Change Management In Nonprofits

In 2021, I proposed an initiative I thought was brilliant—it would help my team make faster progress and better leverage each member's unique skills. Brilliant, right? Yet, it didn’t take off. Many ideas or initiatives fail because we struggle to gain buy-in. The reasons for resistance are many, but Rick Maurer simplifies them into three core categories: (1) "I don’t get it" Resistance here is about lack of understanding or information. People may not fully grasp the reasons behind the change, its benefits, or the implementation plan. This often leaves them feeling confused or unsure about the impact. (2) "I don’t like it" This is rooted in a dislike for the change itself. People might feel it disrupts their comfort zones, poses a negative impact, or clashes with personal values or interests. (3) "I don’t like YOU." This is about the messenger, not the message. Distrust or lack of respect for the person initiating the change can create a barrier. It might stem from past experiences, perceived incompetence, or lack of credibility. When I work with leaders to identify which category resistance falls into, the clarity that follows helps us take targeted, practical steps to overcome it. - To address the "I don't get it" challenge, focus on clear, accessible communication. Share the vision, benefits, and roadmap in a way that resonates. Use stories, real-life examples, or data to make the case relatable and tangible. Give people space to ask questions and clarify concerns—often, understanding alone can build alignment. - To address the "I don't like it" challenge, emphasize empathy. Acknowledge potential impacts on routines, comfort zones, or values, and seek input on adjustments that could reduce disruption. If possible, give people a sense of control over aspects of the change; this builds buy-in by involving them directly in shaping the solution. - And to address the "I don't like you" challenge, solving for the other two challenges will help. You can also openly address past issues, if relevant, and demonstrate genuine commitment to transparency and collaboration Effective change isn’t just about the idea—it’s about knowing how to bring people along with you. #change #ideas #initiatives #collaboration #innovation #movingForward #progress #humanBehavior

Most companies think stakeholder management is about getting buy-in. It's actually about changing predictions.   Years ago, I was helping a technology company with their organizational transformation. They had grown from a startup to several thousand people but were still operating like a startup. No real processes. No decision-making structures. Just running from one urgent need to another.   When I recommended new forms of governance, the resistance was immediate. And here's what made it complicated: each senior leader was resisting against a different, negative outcome as a result of the change.   For example, some believed that structure would slow them down and make them less nimble versus competitors. Others thought it would kill innovation. Some thought it would create bureaucracy by adding layers and layers of approvals to workflows. Many thought it meant they would lose the autonomy to run their business unit.   Here's what was really happening. Each person's brain was making different predictions based on their unique experience. These leaders could only predict problems because unstructured processes and systems were all they'd ever known. Their brains couldn't envision the benefits because they had no (or at least limited) experience with good structure.   Traditional stakeholder management would have grouped them as "senior leaders" and design one strategy for them all. But their concerns were entirely individual.   Changing predictions requires three things. First, understanding that each person's concerns are unique. No two brains make the same predictions. Second, getting people to try new approaches without perfect information. This takes direct, one-on-one conversations. Third, recognizing that predictions don't change overnight. It takes experience and repetition.   If the stakeholders in your company are resisting change understand that their brains are doing what brains do. They're predicting outcomes based on what they know.   The next time you build your stakeholder management approach remember it's not about treating everyone with the same title the same.   It's about engaging everyone, individually, where they are. Michael J Lopez Consulting #change #stakeholdermanagement

Navigating Leadership in Turbulent Times- A few days ago, I had an interesting conversation with a friend about how Non Profits are facing this period of  unknowns and instability. For organizational leaders, the role we play in guiding our teams and ensuring the stability and resilience of our organizations has never been more critical. Here are a few things I learned about leading through uncertainty- 1. Focus with Intent We are constantly being hit with a barrage of incoherent tweets, rash decisions, and contradictory messaging that can feel overwhelming. Reacting to everything will leave us scattered, unfocused, and ineffective. Leaders must prioritize their organizational goals and focus on what they are best equipped to address. 🔑 Choose your battles wisely and resist the urge to 'play whack-a-mole' with every issue. Not every fight is yours to take on, and sometimes, the wisest move is not to fight at all. Focused leadership drives meaningful impact. 2. Embrace Collaboration - In this season of uncertainty, collaboration is not optional—it’s essential. Community and partnerships have always propelled movements forward. 🤝 Build a collaborative work culture, encouraging your team to cultivate strong relationships both internally and externally.  Collaboration builds trust, and allows people to build upon their strengths and leads to better decisions and outcomes.   3. Flexibility & Adaptability -"Be stubborn about your goals but flexible about how you achieve them." Strategy is not a fixed plan but an evolving path to reach a predetermined destination. Recognize when adjustments are needed and model adaptability for your team. 📣 Communicate openly with staff about changes and align around shared objectives, even if absolute agreement isn’t always possible. Pathways can emerge when teams are nimble and solutions-oriented. 4. Support Your Staff- Amid external crises, organizational trust often becomes strained. Now is the time to double down on creating a supportive environment for your team.  Focus on the short-term goals and the long-term mission when conflict arises. Look for areas of agreement to rally around. 💡 Consider what your organization can offer during this period, whether that’s flexible policies, open communication channels, or empathetic leadership. Teams perform best when they feel valued and supported. 5. Safeguard Your Organization - If your mission runs counter to the incoming administration’s policies, preparation is key. 📋 Run a risk assessment and review your policies/processes to ensure compliance and readiness. Develop clear protocols and maintain a strong relationship with your legal counsel.  A proactive approach will protect your organization from unnecessary risks. I can say from experience that leadership in turbulent times isn’t easy, but it’s also an incredible opportunity to model resilience, inspire focus, and foster collaboration.

I asked a nonprofit CEO: "Who designed your program?" Her answer: "Our board and I spent months in strategy sessions mapping it out." "And who did you design it for?" "Families experiencing food insecurity in our community." "How many of those families were in those strategy sessions?" Silence. This is why most well-intentioned programs fail before they start. Here's the actual algorithm for lasting change: Step 1: Start with people, not problems Not data about the problem. Not assumptions about the problem. The actual humans living it daily. Step 2: Understand the system, not just the symptom Homelessness isn't a housing problem. It's mental health + addiction + economic + policy issues that show up as housing. Step 3: Design with, not for The people closest to the problem are closest to the solution. Make them co-creators, not beneficiaries. Step 4: Test small, learn fast Before you scale, make sure it actually works. For the people using it, not just the people funding it. Step 5: Design yourself out of business If your solution is working, people shouldn't need you forever. I've seen this approach reduce homelessness, cut recidivism, and save infant lives. It works because it respects the intelligence and agency of the people it serves. Most organizations skip Step 1 and wonder why their communities don't engage. What step does your organization struggle with most?

I still remember the moment I read GiveDirectly's blog post openly admitting they'd been defrauded by members of their team in Uganda. 🤯 Most organizations would bury this information. They highlighted it. They shared exactly what happened, their investigation process, and the changes they made to prevent future errors. Instead of hiding their mistake, they leaned into transparency. Studies consistently show that strategic vulnerability builds more trust than projecting perfection. We're wired to trust people and organizations that show their humanity. We all instinctively know that nothing is perfect. The key is giving your flaws the right context. Pair it with a strength - what will you learn? Where will you go from here? 🔑 Effective transparency looks like: → Sharing real-time impact alongside setbacks → Revealing your finances in digestible ways → Creating spaces for honest conversations with stakeholders → Publishing external reviews (even mixed ones) → Empowering beneficiaries to tell their unfiltered stories In the nonprofit world, where donor skepticism runs high, authenticity is your most powerful asset. So, how is GiveDirectly doing in the decade since revealing this setback? Find out on the fully transparent financials page of their website: https://lnkd.in/emVYqvsR

Fundraisers vs. Program Staff: The Great Divide? It's a tale as old as nonprofits themselves. Fundraisers and program staff, separated by a chasm of misunderstanding, each thinking the other doesn't 'get it.' But what if I told you this divide isn't just unnecessary—it's actively harmful to our missions? Here's a controversial take: The most successful nonprofits don't have a divide between fundraising and programs. They have a seamless integration. Why? Because donors don't fund organizations. They fund impact. And who knows your impact better than your program staff? So, how do we bridge this gap? Here are some unconventional strategies I've seen work: 1. Flip the Script: Have program staff make donor thank you calls. It's not about asking—it's about sharing impact firsthand. 2. Fundraiser Field Trips: Get your development team out of the office and into the field regularly. Nothing beats firsthand experience. 3. Storytelling Workshops: Train program staff in the art of storytelling. They have the best stories—help them tell them effectively. 4. Shared Goals: Align bonus structures or KPIs across departments. When everyone wins together, silos break down. 5. Job Swaps: Have fundraisers and program staff shadow each other for a day. Walking in someone else's shoes builds empathy and understanding. Remember, at the end of the day, we're all working towards the same goal. By breaking down these artificial barriers, we can create a culture of philanthropy that permeates every aspect of our organizations. Now, I'm curious: Have you successfully bridged the gap between fundraising and programs? Or do you have a horror story of when the divide went wrong? Tag a colleague from another department you work well with, and share your experience in the comments. Let's learn from both the successes and the cautionary tales!

"This is just the flavor of the month, it'll change again!" That's what I overheard in the breakroom during the implementation of a new training program. As the newly minted supervisor, I was supposed to lead this change. But in that moment, I questioned whether or not we'd be able to pull this off. Welcome to my earliest large-scale change initiative. We were creating and implementing a new program. As I walked into that first all-hands meeting, the room was filled with uncertainty. Looking around, I realized each person brought their view of change along with them. ------We All Approached Change Differently----- ➡ The Naysayer: "But, it won't work that way." • What I Learned: Behind every "no" is often a wealth of institutional knowledge. ➡The Enthusiastic Supporter: Always first to volunteer. • What I Learned: Enthusiasm can be contagious, but needs direction. ➡The Skeptical Analyst: Required data for everything. • What I Learned: Data isn't just for convincing others; it's a tool for refining the change itself. ➡The Silent Observer: Quiet in meetings, insightful in private. • What I Learned: The loudest voice isn't always the most valuable. ➡The Overwhelmed: Stressed by the mention of change. • What I Learned: Resistance can come from workload concerns, not just disagreement. ➡The Hidden Influencer: The unofficial leader everyone listened to. • What I Learned: Formal authority isn't everything; respect the informal networks. ➡The Compliant Participant: Went along without real commitment. • What I Learned: Silence isn't always agreement; passive resistance can be as challenging as active resistance. The journey was transformative—for the organization and for me as a leader. I learned that change is about people. By recognizing and addressing the human element, we can navigate the complexities of change more effectively. ❓ Which of these 7 characters do you encounter most often in your change initiatives? How has your approach to them evolved over time?

You know Bob. Bob’s that stakeholder who is not seeing the light on your change initiative. Every transformation leader has at least one Bob, maybe even several. The best way to change Bob’s mind is Susan. Let me explain. You’ve got a high-impact stakeholder who just isn’t on board (Bob). They’re not actively blocking your initiative, but they’re definitely not moving it forward either. Do you schedule yet another meeting? Hit them with a 50-slide deck about why the change is so important? Turns out, the last person they want to hear from is the change leader. The answer may be to check your ego, stop trying to influence them directly, and instead influence them through someone they already trust. That special someone being your Susan. This is the Influence-Attitude Matrix. Farrar Frazee, MHR, SPHR, ACC introduced me to this game-changing framework during an Executive Council for Leading Change (ECLC) roundtable, and I knew instantly that I had to bring it to The Only Constant podcast. The concept is simple: Instead of viewing stakeholders as isolated decision-makers, map their relationships with each other. Who do they work closely with? Who do they already trust? Who is aligned with the change and has the credibility to nudge them forward? Review your stakeholder analysis and talk to those in the know. Once you have your answers, you can deploy the right influencer at the right time to defrost resistance into support without corporate politics or top-down mandates. In a word, Farrar’s matrix is brilliant: 1. Map two axes that determine stakeholder placement: attitude and influence  2. Influence from the upper-right quadrant to the lower-left  3. You can target small, specific components of change 4. Don’t worry about reporting lines; lean into informal relationships I love this conversation because it was packed with practical insights that any leader navigating change can implement right away. So if you’ve got your own Bob that you’re trying to figure out, this might be the key to finally getting them on board. Link to the full episode in the comments below 🎧

Change Capacity: How to Build It Before You Need It Following my post on change fatigue, I got a few messages asking about proactive solutions. The answer? Deliberately building change capacity before you need it. At one time I was working on successfully implementing a major tech transformation while adapting to regulatory changes and updating the staffing model. Our secret wasn't better project management—it was intentionally building change capacity across three dimensions: 𝗜𝗻𝗱𝗶𝘃𝗶𝗱𝘂𝗮𝗹 𝗰𝗮𝗽𝗮𝗰𝗶𝘁𝘆: We invested in resilience training for all employees, teaching practical techniques for managing uncertainty. Research from MIT shows this approach reduces resistance by up to 32%. 𝗧𝗲𝗮𝗺 𝗰𝗮𝗽𝗮𝗰𝗶𝘁𝘆: We established "change champions"—not just to communicate but to protect team bandwidth and raise the red flag when implementation timing and sequence needed to be negotiated. 𝗢𝗿𝗴𝗮𝗻𝗶𝘇𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗰𝗮𝗽𝗮𝗰𝗶𝘁𝘆: Most crucially, we implemented a "change absorption index"—a simple measure of how much change each user group was processing at any time. When a unit approached 80% of their maximum capacity, new initiatives were automatically sequenced. 📊 Quick Change Capacity Audit: - Do people know where to direct their concerns about change overload? - Can managers successfully negotiate implementation timing? - Does your organization measure and track change absorption? - Are change initiatives deliberately sequenced or randomly deployed? The potential ROI is there: imagine faster implementation times and higher adoption rates when change isn't saturated. In today's environment, change capacity isn't just a nice-to-have—it's the difference between organizations that thrive through disruption and those that merely survive. How is your organization deliberately building change capacity? Have you established formal mechanisms or is it still managed ad hoc? #ChangeManagement #OrganizationalResilience #TransformationLeadership #ChangeCapacity