Tag Archives: employees

Gossip’s toll in your workplace

gossipBack in March 2010, an article (registration may be required for access) in Workplace.com highlighted a study in the Journal of Contemporary Ethnography regarding workplace gossip. It reviewed how rumors among employees about a company can dilute authority, can poison workplace congeniality and contribute to staff turnover, all of which can cause harm an organization without ever becoming public (external to the organization). The study is focused on paid employees, but, of course, its findings are important to nonprofits and volunteers as well. The study’s author, sociologist Tim Hallett, calls such gossip “reputational warfare,” and says that once a bad reputation has been solidified, justified or not, it usually sticks — often with negative consequences for the entire organization.

Employees and volunteers will always talk internally about how things are going at an organization, what they think the future holds, what obstacles they see facing the country, etc. There’s nothing wrong with that. But a misunderstanding, a small fear, an unanswered question or an observation by someone uninformed about a situation can turn conversations into negative gossip, layout the foundation for mistrust, conflict, and negative public relations.

Don’t try to stop conversations about the internal workings of an organization – those conversations can be important informal training for new staff and help you discover and address issues before they become full-blown problems. But do work to make sure conversations by staff – employees, consultants and volunteers – are fact-based and within the bounds of your confidentiality policies, and work continually to create a culture where employees and volunteers share their fears, questions and suppositions early with supervisors, without fear of retribution for merely expressing a fear or asking a question.

Gossip tends to crop up when there are voids in communication. Therefore, address fears, questions and suppositions quickly and regularly. Filling the void with information — about possible office relocation, promotions, layoffs, firings, conflicts with funders or partners, budget shortfalls, etc. If a situation must be kept confidential and can’t be shared with employees, consultants and/or volunteers — for instance, the reasons why a staff person was fired — then explain why such information is kept confidential, in such a way that employees realize that you will honor their personnel issues, positive or negative, in a confidential manner as well. If the information could be damaging to the organization if released too early, then say so, explicitly. If you should have released the information sooner internally, apologize to staff and talk about what you will be doing to ensure that information is not withheld again — or ask them how they would have liked the situation to have been handled.

If you don’t want to commit anything or everything to writing, such as in a company-wide memo, then meet individually with staff and volunteers, have the executive director or a senior manager address individual department meetings, and have all-staff meetings. Give employees multiple opportunities to ask questions and voice concerns about rumors that they have heard.

But how do you know gossip is happening? By having trusting relationships across the organization – including across an organization’s hierarchy. That comes from regular conversations, formal and informal, and by showing explicitly how feedback from staff is heard, how suggestions from volunteers does influence the organization, etc. And building trust would take several more blogs to explore…

In short, you must create a culture of faith and trust among your paid staff and volunteers in each other and in the organizational leadership in order to prevent damaging gossip. It’s much easier to create and sustain such a culture than it is to try to overcome “reputational warfare.”

Also see

For Nonprofit Organizations: How to Handle Online Criticism.

Feuds in the nonprofit/NGO/charity world

sabotage your organization’s productivity: tips from the CIA in 1944

In 1944, the CIA’s precursor, the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), distributed a secret pamphlet, the “Simple Sabotage Field Manual“, providing instructions to citizens living in Axis nations who were sympathetic to the Allies on how to weaken their country by reducing production in factories, offices, and transportation lines. It was declassified in 2008 and is available on the CIA’s website.

Most of the tips are about easy-to-do, hard-to-trace physical vandalism: sabotaging electric motors, fuel, cooling systems, power grids, railways and more. But several are timeless instructions on how to be a terrible employee in meetings and in management. And these instructions would be really funny except that I have encountered people in many of my work places that employ these methods. The motivations of employees using these methods today aren’t to help foreign governments – at least I hope not. I’m not really sure what their motivations are. But here’s my favorite productivity-crushing activities recommended in the manual, because I’ve encountered them so often (quotes are used because the manual used them; italics show exact quotes):

When possible, refer all matters to committees, for “further study and consideration.” Attempt to make the committee as large as possible — never less than five.

Bring up irrelevant issues as frequently as possible. Refer back to matters decided upon at the last meeting and attempt to re-open the question of the advisability of that decision.

Refer back to matters decided upon at the last meeting and attempt to re-open the question of the advisability of that decision.

Frequently advocate “caution.”

Multiply the procedures and clearances involved in issuing instructions, pay checks, and so on. See that three people have to approve everything where one would do.

Do your work poorly and blame it on bad tools, machinery, or equipment. Complain that these things are preventing you from doing your job right.

Give people wrong numbers and cut them off “accidentally”

Delay the transmission and delivery of telegrams (now emails and other messages)

Ruin presentations by coughing loudly and by talking (or ignore them while you play on your phone)

When training new workers, give incomplete or misleading instructions.

Misfile essential documents.

Spread disturbing rumors that sound like inside dope.

Work slowly.

Give lengthy and incomprehensible explanations when questioned.

Act stupid.

The last one made me laugh out loud.

But what the manual recommends is not all bad: there’s also this recommendation, which I find particularly valuable it getting what I want when working with government clerks:

Cry and sob hysterically at every occasion especially when confronted by government clerks

Corporate volunteers can be a burden for nonprofits

Back in 2011, I asked if group volunteering was really all its cracked up to be.

The sentiment has gone mainstream: the Boston Globe published this yesterday: Corporate volunteers can be a burden for nonprofits.

Corporate social responsibility folks, managers of employee volunteerism programs: are you listening?

mobile apps in nonprofit program & management work

Whenever I read about mobile apps (software applications to be used on smartphones or tablets) for nonprofits, the articles are almost always be about fundraising – about how to allow people to easily donate to an organization.

What I’m hungry for is information on how nonprofits are already using mobile apps in their program or management work.

I’ve blogged about this quest before, just last month, and posted about it on the TechSoup community forum, and the silence has been deafening. The impression I get is that there are far more ideas about how apps might help nonprofits, beyond allowing people to make donations from their smart phone, than there are actual app uses.

If you have information on employees, consultants or volunteers using mobile apps as a part of their work for nonprofits, NGOs, libraries, government agencies, or any mission-based organizations, pick your place to share your story over on the TechSoup community:

Also see this

The quest continues!

I don’t like “Closed Gardens”

I don’t like “closed gardens” like Facebook to create online communities for volunteers, clients or members. Not only for all of the reasons I note here on TechSoup, but also because a lot of people do NOT like mixing their social lives with their volunteering lives.

Take this story today on NPR’s Talk of the Nation, that noted a teacher was fired for a photo on her Facebook page that showed her drinking wine while she was on vacation. That’s enough to make anyone paranoid about using their Facebook page for their work or volunteering.

Also, if I am required to join a Facebook group as a part of my volunteering, that means other volunteers and the organization’s employees are going to know I’m on Facebook, and want to become my friend – and be hurt if I say no.

More on why I don’t like “closed gardens” as online communities for volunteers, clients or members. Weigh in there on your own thoughts! (if you try to comment here on this particular blog, I’m going to NOT publish your comment and ask that you over to TechSoup and reply)

Do NOT say “Need to Cut Costs? Involve Volunteers!”

(update: Just got a tweet from GiveGood2012, which said,

@jcravens42 love the blog. You’ve made us rethink our marketing gambit. Thank you!!!

Hurrah for them! For all of us! Now, just several thousand other people to go…)

Back in December of 2011, I blogged about Survival Strategies for Nonprofits, also applicable to non-governmental organizations, (NGOs), community based organizations (CBOs), charities, and government agencies focused on the community or the environment, etc., per the current dire economic climate. I wrote that blog in response to so many blogs on similar themes that I found unrealistic – or that said something like this:

Are you a #charity or #socent who needs help to cut costs? Read about our skilled volunteer matchmaking service (a tweet from GiveGood2012)

As my long-time followers know, these kinds of statements drive me crazy, because:

  • Volunteers are NOT free. There ARE costs associated with involving volunteers, particularly volunteers in high-responsibility roles. To involve volunteers effectively, YOU NEED MONEY.
  • People looking for jobs (and, in case you haven’t noticed, there are a LOT of people looking for jobs), as well as unions, read those statements and say, “See, this is where we opposed volunteer involvement – you are doing this to replace paid workers!” It’s why the union of professional firefighters in the USA opposes all volunteer firefighting programs. It’s why the unionized school employees in Petaluma, California protested volunteer involvement in schools. Why shouldn’t they be outraged – you just said volunteers could – and will – take paid jobs away!
  • It leads to poor decision-making by boards of directors and governments. I was contacted by a state historical agency once upon a time. There were patrons of the state historical library that frequented the site and helped fellow visitors in finding information on an ad hoc basis. The agency decided to formalize the activities as a volunteer program, so visitors would know they were talking to someone who officially-represented the organization, so helpers received the proper training, and so helpers received the proper thanks. The informal helpers became formal volunteers, and the volunteers loved it — they saw it as a “promotion”, as a recognition of their knowledge and past help. The volunteer program flourished over just a couple of years, and the agency decided to present it as a success story to the state legislature, which provides funding for the library. Unfortunately, agency representatives presented it in terms of money saved: they calculated a dollar value for each hour the volunteers had contributed, and said, “This is how much money we saved involving volunteers.” And the state legislature was very impressed — so impressed that they cut one of the paid staff member positions and other budget items, and told the agency to do more with volunteers “so you can save even more money.

If you are thinking of converting any roles at your organization from paid to volunteer, do not think of it nor talk about it as a way to save money, and do not think of it nor talk about it as a temporary solution.

Instead, think of it as a permanent re-alignment of your organization. You are doing this for strategic reasons – choose to reserve certain roles for volunteers because you have decided volunteers are the best people for those roles.

Consider this:

  • Does the American Red Cross train mobilize thousands of volunteers to staff most of its services during crisis situations because it “saves money”, or because volunteers are actually the best people for those tasks?
  • Does the Girl Scouts of the USA have volunteers deliver the vast majority of its programs to girls to save money, or because volunteers are the best people for those roles?
  • Do many women’s domestic violence shelters reserve the role of victim’s advocate for volunteers because it “saves money”, or because its clients prefer to work with someone they know is volunteering in that role – they aren’t there for the pay, but because of their desire to help?
  • Does CASA recruit and train volunteers to help children in the court system to save money, or because volunteers are actually the best people for those roles?

When I was directing the United Nations’ Online Volunteering service, administered through UNDP/UNV, the head of UNV at the time, Sharon Capeling-Alakija (whom I miss every day), said something really interesting in a staff meeting that I have never forgotten: she said the reason she was so committed to the OV service was because, without it, “the only way people can be involved in UNV is to become a UNV and going into the field for two years, or by becoming a staff member at headquarters – and most people can’t do this. With this, anyone can be involved in our work now.” I loved that statement. I’ve never forgotten it.

If your organization or program decides that its going to increase the number of volunteers it involves, then reserve certain roles exclusively for volunteers – for instance, all consultancies that will support staff, all front desk/phone staff, all bloggers, all conference support staff, all food servers, etc., and make it a permanent change that will last even when the economy gets better.

Not only are volunteers NOT free, this realignment regarding volunteer involvement will cost money – probably more money than you are already spending now to support and involve volunteers: more volunteers will need to be screened, trained more than once, and supervised and supported, and all employees and volunteer staff in leadership roles will need training on how to work with volunteers – and training is rarely free!

Develop a mission statement regarding why your organization involves volunteers. For example:

All tasks at our organization related to advising new entrepreneurs/mentoring young people/delivering meals/repairing bicycles are reserved for volunteers. We feel these roles, which are fundamental to the meeting of our organization’s mission, are best done by volunteers – unpaid staff donating their time and talent – rather than paid employees.

Such-and-such organization reserves certain tasks and roles specifically for volunteers, per our commitment to create opportunities for the community to participate in, offer feedback and endorse our work.

As a part of our commitment to both transparency and to creating opportunities for community investment in our organization, such-and-such organization welcomes volunteers in a variety of roles, including activities that directly support our paid employees, leadership positions and client services.

 

Just as some jobs are best done by paid employees, some tasks and roles at our organization are best done by volunteers. We therefore reserve certain positions for volunteers, including…

 

Our organization involves volunteers so that we can tap into skills, experiences and talents beyond what our excellent professional staff already bring to our organization and its work.

 

Every employee at our organization looks for ways to involve volunteers in his or her work. This is part of our commitment to involving the community in all aspects of our work.

 

Such-and-such organization is committed to helping to cultivate new professionals in the field of name-of-field-redacted. Therefore, we reserve certain tasks and roles for volunteer interns, to provide career-development experiences to emerging professionals.

 

 

Lots more advice on writing a mission statement for your organization or program, and examples of such, here.

Also see:

Going all-volunteer in dire economic times: use with caution

The Value of Volunteers (and how to talk about such)

Why don’t they tell? Would they at your org?

Over the years, more than one person observed Jerry Sandusky, head of the nonprofit organization The Second Mile and former Penn State defensive coordinator, having sex with boys. Yet none of those people called the police, and none of the people in authority that they told about what they saw called police.

Why?

A leading candidate for the Republican nomination for President of the USA is being accused of sexual harassment by women who worked for a business association he lead, and by a woman who claims when she asked for help getting a job, he pressured her for sex (and, yes, the latter is sexual harassment – a coercive request for sex in exchange for a job, a good grade or other non-sexual “reward”). But people looked the other way, this latest accuser didn’t say anything at the time and for many years, and this man kept moving up in his political party to where he is now.

Why didn’t people in the know say more?

I have the answer to both of those questions: the consequences for the accuser or witness of saying something to people in authority or to the police seemed greater, and worse, than saying nothing. Consciously or unconsciously, people said to themselves, I don’t want to deal with this. This makes me uncomfortable. I may lose my job / never get a job if I say something. I don’t want this to define me, to follow me at this job and all jobs in the future. Maybe he’s better now or maybe someone else will deal with this. I don’t want to be the bad guy. It’s easier for me and this organization not to say anything.

I am not at all excusing the behavior of all the people who didn’t speak out. Penn State’s Athletic director and one of the university’s vice president have not only lost their jobs: they face possible prison time for lying to a grand jury and for not reporting to proper authorities the allegations of sexual misconduct. And that is exactly as it should be. Shame on them! It’s a shame that people in the Catholic Church who knew about sexual assaults by many priests weren’t similarly punished.

But I am challenging nonprofits, non-governmental agencies, universities, government departments and other mission-based programs – and particularly aid agencies with staff members in the field! – to take a hard look at not just their policies, but their culture.

Are you never hearing about inappropriate behavior by employees or volunteers at your organization not because nothing is happening, but because people don’t feel comfortable saying anything?

The consequences of a culture that, intentionally or not, discourages victims and witnesses from coming forward can even be deadly: Kate Puzey, a Peace Corps volunteer in the west African nation of Benin in 2009, was murdered in apparent retaliation for accusing a local Peace Corps staff member of child sexual assault. Her murder, and the poor reaction of the Peace Corps administration to this and to reported sexual assaults on Peace Corps members themselves, lead to a volunteer protection act, passed by Congress this year, establishing sexual assault policies and training to protect victims and whistle-blowers.

What about your organization?

  • Are you going to look at not only your policies, but your practice?
  • Do you do trainings and awareness activities for employees and volunteers regarding sexual harassment and inappropriate behavior every year?
  • What do you do to create a welcoming environment regarding the reporting of inappropriate behavior?
  • What do your individual employees and volunteers say about your organization’s culture, particularly in how comfortable they would feel reporting suspected inappropriate or even criminal behavior by someone, particularly a person in authority?

And in case you are wondering – yes, this is a personally important issue to me.