Lately, I’ve been getting a lot of invitations to speak about the same keynote/workshop topic: “How to Get the Best Out of All Four Generations in the Nonprofit Workplace.”
It surprises me that it’s been so popular because I feel like we’ve been talking about the challenges and opportunities across generations for a while now and most nonprofit leaders “get” that they need to pay attention to generational shifts within their organizations.
Or do they?
In 2007, the conversation was about the “leadership crisis” of not having enough nonprofit managers to fill positions left by retiring Boomers. Then, we got all riled up about the possibility of a “leadership gap” among emerging leaders, which, thankfully, gave funders a good enough reason to support new and existing leadership development programs. Finally, we realized that there was no crisis, gap or deficit at all (nor were Boomers retiring in droves that we thought they would), but that we needed to instead figure out how to lead across generations and take advantage of all the opportunities and talent presented to us now that there are four different generations in the nonprofit workforce.
So that’s what I’ve been going around the country talking about. But part of why I think this discussion should be old news by now is that there was a pretty comprehensive book written in 2008 that outlines all this stuff in great detail called Working Across Generations: Defining the Future of Nonprofit Leadership. It’s a great primer to both the issues and solutions organizations face in developing and supporting leaders of all ages. I use it a lot as a reference in my presentations and I highly recommend it to anyone interested in nonprofit leadership.
These days though, I’m actually more interested in redefining the nonprofit leadership of the present than defining what will be in the future. After all, y’all know how I feel about the term “next generation.” The future is already upon us. The problems that nonprofits address are very real, as should our commitment be to the kind of leadership that will truly be able to solve those problems.
But before we can do that, we need to get rid of the resistance that I hear from so many nonprofit leaders around the country. Specifically, there are three ideas we can begin to embrace so that we can start thinking about leadership differently and therefore engage new leaders to make a difference in communities.
Redefining the Word Itself
Last week in Frederick, Maryland, I asked a group of board members, nonprofit professionals, CEOs and consultants to define the word “leadership.” Everyone had a different definition – including words like passion, vision, inspiration, courage, commitment, influence and action. No one ever mentioned education, age or experience. But think about how many nonprofit organizations fill leadership positions primarily based on those three factors. Martin Luther King, Jr. led the Montgomery bus boycott at the tender age of 26. Was that not leadership?
Leadership as a Process, Not a Position
It can also be dangerous to think of leadership simply as a position and not a process. Why? Well, just because someone holds a particular position or is hired to be “the boss” does not necessarily make them a leader! And vice versa. It’s the action that really matters. And the sooner we realize that leadership is a verb, not a noun, the sooner organizations will be able to tap into the leadership potential of ALL of its staff, volunteers, board members and donors.
The Myth of Experience
A lot of older leaders are reluctant to loosen the reins of powers or pass the torch to younger leaders because, they say, “young people don’t have any experience.” Here, they often forget that most nonprofit founders had NO experience whatsoever building organizations, yet they learned along the way through their passion and courageous action. Why can’t the same model be applied to current nonprofit leadership? I suppose experience as a prerequisite for positions can be useful as a recruitment practice, but it should not preclude anyone from practicing leadership in the first place.
What do you think about all these ongoing conversations about generational shifts in nonprofit leadership? How can we have more effective ones?





