Recently I received an announcement that our local chapter of the Association of Fundraising Professionals is having a showing and discussion of Uncharitable, a feature-length documentary that “exposes the dark side of philanthropy and introduces a radical new way of giving.” That intrigued me. I learned the title comes from a book of the same name by Dan Pallotta, which led me to this TED Talk.
It’s fascinating and I wanted to share it! See what you think.
Many of our local nonprofits have put considerable effort into diversifying their boards of directors. That’s good work toward the “D” in DEI—diversity, equity, and inclusion. Today, let’s give some attention to the concept of equity.
First, let’s differentiate equity from equality. Equity refers to fair treatment, access, opportunity, and advancement for all individuals. Unlike equality, which implies treating everyone the same, equity recognizes that different people have different circumstances and allocates resources and opportunities accordingly. College scholarships based on need are one classic example of equity. The Americans with Disabilities Act is another.
There are numerous visual depictions to contrast the two concepts. I like this one, from Sketchplantations, used by permission.
One powerful way for nonprofit leaders to promote equity is to identify and remove barriers. Attorney Heidi Christianson suggests two places to start. One is barrier language. She recommends eliminating “language that feels like ‘legalese’ and processes that are unnecessary. For example, “If Bylaws and policies are to represent an organization’s collective expectations, they need to be welcoming to all people.” In fact, composing such documents in clear, straightforward language may make it easier for everyone to understand and comply with them!
The second is barriers to service. For instance, Christianson encourages us to “think about meeting times, prohibition on board compensation, and length of board terms.” Look at your list of board expectations or your board member job description. Though not intending to, do they automatically put hurdles in the path of board service for some people but not others?
Here are additional resources for advancing equity in the nonprofit board room:
The Spokes workshop, “Creating and Retaining an Inclusive Board Environment,” addressed two key concepts. One of them, unconscious bias, is the subject of a separate post. In this post, we’ll talk about “microaggression.” It’s something we all can be and probably are guilty of from time to time unintentionally and without realizing it.
The term “microaggression” refers to subtle, often unintentional, actions or comments that convey prejudiced or derogatory messages to individuals based on their membership in a marginalized group. These small, everyday instances of discrimination or bias can be verbal, behavioral, or environmental. Don’t be fooled by the prefix “micro.” Although microaggressions may seem minor, especially to the perpetrator, their cumulative impact can be significant and harmful. And even a single instance can sour a relationship or make a new member of your board feel uncomfortable.
Verbal microaggressions are one example:
Behavioral microaggressions are another example:
Here are some resources for learning more about microaggressions, and how to deal with them when they happen.
What is unconscious bias, and what can I do about it?
Unconscious bias refers to the automatic, unintentional, and often subtle prejudices and stereotypes that influence our attitudes, actions, and decisions without our conscious awareness. These biases stem from our brain’s natural tendency to categorize and make quick judgments based on past experiences, cultural norms, and societal influences. While unconscious biases are a normal part of human cognition, they can lead to discriminatory behavior and perpetuate inequalities in various areas of life, including the work of our nonprofit staff and boards of directors.
Identifying unconscious biases is a crucial step towards fostering a more inclusive and equitable environment. One effective method is through implicit association tests (IATs), which measure the strength of associations between concepts (e.g., race, gender) and evaluations (e.g., good, bad) or stereotypes (e.g., athletic, intellectual). These tests can reveal hidden biases that might not be evident through self-reflection alone. One resource for such tests is Project Implicit.
Another useful strategy is to seek feedback from diverse groups. Engaging in open, honest conversations with individuals from different backgrounds can provide insights into how your behavior and decisions might be influenced by unconscious biases. Additionally, mindfulness practices, such as self-reflection and journaling, can help increase awareness of your thought patterns and challenge implicit assumptions. By recognizing and addressing unconscious biases, nonprofit leaders and board members can contribute to creating more fair and inclusive communities.
If your organization’s bylaws say your meetings will follow Robert’s Rules of Order, then yes, you do have to follow them—but do you follow them? Robert’s Rules are complex! It is very difficult to follow them to the letter unless you have a dedicated parliamentarian available. I’ve been on quite a few boards and none of them truly followed Robert’s Rules.
Robert’s Rules provide a method for making group decisions, but there are alternatives that may better serve your board of directors. Here are some examples.
Consensus Decision-Making: This approach involves discussion until all participants can agree on a single course of action. It emphasizes cooperation and collaboration, seeking to address concerns and find solutions that everyone can support.
Consent Decision-Making: This approach involves seeking consent from all members for a proposed course of action. Instead of requiring full agreement, consent decision-making aims to ensure that no member has strong objections to the proposed action.
Democratic Voting: Similar to Robert’s Rules, democratic voting involves members casting votes for different options, and the option with the majority of votes wins. However, the rules and procedures may be simplified compared to Robert’s Rules.
Each of these methods has advantages and disadvantages. I encourage you to check out thedecider.app. It’s a cool tool to help you choose a decision-making model that suits the decision your group needs to make.
And don’t forget! If you decide to adopt a different method, don’t forget to revise your bylaws accordingly.
Find Us On Social Media: