Pro Bono Junkie's Blog
March 2010 Archives
By Diana Fischer on
March 31, 2010 6:14 PM
| Permalink
| Comments
(1)

In a recent meeting with a funder in New York, the conversation turned to a familiar topic- defining success at nonprofits. Even within a single issue area, nonprofits take very different approaches to the same challenges. Some organizations tackle extremely complex factors and some tackle extremely simple factors, yet often- despite this huge variation in work- their success is compared on an equal playing field.
While the phrase "apples to apples" is used to the point of exhaustion in the nonprofit sector, this seems like appropriate time to deploy it once again. For this blog's sake, however, we'll go with something new- a root vegetable analogy- "beets to beets." Often, when two organizations are tackling the same social issues it is tempting to think that the two organizations are exactly the same, but the differing complexity and nature of their approaches may mean that they can't be compared on a beets to beets basis. Comparing organizations based on how successful they are at meeting their own individual goals is an illogical approach because the contributing factors differ so greatly.
Let's look at some reasons why beets to beets comparisons don't work by examining two hypothetical organizations that aim to boost high school graduation rates-
- Nonprofit number one seeks to boost high school graduation rates through direct counseling, intervention, and guidance for the area's disadvantaged youth
- Nonprofit number two seeks to boost high school graduation rates by transforming the energy of school spaces by painting walls and classrooms bright, cheerful colors through student and adult labor, providing mentoring-like support and painting training for youth
The second nonprofit may seek to engage X number of new volunteers while painting X
number of walls. This group may reach its stated goals 80% -
90% - or 100% of the time, but the difference in the simplicity of the callenges faced by the second nonprofit and the first nonprofit doing direct intervention means comparing the success of these organizations is like comparing beets to... bananas.
It doesn't work! Even if nonprofit number one is only
successful in 50% of cases or meets 50% of its stated goals, a group tackling
such complicated issues can not be expected to be successful in 100% of cases.
Those boing white walls have far fewer barriers to overcome before they can become magenta than a child struggling with multiple social challenges trying to graduate from high school. Yes, there are still some barriers for the painting nonprofit. Recruiting volunteers and getting kids to attend the painting sessions are barriers to painting a school, but they're not on the same scale as coordinating with a social worker or battling addiction and so on.
When awarding funding or bestowing recognition based on
individual success, it just doesn't make sense to use progress towards
individual goals as the uniting factor. The goals require such drastically
different inputs that comparisons will never be beets to beets.
Diana Fischer is a Product Development Fellow at the Taproot Foundation.
By Melissa Paulo & Natalya Matusova on
March 24, 2010 8:05 AM
| Permalink
| Comments
(0)

Several weeks ago, the Taproot Foundation's Pro Bono Action Tank
Leadership Council hosted the Bay Area Corporate Pro Bono Workshop at
Gap Inc.'s headquarters in San Francisco- the last stop on the Workshop
circuit that had included Los Angeles, New York City, Washington, DC,
Minneapolis, and Chicago.
The workshop was designed to promote an active
dialogue about pro bono service among the 50 Bay Area business leaders
who were in attendance. The response was overwhelming. Karen Baker, the
Secretary of Service and Volunteering and the State of California, gave
an impassioned keynote address, highlighting the pro bono ethic and
encouraging business leaders to get their employees engaged and hooked
on the movement. The audience was enthusiastic when Jamie Hartman,
Executive Director, Pro Bono Action Tank, gave her State of the Pro
Bono Union address that highlighted the achievements of pro bono
service thus far. Participants remained fully engaged as Carol Gutery,
National Director, Pro Bono Action Tank walked through the eight
different models of pro bono service delivery and shared resources
around designing a strong pro bono program.
Another
highlight of the event was a lunchtime panel that featured
representatives from Gap Inc, Deloitte, Salesforce.com, and Operation
Access, who spoke about their active pro bono engagement programs,
lending their best practices and learnings to their Bay Area peers.
Notably, Operation Access is itself a nonprofit and successful
recipient of pro bono services. Ben Aune, the CEO of Operation Access,
is an advocate for the movement and has launched an impactful pro bono
program for Operation Access employees.
Perhaps
a sign that the economic tide is turning, the energy in the room was
palpable as workshop participants discussed their triumphs and
challenges, brainstormed strategies, and identified solutions around
pro bono service. The conversation, to our great satisfaction, centered
on " how to do pro bono well" rather than "why should we do pro
bono." Pro Bono Action Tank's Business Value Flashcards were especially a big hit.
All
in all, the formula for a successful corporate pro bono program is
simple: identify what a company does best, think about how to apply it
to the nonprofit sector, and work with available resources. Whether the
goal is to build the capacity of a few local nonprofits or catalyze
change in broad issues area, it is possible to build a pro bono program
that is as effective and as innovative as the company running it.
Did
you attend one of the Workshops? Does your company offer opportunities
to do pro bono work? Do you have any tips or questions about how to
best engage in pro bono service?
Melissa Paulo is a Western Region Development Fellow at the Taproot Foundation. She is a graduate of UC Berkeley's College of Letters and Science.
Natasha (Natalya) Matusova is the Product Development Fellow at the Taproot Foundation. She is a graduate of Northwestern University's School of Education and Social Policy.
By Jaime Hiraishi on
March 17, 2010 1:47 PM
| Permalink
| Comments
(0)

A vast majority of students want to make a positive impact on society and are seeking new ways to leverage their expertise to help their communities throughout their academic careers. Across the country, professional students are joining and starting pro bono consulting programs and clubs as a means of immersing themselves within their local communities to create a lasting impact on worthy organizations.
Many schools are starting to take notice of this trend and are dedicating precious resources and staff to support these efforts-- a crucial step in creating sustainable programs. We've created an
online showcase of some of the top pro bono programs in professional schools across the country to share best practices, foster learning, and promote collaboration across fields and schools.
One of these programs is the
IDEAcorps™ Challenge which partners MBA students from schools like Northwestern Kellogg, Chicago Booth, Berkeley Haas School of Business, DePaul University, and Stanford GBS, with business professionals from companies like Google and Salesforce.com to solve business challenges for participating organizations. For the final two weeks of this program, students traveled to New Orleans to complete their projects and present the findings in a case competition setting. To take a deeper look at this program, or to create a Program Profile of your own program, check out our
Professional School Program Profiles.
These student consultants are not only taking part in the pro bono movement, they are also paving the way for future generations. I have no doubt many participants in university pro bono will lead the way for corporate pro bono and philanthropy, and challenge the culture of the professional world. They are truly pro bono junkies in training!
Jaime Hiraishi is a Recruitment Coordinator at the Taproot Foundation. She also leads the Taproot Foundation's efforts to promote the pro bono ethic in professional schools.
By Kate Wilson on
March 10, 2010 10:58 AM
| Permalink
| Comments
(1)

In August 2009, the
Stanford Social Innovation Review published the article "
Catalytic Philanthropy,"
describing the approach one entrepreneur took to reduce methamphetamine
abuse in Montana. By researching the entry point into drug usage (teens
who were unaware of the dangers of using meth), and implementing a
strategic, well-resourced, targeted crusade to intervene at that level (a multi-million dollar,
Hollywood produced, award-winning ad campaign which brutally depicts
the downward spiral of a meth user), Thomas
Siebel was able to make an almost immediate impact on reducing meth
abuse in the state by more than 50%.
Since Siebel's campaign,
the words "catalytic" and "philanthropy" have become favored buzzwords
of social entrepreneurs. Never ones to be late to a social innovation
party, the (non-meth-addicted) Pro Bono Junkies at Taproot Foundation
were eager to see how this new movement could be augmented with pro
bono service, and set to work on a Catalytic Pro Bono Cause: Foster
Care.
Having polished their logo, web presence and marketing
collateral through three previous Service Grants with Taproot
Foundation, Youth Law Center (YLC) was well-versed in pro bono service.
As a public interest advocacy group whose mission is to end abuse and
maltreatment of children in the nation's foster care and justice
systems and to ensure that these children are connected to families and
communities, they were also also a major resource and expert in the foster
care system. When YLC approached Taproot requesting help with messaging
to "encourage the right families to foster," with hopes of rebranding
foster care systematically, and not simply for their own organization,
Taproot Foundation jumped on the opportunity.
Following the
four steps outlined in the August 2009 Stanford Social Innovation
Review article for successful Catalytic Philanthropy, Taproot
Foundation and YLC set to work.
1. Take Responsibility for Achieving Results
By
following the basic guidelines of the Key Messages & Brand Strategy
Service Grant (Taproot's got about 250 of these projects under our belt
already), we went into the project with a clear project scope and
defined expectations on all sides of the pro bono consulting engagement
- from the time commitment of YLC staff as well as the consultants, to
a timeline for the execution of the project. We also began the project with confirmation that
the end would be implemented not only by YLC but by a variety of
government and nonprofit agencies working in the field.
2. Mobilize a Campaign for Change
In
order to confirm that the new messages and brand position delivered by
the Service Grant would resonate with the right audiences, Taproot
Foundation's pro bono consulting team worked carefully with YLC to
ensure that all benefiting organizations had channels to provide their
input and feedback on the team's work. By making sure that the
California Social Work Education Consortium, California Department of
Social Services, County Welfare Directors, the Foster Parent
Association and other agencies supporting the foster care system across
the state were aware of the progress the Service Grant was making and
able to discuss their thoughts and concerns directly with YLC, we were
able to effectively manage the consulting team's bandwidth. This
effective management enabled the Key Messages & Brand Strategy
Service Grant to be completed on time.
3. Use All Available Tools
The
collaborative nature of the Service Grant program lends itself to an
"all hands on deck" approach - the consultants drew upon their
expertise in marketing, branding, design, management, and other key
areas to build professional-quality messaging about foster care. On the
flip side, YLC and the other participating agencies brought their
perspectives from decades of experience working in the field to help
identify a target audience and the attributes of that audience to
ensure that the new branding was focused and pointed them in the right
direction.
4. Create Actionable Knowledge
The pro
bono consulting team created vignettes to personify the new brand
attributes they discovered. "I am up for the challenge," was personified
through a brief story about a child who refused to eat anything his
foster mother brought him. Through the foster mom's detective work -
checking in with his teacher to see if and what he ate at lunchtime- she
was able to find a solution get the child to eat dinner with his foster
family. The vignette demonstrated the key principle identified by the
consulting team: " Being a foster parent is definitely a challenge,
but it's so rewarding to see your child thrive." The ideas were
reinforced by this new tagline, "I am someone's hero. I am a foster
parent."
The professional-quality
deliverables created by this Service Grant are already being adopted eagerly by the groups involved. This compelling message will enable foster
care agencies to better demonstrate the value that volunteering as a
foster family presents - and by putting these new ideas into the form
of an anecdote, the consultants have made these attributes accessible,
communicable and memorable for a variety of audiences.
Because
this Key Messages & Brand Strategy project is geared towards
reworking the perception of foster care as a whole rather than focusing
on one particular agency, the resulting impact of the Service Grant
will be catalytic in rebranding the issue area and enhancing public
perception of the importance of foster parenting. By improving their
ability to match foster youth with compassionate, flexible families
that are up to the challenge of being someone's hero, these agencies
are positioned to provide foster children with the love and support
they need to thrive.
By Laura Weiss on
March 3, 2010 2:15 PM
| Permalink
| Comments
(0)

Recently
I was working with my colleagues on some organizational design issues.
We were grappling with the classic question of how to scale an
organization so that it's optimized for impact. As we explored ways in
which other types of enterprises have dealt with this kind of growth
challenge, I realized how easy it would be for the discussion to remain
fixed on an analysis of traditional organizational models -
functional, divisional matrix - in the quest to find one that suited us
best.
Such organizational models emerged in the early part of the
twentieth century to prevent chaos and to promote efficiency in growing
businesses. Unfortunately, management theory today confirms that these
very structures can become so rigid that they often prevent creativity
even as they preserve order.
This all got me thinking - how much structure does a small
organization really need? In mulling over this question, I found myself
thinking about the work of the famous Swiss architect LeCorbusier
(1887-1965) and his equally famous plan
libre. Allow me to explain.
During the early days of LeCorbusier's career, buildings were designed
to reflect traditional bearing wall construction, which often limited
the placement of interior walls. But LeCorbusier changed all that with
his most iconic design and lasting legacy to the architecture
profession - the "Domino" house. Conceived in the 1920's, it promoted a
simple grid of structural columns supporting horizontal concrete slabs.
This organizing armature, if you will, allowed for a more important
innovation to be realized - a "free plan" of undulating walls that
could be placed in a variety of configurations to achieve spatial
ingenuity. This was achievable because the walls were not limited by
the structural grid but rather were enabled by it - the grid was "the
function that gives the form to the interior space"
1.
To bring the conversation back to that other kind of organizational
structure - can we design nonprofits for efficiency as well as
creativity? Can there be just enough structure in the right places to
not only support but also enable the kinds of human interactions that
will help them operate as creative entities? In an ever-changing world,
organizations of all kinds must be both strategically adaptable as well
as operationally efficient. To paraphrase management guru Gary Hamel,
we must "build organizations where discipline and freedom aren't
mutually exclusive
"2.
Organizations that enable some freedom of activity are naturally
structured for creativity. They are often characterized less by
prescribed roles, functions or departments and more by the types of
human interactions their culture desires. Typically these are reflected
in such things as a strong sense of community, interdisciplinary
collaborations, a "one-team" mentality, and an open environment (both
literally and figuratively).
So when thinking about what kind of structure is the right kind of
structure, we need to ask ourselves what kins of behaviors are we
trying to encourage so that our relationships - both internally and
externally - deliver unique value and have real impact. Too much
structure can mean too little freedom to explore and adapt. We need to
prevent that from happening.
1 Le Corbusier, Towards a New Architecture, 1960
2 Gary Hamel, The Future of Management, 2007
Laura Weiss is the Vice President of Service Innovation at the Taproot
Foundation. Laura comes to the Taproot Foundation after nine years as
Associate Partner and Practice Director with the world-renowned design
consultancy, IDEO, where she was an advocate for bringing a business
perspective to the design process. A former licensed architect and
educator, Laura holds and MBA from MIT Sloan School of Management, an
MArch from Yale University and a BArch with honors from Cornell
University.