Unexpected Inspiration

It was March 1999. I was nursing a failing business, going to school at night, working part-time for FedEx, and driving a limousine. I was pretty low.

After our furlough in Palm Desert, CA from a three-year missionary term with Wycliffe Bible Translators in the Philippines, we were unable to obtain a new assignment there. I completed a Management course at Summer Institute of Linguistics in Dallas, and was referred to International Relations work, but the director of staffing in Manila office would not allow my wife’s position as a teacher to be our primary assignment so I could intern in the Government Affairs office. Likewise, stateside opportunities were being thwarted by a personnel director refusing to allow me to serve JAARS (our technical service arm) in a field representative position as I had for six years at Eastman Kodak. I was at a stalemate; and so, we resigned a 10 year tenure as technical support missionaries.

Now what to do? Leslie was already teaching in public school, which left me seeking a technical management position in the Coachella Valley where few tech jobs existed. My lack of an undergraduate degree kept me from several promising positions, even though I was told I was overqualified. After the rejection of Wycliffe and these interviewers, I was a bit desperate.

My wife suggested I start a business, as I knew a lot about radios; so I did. I developed a business plan that thoroughly impressed a business loan manager. With an SBA loan and my retirement funds I dove into self-employment. Setting up shop, a sprinkling of sales, repairing CBs for truckers, and developing a tracking system for the local transit company was a great challenge for me. Ultimately, my small draw against a meager net profit slowly drained the business. When the transit manager gave the contract to a relative rather than putting it up for bid, and a ruptured appendix put me in the hospital, I was down for the count.

Having moved the business into my garage, I started a three-quarter load at the community college at night and found three part-time jobs to help keep the family afloat. I was now determined to complete my BS degree so that I could advance in management. In addition to school, and fixing radio and data equipment for two FedEx stations, I started driving a limousine. Although the clients were often glamorous, the level of my self-worth was not.

I picked up the Lincoln Town Car and the client order and headed west on the 2 ½ hour trip to Claremont to pick up a Mr. Drucker. As the elderly gentleman settled into the front seat and we began some small talk, it occurred to me who he was. Wait a minute, I exclaimed . . . “You are THE, Dr. Peter Drucker!” He smiled and said, “Ja, that is me.” I almost wrecked the car.

I am sitting with the worldwide guru of management captive in my limo for two and a half hours . . . as the commercial says – Priceless! He asked about me and I poured out my story, leaving out no detail or the current state of my frustration. He was a most gracious counselor and mentor to me during that drive back to the desert as the keynote speaker at some conference. He put off those interviewers as the loser, not me; the unethical practice of the transit manager; and shortsightedness of the Wycliffe personnel managers. Quoting Teddy Roosevelt, he said, “Failure is the backdoor to success.” Experience is much more valuable than the degree, he said; the piece of paper says nothing of your actual abilities to succeed in business. However, he did encourage me to finish my studies, promising that they would complement my experience.

Of course I told the dispatcher that I would drive Dr. Drucker back the next day. A tired Dr Drucker slept most the way back, but took the time to further encourage me in my endeavors, telling me that he saw great promise in someone with the courage and fortitude to keep up such a load to provide for his family.

Within months I became Administer for a commercial business, then General Manager of two RV Resorts, and subsequently CEO of two ministries in need of restoration. After completing a graduate-level certificate in Nonprofit Organization Management at UC Riverside, two years ago [now 7 years ago] I took a shortcut into an MA in Global Leadership at Fuller Theological Seminary.

Thank you, Dr. Peter Drucker, for your inspiration during a limo ride.

“All things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose.” Rom 8:28.

PS: On June 11, 2011 I walked across the stage and received my MA in Inter-cultural Studies: Global Leadership from Fuller.

Re-Post in Memory of Peter Drucker ~ Inspiration Comes in Unexpected Ways

On the occasion of the anniversary of Peter Drucker's passing, I re-post this blog in his memory:

It was March 1999. I was nursing a failing business, going to school at night, working part-time for FedEx, and driving a limousine. I was pretty low.

After our furlough in Palm Desert, CA from a three-year missionary term with Wycliffe Bible Translators in the Philippines, we were unable to obtain a new assignment there. I completed a Management course at Summer Institute of Linguistics in Dallas, and was referred to International Relations work, but the director of staffing in Manila office would not allow my wife’s position as a teacher to be our primary assignment so I could intern in the Government Affairs office. Likewise, stateside opportunities were being thwarted by a personnel director refusing to allow me to serve in a field representative position as I had for six years at Eastman Kodak. I was at a stalemate; and so, we resigned a 10 year tenure as technical support missionaries.

Now what to do? Leslie was already teaching in public school, which left me seeking a technical management position in the Coachella Valley where few tech jobs existed. My lack of an undergraduate degree kept me from several promising positions, even though I was told I was overqualified. After the rejection of Wycliffe and these interviewers, I was a bit desperate.

My wife suggested I start a business, as I knew a lot about radios; so I did. I developed a business plan that thoroughly impressed a business loan manager. With an SBA loan and my retirement funds I dove into self-employment. Setting up shop, a sprinkling of sales, repairing CBs for truckers, and developing a tracking system for the local transit company was a great challenge for me. Ultimately, my small draw against a meager net profit slowly drained the business. When the transit manager gave the contract to a relative rather than putting it up for bid, and a ruptured appendix put me in the hospital, I was down for the count.

Having moved the business into my garage, I started a three-quarter load at the community college at night and found three part-time jobs to help keep the family afloat. I was now determined to complete my BS degree so that I could advance in management. In addition to school, and fixing radio and data equipment for two FedEx stations, I started driving a limousine. Although the clients were often glamorous, the level of my self-worth was not.

I picked up the Lincoln Town Car and the client order and headed west on the 2 ½ hour trip to Claremont to pick up a Mr. Drucker. As the elderly gentleman settled into the front seat and we began some small talk, it occurred to me who he was. Wait a minute, I exclaimed . . . “You are THE, Dr. Peter Drucker!” He smiled and said, “Ja, that is me.” I almost wrecked the car.

I am sitting with the worldwide guru of management captive in my limo for two and a half hours . . . as the commercial says – Priceless! He asked about me and I poured out my story, leaving out no detail or the current state of my frustration. He was a most gracious counselor and mentor to me during that drive back to the desert as the keynote speaker at some conference. He put off those interviewers as the loser, not me; the unethical practice of the transit manager; and shortsightedness of the Wycliffe personnel managers. Quoting Teddy Roosevelt, he said, “Failure is the backdoor to success.” Experience is much more valuable than the degree, he said; the piece of paper says nothing of your actual abilities to succeed in business. However, he did encourage me to finish my studies, promising that they would complement my experience.

Of course I told the dispatcher that I would drive Dr. Drucker back the next day. A tired Dr Drucker slept most the way back, but took the time to further encourage me in my endeavors, telling me that he saw great promise in someone with the courage and fortitude to keep up such a load to provide for his family.

Within months I became Administer for a commercial business, then General Manager of two RV Resorts, and subsequently CEO of two ministries in need of restoration. After completing a graduate-level certificate in Nonprofit Organization Management at UC Riverside, two years ago [now 5 1/2 years ago] I took a shortcut into an MA in Global Leadership at Fuller Theological Seminary.

Thank you, Dr. Peter Drucker, for your inspiration during a limo ride.

“All things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose.” Rom 8:28.

PS: On June 11, 2011 I walked across the stage and recieved my MA in Inter-cultural Studies: Global Leadership from Fuller.

Organizational Leadership: Considerations for a Nonprofit Merger ~ Part 6

“No nonprofit organization can survive and succeed in advancing its mission while living independently of other nonprofits. Organizations gain information, political power, and personal and professional support from and in concert with other nonprofits. Thus, close working relationships, partnerships and even joint ventures between nonprofit organizations are a fairly natural occurrence.” ~ David La Piana

Organizational Leadership: Considerations for a Nonprofit Merger ~ © by James K. Lewis

STEWARDING CHANGE

What is the role of the leader seeking to assist his or her (or another’s) organization in creating change? In The Making of a Leader, Robert Clinton asks successful leaders to expect to be led into these types of situations in which God will use them to humbly undertake action in the life of other leaders [or organizations]. This action can be through: affirming or encouraging leadership potential; offering guidance on a special issue; giving insights that broaden the leader [or organization]; challenging the leader [or organization] Godward; or opening a door to ministry opportunity [or collaboration] (Clinton 1988, 149 brackets mine).

Resistance
Resistance to needed change can be due to several issues. Resolving change and its related conflict through the abuse of position and/or power are common maladies – such as the founder refusing to step aside, or a board chair disallowing discussion on the topic. Staff resistance – either preceding or subsequent to decision-making time – may create additional issues. An existing dysfunction of the organization, or the breakdown of a successful transformation, may be caused by an incongruence between people’s actions and the organization’s stated values. Addressing this mis-fitting of people to organizational values cannot be overstated; as Peter Drucker said in an interview with Bruce Rosenstein, “When people are very unhappy, they are in a position that the values of the organization don’t fit them.” The result is that they must be assisted into other work. (Rosenstein)

It is imperative in this scenario for the leader to focus attention on the primary purpose of the organization . . . that is, the sustaining of the mission of the organization. If the mission cannot be continued through an alliance with or mentoring by another organization, then the choice will be between a merger and acquisition, whereby the organization’s core purposes are sustained by and through the resulting entity. If the mission has been sufficiently accomplished, then either the reimagining or dissolution of the organization is the appropriate and normative choice. It takes a sensitive leader and/or consultant to lead the board and the staff to either of those responsible conclusions.

To reiterate: the role of the leader is to steward change in such a manner that the core mission is sustained. If it is determined that the mission has been completed, unless the mission is revised, the organization’s life-cycle is at its end. The leader must then develop the process for the required transformation of the organization, or for the legal dissolution of the organization.

Responding to Change
While the leader may be working on the process for change within the organization or with another entity, he or she must recognize and address specific change issues. In Reframing Change: Training, Realigning, Negotiating, Grieving, and Moving On, Lee Bolman and Terrence Deal outline several critical strategies leaders must implement in order to realize success through change of this magnitude. Three of these that I will share here are Realignment, Conflict, and Loss (Bolman and Deal 2006, 447-469).

The leader needs to begin to realign the organization’s structures to invite and provide the impetus for change. While an organization’s maladies may have developed due to deterioration or lack of structure, this is the time to act. The need for structure at this time is more imperative than ever; people need clarity, predictability, and security. Policies and procedures become welcome and bring cohesiveness to an otherwise chaotic work environment. Often, people are looking for structure in this scenario. Additionally, the formal delineation of authority informs all concerned who is responsible and provides continuity.

Change often brings about discord, which requires a leader to be able to identify the real issues, develop collaborative efforts and provide an environment in which discord can be mediated towards common ground. Two conflicting, and sometimes alternating, responses to change are status quo (to hold onto past accomplishments), and ignoring the situation (staying busy enough or throwing money into the organization hoping that the problems will go away – or solve themselves). The loss of what “once was” can also cause paralysis, and in the midst of responding to the changes, leaders and staff can go through cycles of grief. Providing appropriate counsel during this time will help the staff to handle the challenges and uncertainty they face.

Human Assets
In coping with the issues within a merger or acquisition, leaders must recognize the pressures that are being carried by our most important asset – our staff; human beings with feelings for the past and dreams for the future. Appropriately responding to how people deal with change is likely the most critical element for the success or failure of the organizations involved (Beckhard 2006, 12). Critical to the success of the resulting organization is the communication of its mission and core values that the staff is charged with embracing while supporting the development of new direction and purpose of the organization (Lawler 2006, 551).

Bolman and Deal also address several issues that leaders must assist staff in facing as the organization transitions and realizes stability through change: values, symbols, and celebration. It is crucial for people to be able to hold onto their organization’s core values. For many these values are what kept them in the ministry, struggling in order to provide crucial services for individuals in need and to benefit their community; perhaps having been asked to give up compensation and forgo raises, but remained loyal to the organization rather than taking a more lucrative position outside the ministry and the nonprofit sector.

Ensuring that symbols—either real or perceived—are protected and endure beyond the restructuring may help in dealing with the loss of what they identified with in the organization and its ministry. Keeping a logo or being identified in name as a ministry of the surviving organization can keep that flame alive for those surviving the change. Investing in ceremony is also an encouraging process that aids in bringing the positive to the forefront of significant change and celebrating a successful transition.

Organizational Leadership: Considerations for a Nonprofit Merger ~ Part 5

“No nonprofit organization can survive and succeed in advancing its mission while living independently of other nonprofits. Organizations gain information, political power, and personal and professional support from and in concert with other nonprofits. Thus, close working relationships, partnerships and even joint ventures between nonprofit organizations are a fairly natural occurrence.” ~ David La Piana

Organizational Leadership: Considerations for a Nonprofit Merger ~ © by James K. Lewis

OPTIONS FOR CHANGE

Although this paper is discussing mergers and acquisitions, these may not necessarily be the most effective way to deal with the issues at hand. The duty of the steward leader, in concert with his or her staff team and board of directors, is to determine the best course of action for the preservation and sustainability of the organization’s mission. A leader may find that a temporary mentoring, collaboration, or strategic alliance may be the best tool to get the organization on surer footing, providing time to determine the long-term solution. One option I spoke of in a previous paper is increased collaboration with the local church. One should keep all options open at the outset as he or she becomes more aware of the extent of the issues the organization is facing (Carlson and Donohoe 2010, 215-216).

A broadened outlook by an independent third party—such as a consultant or potential partner—can go far in revealing potential blind spots that the leader may have overlooked. Consultation with a professional, or collaborating with a potential partner—although sometimes difficult due to pride and fear of change—can be a great benefit in combining efforts, developing broader resources, and identifying common mission, vision, and core values with others.

While identifying potential joint ventures, in The Executive Director’s Guide to Thriving as a Nonprofit Leader, Carlson and Donohoe discuss several formal options available to the organization seeking partnership opportunities:

• Joint programming or Joint Venture: Broadly defined actions such as program collaboration between nonprofits that may serve to minimize duplication and, competition, or jointly doing business, fundraising, or awareness campaigns.

• Administrative Consolidation: Sharing core administrative functions. Each keeps their separate boards and staffs, however, a portion or all of support systems are shared, such as Accounting, Payroll and HR functions.

• Merger: The legal and permanent blending of two or more entities into a separate entity. Agreeing to integrate processes, programs, governance, and staff – establishing an entirely new organization that merges all operations and programs. This is sometimes referred to as a consolidation.

• Acquisition: Much the same as a merger, except that the surviving entity is usually the larger and/or more capable organization that assumes control of the smaller organization. Much of what is termed “merger” is actually an acquisition of a smaller, weaker organization by a larger, more successful, or well-known organization. Although the term acquisition can have negative connotations, the benefit of both merger and acquisition is the designed potential of the resulting organization being greater than the sum of each organization.

• Only vaguely alluded to by Carlson and Donohoe, is mentoring – or what they might call collaborative assistance. As a stronger, more able organization—and/or perhaps a consultant—comes alongside of a struggling organization, a relational collaboration can take place – helping strengthen that weaker organization in areas of needed growth. This is especially helpful when the organizations are not similar in mission, program or values, perhaps as a preliminary step for those considering a merger or acquisition.

Case Studies

In the following three situations, six organizations followed one of the above scenarios with positive outcomes:

1. In light of external forces causing downsizing and other remedial responses in two similarly recognized and successful organizations, one of the boards sought a discussion with the other on how they could work more closely together – initially without including the topic of merging. They came to recognize their joint efforts could be more powerful and effective than continuing separately. One of the CEOs was skilled in program and the other in administration. As one CEO was adverse to a co-leadership position, the boards set one in place as CEO of a true merger of the two organizations, and the other over program/operations. (Frank 2011)

2. RRM was a newer, larger, more successful and well-managed—but lesser known—service provider. SHMC was a much smaller, less funded—but more recognized—service provider in the same town. Due to external economic and operational issues, they both sensed a need to collaborate – especially when both faced the loss of their respective properties. After an initial period of trading staff and testing the culture of the new combined team, the two boards came together and accepted the acquisition of the larger by the smaller, joining the name, using the prefix of the more recognized name of SHRM. Although a true acquisition, they used the term “merger” as it was more acceptable to the community, who recognized great benefit in this apparent joining of efforts, rather than an acquisition of the more recognized by the other. It was seen as the biggest thing to happen in the Province in years. So positive was this collaboration that they were able to present a new giving opportunity, resulting in a gain of about three thousand new donors in the first year alone. Also, having a single provider, people were less confused about which to support. (Porter 2011)

3. Unlike the first two cases, a third set of organizations realized that one of them desperately needed help and initiated a discussion about how the stronger could best serve the other. Upon examination of the differences in culture and programs, the more established organization offered to come alongside the weaker one and support its reorganization and strengthening through mentoring; leaving intact both viable organizations continuing to serve the community. (Anon 2011)

These are examples of merger, acquisition, and collaborative assistance (or mentoring), respectively. Although these narratives are brief—without detailing issues and processes—they serve to illustrate that every situation calls for its own remedy for a successful outcome. The critical issue is finding the process and outcome that best sustains the mission of the organization and serves the community. Some cases may require amending the mission – or, if there is no longer a recognized related need, to dissolve the organization.

Organizational Leadership: Considerations for a Nonprofit Merger ~ Part 4

“No nonprofit organization can survive and succeed in advancing its mission while living independently of other nonprofits. Organizations gain information, political power, and personal and professional support from and in concert with other nonprofits. Thus, close working relationships, partnerships and even joint ventures between nonprofit organizations are a fairly natural occurrence.” ~ David La Piana

Organizational Leadership: Considerations for a Nonprofit Merger ~ © by James K. Lewis

Organizational Reluctance

A reluctance to act is often due to complacency based on many fruitful years of funding and stable compensation. Many larger nonprofits began to model for-profit corporations, and nonprofits became attractive destinations for the corporate executive. The reluctance of the government to provide oversight of the nonprofit sector also played into this contentment, until issues began to crop up in larger, national nonprofits. Revelations of high compensation and benefits invited investigation, and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 began to be increasingly enforced upon the nonprofit public benefit corporations on a larger scale. Recently, the U.S. Congress started holding extensive hearings about nonprofits. Until these troubles began to manifest themselves, there were few market forces to compel additional governance, consolidation, or restructuring of nonprofit organizations.

This lack of discipline led to inadequate regular and rational methodologies of measuring services and outcomes. Some business-savvy nonprofit leaders do not necessarily differentiate between sectors, and similarly fail to recognize that one does not measure nonprofit performance in the same manner as for-profit businesses. Equally detrimental, many nonprofits lack discipline in developing consistent and rational methods of assessing output and tracking. Jim Collins, in Good to Great and the Social Sectors gets direct in this matter when he admonishes the leader that “It doesn’t matter whether you can quantify your results. What matters is that you rigorously assemble evidence—quantitative or qualitative—to track your progress.” (Collins 2005, 7) Many nonprofits merely lack the know-how or resources to measure their program results. However, this information can be critical for improving their activities and reporting to funders. While nonprofits were formed with the best of intentions, merely “doing good” is not sufficient in light of economic downturns.

With wise foresight Peter Drucker, in Managing for the Future: 1990s and Beyond, warned of the temptation of resting on the “goodness of our cause.” There needs to be a shift from the “good cause” mentality to one of accountability and results [with a view of ROI]. Unfortunately, nonprofit organizations develop a strong emotional attachment to [services they provide] and a resistance to facing reality. Drucker provides an illustration of this resistance to change from an old medical saying: “‘As long as the patient eliminates there is a chance. But once the bowels and the bladder stop, death does not take long.’ If organizations cannot get rid of their waste products, they poison themselves. They must organize abandonment.” (Drucker 1993, 206, 229, 340 brackets mine).

Facing Reality & Awareness

Henry Cloud, in Integrity: The Courage to Meet the Demands of Reality discusses the need to face up to new realities and question what the world is really like – rather than rest on assertions and assumptions that made sense a few years ago. Many nonprofit leaders do not desire quantitative feedback, but it is only by looking at reality will we see our true strengths and weaknesses. Once a leader accepts reality he or she can examine how to best develop assimilation and accommodation . . . to change and adapt the organizational culture and context (Cloud 2006, 116-117, 133-138).

There needs to be both awareness that something has changed, and someone in a “strategic position” to effect change. Some conditional awareness that can motivate this process for change is a:
• Need to change managerial strategy
• Need to make the organizational climate consistent with individual and environmental changes
• Need to change cultural norms
• Need to change structure and roles
• Need to improve (or introduce) intergroup collaboration
• Need to open up the communications system
• Need for better planning
• Need for coping with problems of merger
• Need for change in motivation of the workforce
• Need for adaptation to a new environment

Any one, or a combination of conditions, too long ignored may bring about the decline of an organization and the need for examination of reorganization and/or restructuring, including consolidation or merging with another entity or if needed, acquisition. Glenn Parker, writing in Organizational Development, discusses conflict and denial as conditions that call for assessing the organization (Parker 2006, 664).

In this scenario, there has likely been an ongoing ignoring or denying of dysfunction that begged to be addressed, but the hesitancy to recognize a shift in reality, or new paradigms, leads to a weakness in the organization. Whether it is prior to, or subsequent to a merger, the failure to address the human problems is inevitably destructive to the health of the organization (Beckhard 2006, 10). This dysfunction has the most likelihood of affecting staff cohesiveness and organizational synergy; thus furthering the demise of the organization. Before such injurious effect is realized, a leader should begin to investigate options for the survival of the organization.

Organizational Leadership: Considerations for a Nonprofit Merger ~ Part 3

“No nonprofit organization can survive and succeed in advancing its mission while living independently of other nonprofits. Organizations gain information, political power, and personal and professional support from and in concert with other nonprofits. Thus, close working relationships, partnerships and even joint ventures between nonprofit organizations are a fairly natural occurrence.” ~ David La Piana

Organizational Leadership: Considerations for a Nonprofit Merger ~ © by James K. Lewis

CULTURE AND CONTEXT

In Cultivating Communities of Practice E. Wenger notes that multiple changes happen when companies are restructuring internal and external relationships in response to a shifting market (Wenger, McDermott and Snyder 2002, 6). Most nonprofits have such an idealistic view of themselves and their mission that they refuse to see the changing landscape around them. When they do recognize external issues threatening their existence, it is often too late. In a context of economic struggle or other negative external force, this protective culture serves to weaken rather than strengthen. Ken Berger warns that “All too often, self-preservation trumps mission” (Gose 2008).

Founder’s Trap
One self-preservation issue in declining organizations is the older founder-leader, or long-term executive and/or board members, clinging onto what “once was.” This can result in a loss of both innovation and the deterioration of the organization’s lifecycle; either stalling in what Adizes refers to as a "Founder’s Trap," or aging into "Aristocracy" or "Bureaucracy." * Today, it can be seen as reluctance to pass one’s mantle to the new generation of leaders. While it may be a founder-leader imagining he or she is being loyal to what they gave birth—or a board member who has invested personal wealth to keep the organization afloat—these leaders are actually displaying a character of blind and selfish ownership; this runs counter to steward leadership. Condon is unabashedly bold as he states that service organizations that were “started with fire and zeal settled into hidebound bureaucracies” (Condon 2009).

The steward leader must learn when it is best to let go and allow an organization to grow beyond his or her capabilities. It is often the organization itself that will provide the indication of a need to step away. However, a reluctance to release the reins of power and position may keep them hanging on until there remains no other option than a merger or acquisition . . . or death of the organization (Blackaby and Blackaby 2001, 257-259).

*- For a full discussion of Organizational Lifecycle please see: Adizes, Ichak. Managing Corporate Lifecycles. Santa Barbara: Adizes, 2004.

Organizational Leadership: Considerations for a Nonprofit Merger ~ Part 2

“No nonprofit organization can survive and succeed in advancing its mission while living independently of other nonprofits. Organizations gain information, political power, and personal and professional support from and in concert with other nonprofits. Thus, close working relationships, partnerships and even joint ventures between nonprofit organizations are a fairly natural occurrence.” ~ David La Piana

Organizational Leadership: Considerations for a Nonprofit Merger ~ © by James K. Lewis

CURRENT NONPROFIT ENVIRONMENT

The previous decades witnessed a marked growth of the nonprofit sector from 1998 to 2005 as the numbers expanded from 1.1 million to 1.4 million nonprofits. In 2006 these public benefit corporations added over $600 billion to the economy and almost 10% of jobs nationwide – 35% in health services alone (NPSIB, 2007). This growth led, not only to increased services, but to a corresponding increase in funding requirements as well – from both private and government sources – unintentionally serving to create a duplication of services and dilute the available funding. In 2009 Robert Egger, author of Begging for Change, warned that this growth had caused “. . . too many nonprofits, sometimes duplicating each other's services and fighting one another for funding and supplies” (Condon 2009).

In recent years, however, that growth has been checked with the downturn in the economy as funding sources have been hit with losses. As early as 2008 monitors of nonprofits started warning of a decline, and funders were told to reconsider who they funded:

More than 100,000 nonprofit groups nationwide will fail within the next two years, including a few “big brand-name nonprofits,” a scholar of philanthropy and government told charity leaders assembled here to discuss the fallout from the nation's financial meltdown. Paul C. Light, a professor of public service at New York University, said that grant makers and others should focus resources on strong organizations and pull the plug on those that are likely to fail . . . (Wasley 2008).

These warnings also called for a consolidation of similar service providers. Ben Gose, in "Chronicles of Philanthropy" quotes Ken Berger, chief executive of Charity Navigator, who admonished that there was a definite need for “charities to consider joining forces now or at least share administrative staff.” He saw immediate value in nonprofit partnerships (Gose 2008).

Similarly, New York Secretary of State Lorraine Cortes-Vazquez noted that collaborating would be critical for the survival of the nonprofit sector, and stated that it was not the level of services that put nonprofits at risk of failure, but not having proper administrative capacities, and called for sharing back-office functions in order to reduce the load on most charities. This shared effort would permit a refocusing on service rather than fund development (Wasley 2008).

The future for those who refuse to recognize this need is more foreboding, and we have seen many organizations take to downsizing and internally breaking down into core areas of expertise. Eventually, some may seek out and enter into increased partnerships with other organizations in their similar contexts . . . or cease to exist. Nonprofit leaders should take note of Peter Drucker’s early stance, long before the current economic shifts had forced organizational change on all levels. In Innovation and Entrepreneurship (1985) he wrote that “systematic innovation . . . consists in the purposeful and organized search for change, and in the systematic analysis of the opportunities such changes might offer for [or force?] economic or social innovation.” He goes on to identify systems of change. Several are: unexpected success or failure; incongruity (gap between reality as it and reality as it is assumed to be); and changes in industry or market structure that take people unawares (Drucker 1993, 342-343 brackets mine). These shifts and discrepancies are indicative of the culture and context of the at-risk nonprofit.

Inspiration comes in unexpected ways

It was March 1999. I was nursing a failing business, going to school at night, working part-time for FedEx, and driving a limousine. I was pretty low.

After our furlough in Palm Desert, CA from a three-year missionary term with Wycliffe Bible Translators in the Philippines, we were unable to obtain a new assignment there. I completed a Management course at Summer Institute of Linguistics in Dallas, and was referred to International Relations work, but the director of staffing in the Manila office would not allow my wife’s position as a teacher to be our primary assignment so I could intern in the Government Affairs office. Likewise, stateside opportunities were being thwarted by a personnel director refusing to allow me to serve in a field representative position as I had for six years at Eastman Kodak. I was at a stalemate; and so, we resigned a 10 year tenure as technical support missionaries.

Now what to do? Leslie was already teaching in public school, which left me seeking a technical management position in the Coachella Valley where few tech jobs existed. My lack of an undergraduate degree kept me from several promising positions, even though I was told I was overqualified. After the rejection of Wycliffe and these interviewers, I was a bit desperate.

My wife suggested I start a business, as I knew a lot about radios; so I did. I developed a business plan that thoroughly impressed a business loan manager. With an SBA loan and my retirement funds I dove into self-employment. Setting up shop, a sprinkling of sales, repairing CBs for truckers, and developing a tracking system for the local transit company was a great challenge for me. Ultimately, my small draw against a meager net profit slowly drained the business. When the transit manager gave the contract to a relative rather than putting it up for bid, and a ruptured appendix put me in the hospital, I was down for the count.

Having moved the business into my garage, I started a three-quarter load at the community college at night and found three part-time jobs to help keep the family afloat. I was now determined to complete my BS degree so that I could advance in management. In addition to school, and fixing radio and data equipment for two FedEx stations, I started driving a limousine. Although the clients were often glamorous, the level of my self-worth was not.

I picked up the Lincoln Town Car and the client order and headed west on the 2 ½ hour trip to Claremont to pick up a Mr. Drucker. As the elderly gentleman settled into the front seat and we began some small talk, it occurred to me who he was. Wait a minute, I exclaimed . . . “You are THE, Dr. Peter Drucker!” He smiled and said, “Ja, that is me.” I almost wrecked the car.

I am sitting with the worldwide guru of management captive in my limo for two and a half hours . . . as the commercial says – Priceless! He asked about me and I poured out my story, leaving out no detail or the current state of my frustration. He was a most gracious counselor and mentor to me during that drive back to the desert as the keynote speaker at some conference. He put off those interviewers as the loser, not me; the unethical practice of the transit manager; and shortsightedness of the Wycliffe personnel managers. Quoting Teddy Roosevelt, he said, “Failure is the backdoor to success.” Experience is much more valuable than the degree, he said; the piece of paper says nothing of your actual abilities to succeed in business. However, he did encourage me to finish my studies, promising that they would complement my experience.

Of course I told the dispatcher that I would drive Dr. Drucker back the next day. A tired Dr Drucker slept most the way back, but took the time to further encourage me in my endeavors, telling me that he saw great promise in someone with the courage and fortitude to keep up such a load to provide for his family.

Within months I became Administer for a commercial business, then General Manager of two RV Resorts, and subsequently CEO of two ministries in need of restoration. After completing a graduate-level certificate in Nonprofit Organization Management at UC Riverside, two years ago (2005) I took a shortcut into an MA in Global Leadership at Fuller Theological Seminary.

Thank you, Dr. Peter Drucker, for your inspiration during a limo ride.

“All things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose.” Rom 8:28.

PS: On June 11, 2011 I walked across the stage and recieved my MA in Global Leadership from Fuller.