Young People Leading the Way Towards Collective Leadership

This is a guest post from Deborah Meehan, Executive Director of the Leadership Learning Community (LLC), a national nonprofit organization leveraging leadership by generating ideas, connections, and actions.

Working in the field of leadership I have heard many Executive Directors talk about the loneliness of leadership or ‘loneliness at the top’.  How curious.  Leadership doesn’t happen in a vacuum – it’s all about working with other people, so why the loneliness?  I heard Executive Directors talk a lot about being the ones who worry about everything. Is this what it means to be a leader?  It’s not so farfetched that our ideas of leadership would take on rather heroic proportions when you consider common leadership role models like Martin Luther King, Jr.

Luckily there is another point of view emerging.  According to “Next Shift: Beyond the Nonprofit Leadership Crisis,” by the Building Movement Project, younger leaders are not attracted to hierarchical structures and are “trying to find new ways to organize and structure work, ranging from entrepreneurial models to shared leadership and broader participatory structures.”  Instead of being heroic leaders, there is an opportunity for nonprofit leaders to think of ourselves as facilitators of a process that engages everyone in our organizations in leadership.

As Executive Director for the Leadership Learning Community (LLC), I constantly draw inspiration from young leaders and the collective leadership model.  Our entire staff is our leadership team.  We all have input in planning projects, setting budgets, conducting performance reviews, hiring, and actively learning from our achievements and mistakes. As a team, we come up with more creative ideas and tackle tough problems more efficiently than I (or any one individual) could alone.

Even though collective leadership empowers teams and eases the burden on ED’s, there are not a lot of nonprofit adopting this model, probably because it is not easy. In our case, we first erred in the direction of micromanagement. Now we distribute leadership and responsibility. It’s a balance, knowing when and what each of us needs to communicate to the team without overloading each other. It’s a messy business, but we continue to be amazed by what a handful of people can do when everyone’s leadership is tapped.

Although the interest in collective leadership in the nonprofit sector seems to be increasing, there is a need for more models and tools that can validate this approach and guide organizations.  Last year, we made a small grant to the DataCenter, an organization that had recently adopted an entirely shared leadership model, so they could identify and share lessons from their experience.  For example, all of their employees receive the same base salary and their job is divided 80/20 between program and administration tasks.  This allows all the employees to learn about both aspects of the organization.

To build on these lessons, we launched a collaborative research initiative, Leadership for a New Era, with 20 partners. We hope to show how collective approaches unleash innovation, and identify tools to help organizations accomplish more (and have more fun) by tapping the full leadership potential of their teams.

Deborah Meehan is the founder and Executive Director of the Leadership Learning Community (LLC). In 1991 Deborah received a Kellogg National Leadership fellowship. She was also a 1991 Salzburg Fellow and returned to Salzburg in 2007 as a member of the Global Youth Leadership faculty. Deborah also conducts an annual Women’s Leadership Seminar for women law fellows. She has served as a consultant for the W.K. Kellogg Foundation to build an alumni association for the 700 leadership alumni of the Kellogg program. She serves as a board member for the International Leadership Association and the Blue Cross Blue Shield Foundation of MN. Deborah has created a consulting services arm of LLC and conducted evaluations for national and international leadership programs and produced leadership scans, literature reviews and made program recommendations on behalf of 30 foundations that include a broad range of small, large, regional, state and prominent national foundations.

Dismantling the Executive Director Role, Moving Toward Collective Leadership

When the Chinook Fund and the Colorado Anti-Violence Program (CAVP) found that they were both moving away from having a traditional leadership structure, they decided to put their heads together and help each other develop a collective leadership model. At a time when both organizations had an empty executive director position, they saw how they were being so focused on how to change the outside and not taking time to reflect on how they were treating each other inside their organizations.

In Chinook’s case, they had hired a woman of color to lead the foundation, however it didn’t work out. The position wasn’t resourced correctly, bad power dynamic between ED and staff as well as ED and board. And no one wanted to step into those shoes. The traditional role of an ED certainly didn’t resonate with Neha Mahajana at Chinook – her culture values stepping back and humility, and those values are beautiful. She didn’t want to sacrifice them.

CAVP wanted to switch from having an executive director to having a shared leadership structure. They had tried before, but found that hadn’t worked out because they just jumped right in and not taken a lot of time to think about it through a real process.

Both organizations ended up with a shared directorship held by three co-executive directors.

Shared Leadership Roles

Both organizations didn’t want it to be about one person moving them into the heartland, but about all the staff moving the organization in the same direction. With three co-directors, 50 percent of their time is divided among their particular program/leadership area (for instance, fundraising, finance, advocacy) and the rest of time is divided up so that everyone is equally responsible for administrative activities. They seek to take advantage of everyone’s individual strengths and their models are fluid enough that they can switch leadership priorities based on where the organization is in its life cycle.

They make their roles clear to everyone on the board and staff with a very detailed organizational chart describing who has what power. As co-directors, they take on the responsibility of consensus-based decisionmaking, even when it comes to board issues. For instance, CAVP staff are not board members, but everyone has a vote at the board meetings. Even part-time staff attend both board and staff meetings to ensure that those decisions work for everyone. Both organizations are also working to transform their boards because they understand that real collective leadership can’t stop at the staff level.

Shared Supervision

Both Chinook and CAVP’s staff are responsible for supervising each other. They utilize peer supervision to help each other become better leaders. They recognize that kust as there are certain qualities needed to be a good executive director, there are certain skills that people need to be a good co-director. Chinook employs a “team coach”  - a former board member who facilitates the peer supervision and helps them give each other tough feedback that comes from a  place of respect and love. They do this on a monthly basis depending on capacity. The board is ultimately responsible for supervising all three co-directors.

Challenges

  • They had to figure out how they were going to manage conflict among the three co-executive directors
  • Having three leaders requires extensive communication
  • Had to explain to the other staff how the organization was changing and get buy-in
  • They had to cultivate an incredible amount of trust amongst themselves as co-executive directors
  • The organizations had to become more transparent about finances with a shared leadership model

Opportunities

  • They got to build shared ownership of leadership responsibility so that no one gets to “check out” of leadership
  • This model doesn’t set up one leader for an isolating/unsupported position or unchecked power/control
  • It challenges the old 1950s business model of running a nonprofit

Two burning questions from the audience were on my mind as well.

  1. Both organizations had opportunities where there was an open ED position, which presented an opportunity to talk about changing the leadership structure. How can we bring up these conversations even without being in that situation?
  2. Both Chinook and CAVP are very small organizations (under 10 staff). Can this model or a similar model work in larger organizations?
Loading...
Sign up for blog updates and get a FREE chapter of my book, How to Become a Nonprofit Rockstar!