions.”  The conversation touched a nerve as I’ve grown increasingly frustrated with the pursuit of “one note” poverty: the desire to find that one story of poverty that fits in neatly with what those of us in power believe poverty should look like so we can develop one solution that we find comfortable. We do this almost to the point of being unrealistic in our understanding poverty and our expectations of those who are poor.

One book I think acknowledges the complexity of poverty and how families make financial decisions is Portfolios of the Poor. I read this book a few months ago and wondered what lessons could be applied here in the States (the book focuses on families in Bangladesh, India, and South Africa). Many of the remedies I have seen for low income families in the States focus on opportunities for education and employment, yet don’t address the day to day financial decisions that promote or hinder taking advantage of such opportunities.

This has made me reflect on my own experiences serving low-income families at an inner city Catholic School. Catholic schools have a rich (though sometimes times troubling) history of mission driven education in NYC, focusing on immigrants, children of color, and poor communities. I work with parents regularly in finding financial aid to subsidize the cost of tuition often by almost 80%. Yet some families still struggle to pay. Is it simply the cost or something else?

When I talk with families, it isn’t just the cost of tuition that’s prohibitive—it’s also the myriad of other often uncontrollable factors common among poor families that affect their finances and financial decisions and thus their ability to pay. For example, rarely is it just mom paying tuition; other family members chip in to pay for tuition as well. For parents who work hourly or under the table, money isn’t always consistent; sudden expenses are disastrous for our families; and public assistance does not cover nearly as much as people assume it does.

What has helped enormously is simply being flexible in when we take payments. The once a month approach, common in the majority of institutions that deal with any financial transactions, benefits us, not the families we serve. So being able to pay weekly in small amounts, for example, is much more beneficial than having to pay in monthly lump sums for families who receive small amounts of money from various family members to cover tuition. Being flexible not only puts the families first but also shows that we trust them.

So while we work to eradicate poverty, is there a way to respect the humanity of those we are serving by acknowledging and accommodating their needs as they navigate poverty?

I know this is my experience at a small school in Manhattan so I’d love to hear some other stories and suggestions on making financial decisions and understanding the needs of poor families. What is and is not working? What challenges come up frequently?

Photo credit: uspoverty.change.org


Online Fundraising Contests and Their Potential Impact on Nonprofits and Philanthropy


Posted by ajlovesya

Online Fundraising Contests

This week there have been some great discussions about online fundraising contests with lots of interesting perspectives:

I still have mixed feelings on online fundraising contests and a few questions to explore their impact:

1. How much social media involvement is required before participating in the competition? Sometimes these competitions are discussed as a way to get nonprofits more engaged in social media. However, based on a recent case study of Darius Goes West, winner of the America Giving Challenge, that doesn’t seem to be the case—instead active social media involvement is necessary before starting a competition. This makes sense; these kinds of competitions emphasize a short term goal when I think to get the most out of social media there needs to be a long term strategy, with the competition being one of many ways for fans/followers to get involved.

2. Do these contests offer fairer models of funding? The biggest charge against foundations is that their grant processes are archaic. In addition to asking for a great deal of information, the majority of foundations give less than $15,000, very little of which goes to general operating funds which many nonprofits need. However with these contests, the ease getting involved, getting feedback, the potential of attracting new supporters, and more control over how funds are spent are benefits that can’t be ignored. Additionally, people seem much more comfortable calling a company out for not being transparent or fair than doing the same with a foundation.

3. Are these competitions as inclusive as they claim to be? While social media is “free” in terms of signing up, I wonder if it also allows people to overlook organizations doing great work, but who don’t have the time or resources to get tons of votes. For example, if you are doing great work in rural part of your country, how do these competitions benefit you? And if these competitions are laying new ground for a more market based, open form of funding, how do we address the digital divide and ensure that organizations don’t get left behind?

4. Do competitions encourage a narrow approach to social change? One thing that stands out to me in these competitions is that they come eerily close to being popularity contests, focusing on what sounds/looks good as opposed to addressing impact and encouraging nonprofits to tackle larger issues.  Additionally, an issue Jessica Gottlieb brought up in her post is that while Pepsi may give money for a weight room at an inner city school, they contribute to the issue of obesity simply by the product they sell and how they sell it.  Are nonprofits less inclined or more inclined to look at corporations as both solutions and causes of the issues they are trying to address?

What are your thoughts on online fundraising contests for nonprofits?


Internalized Oppression and its Impact on Social Change


Posted by ajlovesya

I just finished reading Grassroots and Nonprofit Leadership: A Guide for Organizations in Changing Times. This is the best book I have read on activism and leadership and is now a staple in my social change library. The book is full of tangible leadership techniques and pushes activist to consider how their leadership and the structure of their organizations hinders or furthers their cause. You can download the book for free.

One major challenge to effective leadership that they highlight is low morale brought about by internalized oppression. Internalized oppression (also called “self-hate”) is when a member of an oppressed group believes and acts out the stereotypes created about their group. This extends beyond race, gender, and class internalized oppression to how we see ourselves as activist (waiting to get a “real job” for example).  The authors outline four ways that internalized oppression negatively affects the function of a group (p. 151-152):

Damaged self respect: When people don’t respect themselves they may substitute self-righteousness.

Irrational attacks on leaders: The more oppressed a group is, the harder it is on its leaders.  People project their negativity on those most visible and their own feelings of powerlessness in those in their group acting more powerfully.

Divisiveness in the group:  This shows up as complaining rather than taking responsibility to give feedback or correct situations, making nonnegotiable demands, turning conflicts into win/lose situations, gossiping, and backbiting.

Pessimism: Experiments won’t work, bold action will backfire, social betterment is impossible anyway, and we might as well just talk about out beliefs rather than expect real change.

Additionally, when it comes to strategy, internalized oppression allows folks to settle for much less than real change.

Bringing up internalized oppression and its impact on our social change work is like entering a battlefield. While a discussion may encourage reflection, openly acknowledging how we may participate in our oppression and the oppression of others takes a great deal of strength. When I’ve seen when discussions of internalized oppression happen, it is usually in the form of name calling (charging someone with being a self-hater), disgust, and disappointment. It is seen as a barrier to progress with the greatest offenders called out quickly.

But what about those subtle aspects of internalized oppression that can easily be looked at as a form of strength, humor, or defense? The International Re-evaluation Counseling Communities based in Seattle looks at some of the ways internalized oppression manifests itself among African-Americans:

We invalidate our children with fierce criticism and fault-finding, intending to “straighten them out” but, in the process, destroying their self-confidence.

Internalized oppression leads us to accept a narrow and limiting view of what is “authentic” black culture and behavior.

Internalized oppression is a major factor in the perpetuation of so-called “getting by” or “survival” behaviors.

I can’t lie—when I read through the entire list a shiver went down my back. Many of these behaviors and attitudes I have witnessed, felt growing up, and deal with today. Some I never looked at as being a barrier to social change and progress for African-Americans, even though I also believe that attitudes that encourage settling or negativity, even if rooted in an oppressive past, should be examined.

While these behaviors and attitudes are neatly listed, overcoming internalized oppression feels like an all encompassing life long journey. For those of us who have made social change our profession, it extends beyond friendships to challenging values at our organizations and the language we use to describe the groups we work with. Where do we begin personally and professionally?

To start, I think we should deliberately address internalized oppression as a separate critical issue at the heat of any social change movement. Internalized oppression affects how we treat each other, how we structure our organizations, and our definition of progress. I really like the questions The International Re-evaluation Counseling Communities asks when trying to overcome internalized oppression among African-Americans:

  • What has been good about being black?
  • What makes me proud of being black?
  • What are black people really like?
  • What has been difficult about being black?
  • What do I want other black people to know about me?
  • How have I been hurt by my own people? (be specific)
  • When do I remember standing up against the mistreatment of one black person by another?
  • When do I remember being strongly supported by another black person?
  • When do I remember that another black person (unrelated) really stood up for me?
  • When do I remember acting on some feeling of internalized oppression or racism?
  • When do I remember resisting and refusing to act on this basis?

But again this is a first small step.  A challenge I see is making the case for why a focus on intra-group dynamics is valuable in the first place, especially if an organization or movement is being led by someone who is not a member of the group fighting for change.   Is the focus inherently divisive?  What are some examples of programs and practices aimed at challenging internalized oppression? How do we walk the line between looking at something as an example of internalized oppression or an example of something else? What are the limitations to thinking about internalized oppression?

Image credit: Crossing the T, Life at the Intersection of Church and Trans


Can Personal Branding be a Social Change and Community Building Tool?


Posted by ajlovesya

Rosetta Thurman recently wrote a manifesto for why young professionals should care about personal branding and social media.  (She is also offering a 7-day boot camp on personal branding!  Early bird discount ends tonight).  I thought her manifesto on personal branding raised a lot of interesting points and there are a few I’d like to highlight:

  • A lot of young professionals complain that they gets no respect. Why would we? We’re young. People think we don’t know anything. That we haven’t done anything. Now in some cases this is true, don’t get me wrong, but in many cases it couldn’t be further from the truth.
  • Young professionals often have advanced education; a rich portfolio of work, volunteer and internship experiences; and a fiery passion for the cause.
  • The only problem? We’re not visible to senior leaders. No one can “see” us because we’re not at the tables. Especially if we’re the assistants and the interns.
  • But that’s the great thing about having access to social media. You might be a lowly administrative assistant at your organization, but on Twitter, you can be a rockstar.
  • Social media makes it so that thousands of people can “see” you and follow your work and leadership. Social media can make you more visible to all the right people – if you use it right – if you market yourself with professionalism and authenticity.

I think this gets to heart of why personal branding can be so powerful.  We often talk about how social media has democratized communication.  While the idea is not perfect, the premise is compelling: these tools allow us to share and connect in ways that are more accessible and engaging than ever before.   The ability for folks using social media to break barriers does  not only apply to communities facing inequality in general; we can also address the very inequality that seeps into our organizations and affects our working relationships. We can advocate for ourselves and our communities and push for greater opportunities.

Ironically, personal branding has an awful reputation (ha!) for being impersonal and fake.  It doesn’t need to be that way and focusing on your gifts and the gifts of others requires you to be open, generous, and humble.  The human part of personal branding is crucial for success.  Just think about the people you are most likely to follow/fan/subscribe to.  Are they just “me me me!” or are they asking, engaging, and sharing ideas and challenges that the both of you care about? If we look at personal branding as more than just “I need a job!” and instead look at it as a conversation about pressing issues in our sector/causes and how each of us is best positioned to address these issues, we’ll be better able to see, share, and enjoy the benefits.

I didn’t start blogging with big dreams of landing a fly job some where with a big organization.  I started out wanting to connect with folks who shared my  love and sometimes not-so-much-love of public service.  The ups and downs in the sector and how to get over them.  But folks started asking me different questions…harder questions.  I started going to different conferences and meeting folks that demanded I figure out who I was and what I stood for.  It is through the connections I have made through this blog and the expectations of friends and readers that I’ve been able to grow and find better opportunities.

So you want to get the most out of personal branding?  Focus on growth and connections.  Pay attention to people.  Be open about what you believe and why you believe it. Don’t call it personal branding (I hate the term too–if you have a better phrase, let me know).

What are your thoughts on personal branding?