The Personnel Files

As Nonprofit Executive Directors, personnel issues are often the most challenging.

In the world of nonprofit leadership, few challenges are as complex and consequential as staffing decisions. As executive directors, we often find ourselves navigating the delicate balance between organizational growth and resource management. Let me share this story as a cautionary tale and a learning opportunity for those at the helm of mission-driven organizations.

Our story begins with a familiar scenario: a thriving ministry area within our organization was expanding rapidly, necessitating the creation of a new position. It was an exciting time, as our revenues were strong, allowing us to invest in our team to support this growth. With optimism and a sense of urgency, we set out to find the perfect candidate to join our ranks.

The process started smoothly enough. Working collaboratively with our ministry team, we crafted a comprehensive job description that we believed would attract top talent. Fortune seemed to smile upon us when we quickly identified a candidate who appeared to tick all the boxes. On paper, this individual was impressive: young, energetic, and enrolled in seminary studies. The latter point seemed particularly advantageous, as it suggested a deep commitment to our mission and values.We were pleased to find that the candidate's schedule could be flexibly arranged around their classes, which appeared to be a win-win situation. The physically demanding nature of the role seemed well-suited to a younger, more vigorous individual. With high hopes, we proceeded with the hiring process.

Initially, our decision appeared to be vindicated. The onboarding process went smoothly, and our new team member integrated well into our existing systems. Their positive attitude was infectious, and they seemed to be forming good relationships with the rest of the staff. We felt confident that we had made the right choice.

However, as time passed, cracks began to appear in this rosy picture. Our ministry leader started to notice concerning patterns in the new employee's performance. Phone calls were going unreturned, and assignments were not being fulfilled. These issues, while not catastrophic, were the first seeds of what could grow into more significant problems if left unaddressed.When I became aware of these concerns, I immediately reached out to our ministry leader for more information.

To my surprise and disappointment, I learned that he hadn't yet spoken directly with our new team member about these issues. Recognizing the importance of early intervention, I asked the ministry leader to take some time to reflect on the situation and provide me with a more detailed assessment of what might be happening.

Before this deeper analysis could take place, however, the situation took an unexpected turn. Our new employee approached me directly, expressing that they felt overworked. I listened attentively as they explained their situation, and it became clear that personal issues at home were interfering with their ability to perform at work.

In an attempt to address the situation constructively, I proposed a compromise. We agreed on a list of ten basic tasks that needed to be accomplished each week – a manageable three or four items per day. Both of us felt that this was a reasonable and achievable goal. We set a follow-up meeting for one week later to assess progress.

When the day of our follow-up meeting arrived, I was eager to hear about the employee's progress. To my dismay, they proudly announced that they had completed seven out of the ten assigned tasks. While they seemed pleased with this outcome, I found myself underwhelmed. When I pointed out that seven out of ten equated to 70% – effectively a C- grade – the employee's response was telling. They quipped that it was "good enough for a diploma."

It was at this moment that I realized we had reached a critical juncture. The disconnect between our organizational standards and the employee's perception of acceptable performance was stark. I explained firmly that we weren't interested in running a "C- shop." I emphasized our commitment to excellence, reminding them that we rely on donations and have a responsibility to operate at an "A" level.

The conversation that followed was difficult but necessary. I asked the employee point-blank if they believed they could consistently perform at an A level in this role. After a moment of stunned silence and careful consideration, they admitted that they didn't think they could meet that standard.

This honest acknowledgment led to a mutual understanding that the position wasn't the right fit. While it was a challenging conversation, it ultimately allowed us to part ways amicably. The employee's candor was appreciated, and it enabled us to make a decision that was in the best interest of both the individual and the organization.

This experience reinforced a crucial lesson in nonprofit leadership, one that echoes the wisdom of Billy Beane, the renowned General Manager of the Oakland A's, as described in the book "Moneyball." Beane's insight that it's always easier to recover from a personnel move you didn't make than from one you did make resonates deeply in the nonprofit sector.

Upon reflection, I don't necessarily view hiring this young person as a mistake. However, the experience highlighted areas where our hiring and onboarding processes could be improved. Perhaps we should have delved deeper into certain aspects of the candidate's background or motivations. Maybe we could have established clearer performance expectations from the outset. Regardless, the important thing is that we were able to recognize and address the issue once it became apparent.

This experience underscores the complexity of personnel management in the nonprofit sector – or indeed, in any field. As leaders, we must approach staffing decisions with careful consideration and a long-term perspective. It's crucial to resist the pressure to make hasty hiring decisions, even when faced with urgent needs or limited resources.

Effective nonprofit leadership requires a delicate balance of optimism and pragmatism. While we should always be open to giving people opportunities to grow and succeed, we must also be prepared to make tough decisions when necessary. This means having the courage to address performance issues promptly and directly, always keeping the organization's mission and stakeholders at the forefront of our minds.

Moreover, this experience highlights the importance of ongoing communication and performance management. Regular check-ins, clear goal-setting, and open dialogues about expectations can help prevent small issues from escalating into larger problems. It's also crucial to create an environment where team members feel comfortable discussing challenges or concerns before they become insurmountable.

As nonprofit leaders, we must remember that our responsibility extends beyond just filling positions. We are entrusted with stewarding resources, maintaining donor confidence, and ultimately, advancing our organization's mission. Every staffing decision we make has the potential to significantly impact our ability to serve our communities effectively.

In conclusion, while this particular staffing situation didn't work out as initially hoped, it provided valuable lessons that can inform future decision-making. By approaching hiring with careful consideration, maintaining clear communication, addressing issues promptly, and being willing to make difficult decisions when necessary, we can build stronger, more effective teams. These teams, in turn, will be better equipped to drive our organizations forward and create meaningful impact in the communities we serve.