A Personal Experience

For nearly twenty years I was a museum employee, commuting to the office, working my way up from educator to executive director, receiving a paycheck, and for the most part enjoying myself. The work was challenging and usually rewarding, if not financially, then at least affirming my sense that I was doing something important and making a difference in the lives of people.

During those years as an employee I felt the security of steady pay and benefits. I managed to avoid being one of the ones laid off during the occasional downsizing years, and as I worked my way up the ladder I received pay increases that were always welcomed at home. Although I might have denied it, I was a kin to the "organization man" of the 1950's, giving my time, talent, and loyalty to institutions in exchange for a salary and the sense of belonging to something larger than me.

Then things changed. After a very difficult year, in which I ended up resigning as director of the organization I was leading, I faced an uncertain future. Being an executive director no longer appealed to me. I thought about changing professions. However, I still felt committed to the work that nonprofit organizations do. Those twenty years had been more than just a job. After months of talking to friends and colleagues, and thinking about the options, I took a chance and decided to have a go at serving in the nonprofit arena, not as an employee, but as a consultant.

A National Trend

Until recently, American corporations were organized along the lines of a nineteenth century factory, with decisions made at the top, and employees working specified hours and doing specified tasks. These businesses functioned with the hands and muscles of the workers. In today's economy, the source of value has shifted to the brain. It is not what employees do, but what they know, that makes the difference. These "knowledge workers" are not content with simply taking directions from higher up. Hence, corporations have changed their structures, giving workers more autonomy and a role in decision making. The most successful companies are those that have figured out how to tap the knowledge of their employees.

Nonprofit organizations, whose employees are certainly valued for their knowledge more than their brawn, have been struggling with this structural change. Many of the organizations I consult with are trying to break down the barriers that separate senior managers from junior staff, and one department from another. Everyone emphasizes teamwork and empowerment, attempting to find a balance between control and creativity. Some have been very successful in transforming themselves into innovative, yet disciplined organizations.

As corporate structures have changed, so have working arrangements. The traditional full time job, with full salary and benefits, is giving way to flex time, part time, temporary, and contractual work. The largest employer in America is no longer General Motors; it is Manpower, Inc. Peter Drucker, in Harvard Business Review (February, 2002), writes that everyday 2.5 million temporary workers fill slots in American businesses, not just as receptionists and bookkeepers, but also in skilled roles such as nurses. Using temporary workers and outside expertise has become a routine practice. Daniel Pink, author of Free Agent Nation (2001), calculates that 1 in 4 workers now earns a living as what he calls a free agent, someone who has a degree of autonomy in choosing when and where to work.

Corporate downsizing, in the early 1990's and again this past year, has fed this trend as employees have realized that there is no guaranteed security in working for a large organization. Early retirement in the past decade also contributed, as men and women not yet ready to take up golf full time looked for something useful to do. Many started micro-businesses, with one or two individuals providing products and services that once were produced by much larger operations. Computer technology also has driven this national transformation, making it possible for people to work efficiently and effectively in home offices, while maintaining regular communication with colleagues and clients.

This trend will continue. Young people no longer expect to work for the same company for an extended period. Three or four years are enough to learn what one can learn, and then it is time to move on. Many of them will eventually seek opportunities to work on their own. At the same time, as the baby boomers approach retirement age, many of them will opt for only partial retirement. Some will not have enough retirement income to live on, and others will be looking for something meaningful to do.

Nonprofit organizations are part of this trend. Hence, in the future work in these organizations will be very different from what it is today.

Going Hollywood

One likely change will be an increased use of the Hollywood model in getting things done. At one time the major studios followed the industrial model, controlling the production of movies from the top down. The technicians, directors, and even actors, were employees of the corporation. That has given way to a very different process, in which autonomous groups and individuals come together for a specific project and a specific time frame. When the project is over, they part ways. This merging of talent as needed has become the norm for producing movies.

Among nonprofit organizations, museums have long followed this model when producing exhibitions. Designers, fabricators, conservators, content experts, and more recently audience experts, come together to create an exhibit, and disperse once it opens. Because of the periodic nature of exhibitions, few museums maintain all of the necessary expertise in house.

We can expect this way of doing things to expand to many nonprofit endeavors. One can envision teams of independent experts coming together to create new education programs for schools, to develop new ways to solicit donations, to design new client services, or to innovate in just about any area of nonprofit work.

Outsourcing

Similarly, businesses are now outsourcing some routine functions once performed by full time employees. For example, many companies contract out the handling of customer calls. The business that runs the call center handles calls for a number of clients, and specializes in the best technology, staffing, and training necessary to handle customer concerns effectively. Outsourcing is a common business method used to control costs. Indeed, I have a brother who works for a business that analyzes a company's operations and finds ways to cut costs and improve services through outsourcing.

Growth in the number of independent professionals with the requisite expertise will lead many organizations to outsourcing current functions. Independent experts will serve several organizations, as needed, instead of just one. This will enable the organizations to have the benefit of the best knowledge available, without the overhead of a full time employee. At the same time, it will enable the expert to do what she is most interested in, without having to climb the management ladder.

Ends and Means

To understand how this transformation will occur, it is crucial to grasp the difference between ends and means. What a nonprofit organization does, day to day, is not the purpose of the organization. Rather, the work is a means to a greater end-bringing something of value to the people served. Exactly what that value is depends upon the mission or purpose of the particular organization. While the organization should not abandon its ends, there is no reason why the means should not change. Indeed, the means should change, if other methods prove more effective.

The best example I have encountered of such an approach is the San Francisco Architectural Foundation. Over the years the San Francisco foundation had developed and operated a host of materials and programs for schools and the public in order to increase understanding and appreciation of the built environment. Then a few years ago, as part of a strategic planning process, the leaders of the organization examined its purpose, and made a clear distinction between ends (increased understanding and appreciation) and means (programs and materials.) Next, they looked around to see who was doing similar work elsewhere, and found a number of organizations producing such programs and materials. The foundation determined it could fulfill its mission more effectively by becoming a broker between the producing organizations and the schools and public they want to serve. Now the foundation, instead of producing its own programs, markets ones produced by others. It also facilitates the relationships between the organizations and the schools. By making this shift, the foundation cut its costs dramatically-it now has only two staff-and has increased the number of people in San Francisco who experience programs about architecture and the built environment.

The New Professionals

Although independent professionals currently make up only a small part of the people working in the nonprofit field, their numbers will grow, changing the nature of nonprofit organizations. In the coming decades we can expect to see different kinds of workers.

Micro-Businesses. Some professionals will form private, micro-businesses that contract services to a number of organizations. For example, I know two science teachers who develop curricula and conduct teacher training for a number of schools across the nation.

Sole Operators. Many workers will be sole operators, working from home, networked to a number of client organizations. Some will provide specific services, such as bookkeeping, volunteer scheduling, or grant writing. Others will serve, as I do, as organizational advisors or coaches, helping with planning and the design of the work processes.

Talent Pools. Some workers will be part of an ever-changing talent pool, much like today's exhibit designers, coming together for specific projects. Most creative work will occur in this way.

Insiders. With so many workers operating outside of the bounds of the organization, some people still will work on the inside. However, instead of being the doers, they will act more as coordinators or facilitators, ensuring that the resources of talent and expertise are in place where and when they are needed.

Benefits and New Challenges for Organizations

A common complaint of nonprofit managers today is that they spend so much time managing that they do not have time to do what they really enjoy, the work that first brought them into the field. A common complaint of executive directors is that a department head might be great developing programs or working with clients, but does not have any talent for managing people. The current hierarchical structure makes this a persistent problem. The new structure of work will eliminate this problem, permitting people to do what they do best.

Future nonprofit organizations will be more flexible, and potentially more responsive to challenges and opportunities. Because of the networking of expertise and resources, they should be able to marshal what they need, when they need it. An organization's leaders will have to work hard to manage the network, nurturing interpersonal relationships and attending to the details of contracts, including working out intellectual property rights issues.

People currently working inside nonprofit organizations are likely to find this trend disconcerting. As with all transformations, employees will have to let go of old ways, without being entirely certain of how the new ways will work. If you are experiencing this, Qm2 can help you facilitate this change in your organization. Contact us.

Benefits and New Challenges for Individuals

The individual, independent workers will gain from the autonomy of working at home and being paid for performance rather than for simply showing up. They will be able to set schedules that suit their own styles, and instead of trying to balance work and family they will blend them. They will continue to worry about money, but instead of being totally dependent on a single organization, they will have the safety of several sources of income.

To overcome the potential isolation of working alone, independent professionals in all fields have begun to form small support networks. I have had the good fortune of joining Qm², which contrary to what one might assume is not a consulting firm, but rather a community of colleagues who share a common approach to helping organizations. We meet together three or four times a year to learn from one another and to develop strategies for building our individual businesses.

If you are at a point in your career where you are considering going "independent", you can contact us for advice. Any of the Qm2 associates would be happy to share their own experiences with you.

My own experience as an independent professional has taught me that this is a wonderful way to work and live. I like that I am working for the success of many organizations, and not just one. I like that I am solely responsible for my own success. I have new challenges-getting new clients, generating new ways to serve existing clients, coordinating my travel schedule with my wife's, and so forth. I relish these challenges. My work is invigorating, much as it was when I started with my first job, decades ago.

(A version of this briefing appeared in History News, Summer 2002.)