7 Ways to Sabotage Your Nonprofit
Let's have an honest chat about something that keeps popping up in our sector: unintended self-sabotage. It's like a sneaky trap we keep falling into.
About a year ago, I stumbled upon a surprising source of wisdom: the CIA's Simple Sabotage Field Manual from World War II. Yep, it was all about disrupting enemy organizations, but believe it or not, we often unintentionally apply those detrimental techniques to our own nonprofits.
Let’s delve into the seven key areas where nonprofits often mirror the CIA's sabotage techniques.
1. We focus on conforming instead of innovating 🕵
Once you infiltrate an enemy organization, the CIA manual suggests, "Advocate 'caution'. Be 'reasonable' and urge your fellow conferees to be 'reasonable' and avoid haste which might result in embarrassments or difficulties later on."
Too often, nonprofit leaders resist innovation and cling to the same old practices, mostly out of fear. But that holds us back! We need fresh ideas, to be able to take risks, and shake up the status quo. One great example of stagnancy is holding the same events each year without analyzing them. Another is how organizations often shy away from taking a political stance on important issues; issues directly tied to our organization's impact. What we have been doing as a sector obviously doesn’t work to effect systemic change. It's time to get imaginative and embrace the new!
2. We lose focus on urgent priorities 🚫
To cause disruption, the manual astutely recommends, "Engage in lengthy debates over exact wordings... insist on flawless execution... squander time."
That definitely hits close to home! Nonprofits often get caught up in endless discussions and meetings, losing sight of our core objectives. When was the last time you worked at an organization that actually completed its strategic plan? We need to keep our eyes on the prize and make mission-critical goals our top priority. Let's break free from the cycle of pointless debates and stay focused on what really matters!
Do endless meetings and circular discussions sound familiar? The manual’s suggestion to "Make 'speeches'. Talk as frequently as possible and at great length" also mirrors these energy-draining practices in nonprofits.
Nonprofits fall into the trap of slow and steady progress and often lack a sense of urgency- failing to seize opportunities for growth; they are the white moderate. They may resist implementing new technologies or processes that could enhance their impact, which can result in burnout among staff and volunteers due to unsustainable workloads, inadequate support systems, and circular discussions. For instance, a nonprofit might delay adopting online donation platforms to have lengthy discussions about the merit of each, go through various approval processes and consultations, and form a committee to decide, all the while hindering its ability to reach a wider donor base. They may allow a toxic ED to stay at an organization because they raise a lot of money, ignoring the well-being of the staff and organizational health. Decisions like these are poison to morale and cause staff to leave organizations.
Addressing inadequate leadership and management practices, implementing proper systems, and prioritizing staff well-being are all urgent issues that need to be immediately addressed to avoid self-sabotage.
3. We keep deciding not to be transparent 🤫
When communication falters, everything goes haywire. Poor messaging and a lack of transparency create confusion and mistrust, putting your mission at risk.
A lack of effective communication can stem from inadequate resources allocated to communication efforts, limited transparency, and an unwillingness to include certain communities, usually staff, program users, or donors. Far from creating a sense of inclusion, controlling access to information or information systems breeds mistrust both within and outside the organization.
The sabotage manual advises agents to "Spread disturbing rumors” and to "refer back to matters decided upon at the last meeting and attempt to reopen the question of the advisability of that decision." This behavior typically materializes as power hoarding within an organization, suffocating innovation and agility. It also breeds confusion and a lack of transparency around decision-making. We need openness and clear communication so everyone understands the direction we're heading in. Transparency is key for a healthy organization!
4. We stick to bureaucracy and hierarchies 💡
The sabotage manual intriguingly instructs to "Increase the number of procedures and approvals needed for issuing instructions, paychecks, and the like."
Excessive procedures and approvals for every little thing - well, that sounds like some nonprofits we know, right? Endless bureaucracy slows us down and stifles creativity. But do we really need a committee for every decision? Let's simplify, trust our amazing staff, and empower them to make sound decisions. Bye-bye bureaucracy, hello innovation!
The manual mentions "When possible, refer all matters to committees, for 'further study and consideration.'" Nonprofits might overly complicate their processes by requiring extensive committee approvals and ten consultants for minor decisions or budgetary allocations. This slows down progress and squanders resources.
Do we really need an HR committee, a finance committee, a fundraising committee, a social committee, a DEI committee, a governance committee, a budget committee, a hiring committee, a marketing committee, five employee resource groups, an evaluation committee, and an events committee? Is it not possible to trust our staff and leaders to make sound decisions for the programs they oversee? Can we not expect board members to understand and be responsible for items outside of their specific committee roles? By cutting down on bureaucracy and empowering our people, we can cultivate agile, innovative, and informed leaders and staff members.
5. We actively discourage disagreement 🤝
"Never permit shortcuts to be taken in order to expedite decisions," states the manual, a sentiment echoed in nonprofits that discourage disagreements and favor a consensus-driven culture. Discouraging disagreement is borne from many white supremacy characteristics. This version of power hoarding can limit diverse perspectives, hinder equity and justice, and uphold ineffective systems.
A lack of inclusion, psychological safety, and equitable practices within decision-making processes perpetuates power imbalances and causes the charity to stagnate. For example, a nonprofit's leadership team might be resistant to new ideas from staff members, missing out on valuable insights and fresh approaches. Instead of allowing discourse around an idea to happen, they shut it down citing a variety of reasons (budget, approvals, time, strategic priorities, etc.).
We need to nurture a culture that values diverse perspectives and promotes constructive debates. Encouraging diverse perspectives and constructive disagreements is crucial for fostering empowered communities, addressing systemic inequities, and making our sector more effective.
6. We operate in constant chaos 📅
It’s an emergency! But it will take us 43 meetings, five reports, 6 environmental scans, and one consulting firm to envision our next step.
Working slowly and inefficiently reflects another sabotage tactic. Nonprofits often work in a state of chaos. It's time we put more strategic thought into aligning our goals, strategies, and timelines. Critical projects and decisions can no longer be overshadowed due to limited capacity or funds, inadequate strategic planning, or poor management. In the end, we must realize that delaying decisions for months or years results in operationalizing the problem you must solve, causing your nonprofit to operate sub-optimally despite its failings.
Another sabotage technique the CIA manual mentions is to "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." In nonprofits, there is an ever-present desire to pass the buck. Oh, it was the board’s decision, or it was a bad hire, donor fatigue, we just can’t afford raises this year, we were too busy to notice a huge mistake, or it was a lack of processes. By passing the blame onto other people or tools, rather than assessing and addressing the true root causes of inefficiencies, we continue to perpetuate and systematize chaos.
7. We use inefficient communication channels 🌍
Ineffective communication is a silent saboteur within nonprofits, creating bottlenecks that hinder collaboration and restrict the pooling of collective intelligence. These practices often mirror a tactic from the CIA's sabotage manual: "Work slowly. Think out ways to increase the number of movements necessary." When communication channels in a nonprofit aren't efficient, we unwittingly reflect this strategy, causing a slow grind in productivity and collaboration.
Inefficiencies can also be spotted in organizations that have an unnecessary number of communication steps or channels. Have you ever felt like your organizational communication resembled a game of broken telephone? Or that sharing an idea through an established channel felt like shouting into an organizational void, with no response echoing back?
One familiar result of this CIA tactic is siloed operations. Instead of working in harmony, departments work as isolated entities. If the fundraising team doesn't regularly interact with the programming department, for instance, they may not know the latest impacts and the organization might miss opportunities to showcase these programs to potential donors. This in turn impacts programming, who feel they have little to no input in how their programs are portrayed and are unsure why there are funding gaps. They may also not understand the information required by the fundraising team to raise funds.
Another sabotage nugget from the manual: "Haggle over precise wordings of communications, minutes, resolutions." Does this remind you of any past meetings where discussions were more about semantics than substantial progress? Or the strategy to "Pretend that instructions are hard to understand... Misunderstand orders. Ask endless questions." Does it strike a chord with any board meetings where the attendees hadn't read the provided materials, leading to repetitive clarifications?
To me, it feels painfully familiar. I have attended countless board meetings where it was evident that few, if any, board members had reviewed the provided materials. This leads to a scenario where the Executive Director or a staff member ends up reading the document aloud and answering questions that were already addressed in the materials. This is a time-consuming and frustrating practice we need to eliminate to foster effective governance and operations.
Having identified these patterns of self-sabotage, let's embrace a transformative approach:
Embrace innovation and challenge systemic barriers in all aspects of our operations.
Cultivate a culture of agility, accountability, adaptability, and inclusive decision-making.
Prioritize clear, effective, and equitable communication and decision-making practices.
Streamline internal processes and challenge hierarchical structures.
Foster constructive debates and value diverse perspectives.
Prioritize strategic resource allocation and implement changes needed by staff.
Recognizing and challenging self-sabotaging behaviour is the first step in transforming the nonprofit sector. By embracing innovation, inclusive decision-making, effective communication, streamlined processes, constructive debates, strategic resource allocation, and equitable practices, we can redefine the way nonprofits operate. Together, let's ignite a revolution of equitable governance and make a lasting impact.
In solidarity,
Maria
