Part II Part II
Case 3: Blue Chip Animal Shelter
Susan Smith, an employee of the Blue Chip Animal Shelter, anticipated a relaxing Sunday morning with coffee and the papers. Her expectations were dashed as she read the headline in Phil Mather’s column. Mather, the premier muckraking columnist for the Polk River Gazette, had investigated the Blue Chip Animal Shelter’s choice for a new executive director, Bob Green. Green had been recruited from another state, where his expertise contributed to the phenomenal growth of the Desert Animal Shelter.
Blue Chip’s board needed to make a generous offer to attract Green, but the details were supposed to be confidential. One or more board members were clearly irate about the offer and had contacted Mather with the as- tounding details. Green’s executive package was to exceed the compen- sation of the CEO of the city’s largest employer! As Blue Chip’s biggest fundraising event was scheduled to take place in two weeks, Susan was in shock.
Even more disheartening, the intraboard battle at Blue Chip raged on for weeks in Mather’s column, thanks to information supplied by the dis- gruntled board members. The municipality’s city council even became embroiled in the controversy, demanding that either the compensation package had to be modified or they would terminate their contract with Blue Chip for animal rescue services.
In this case, the board leadership did not engage in effective crisis man- agement, nor did they attempt to present a united front to the media. The crisis continued and became very public and political as the city council joined the debate. The board ultimately restructured the offer and at- tempted to conceal the enormous housing allowance that appeared to be what was fueling the initial debate. Several months later, Mather did a col- umn on the resolution of the crisis and exposed the restructured package, which served to fuel the debate once again.
■ Maintenance of vehicles and physical plant. Maintenance issues may appear to be in the realm of operations, but the overall appearance of the non- profit facilities and their safety is essential in maintaining public confi- dence. The presence of common hazards, such as trash, peeling paint, and broken stairs, presents a poor image and suggests disregard for vis- itors, clients, and the public.
staff behavior and the nonprofit’s public image 147
Staff Behavior and the Nonprofit’s Public Image
Paid and volunteer staff are the nonprofit’s fundamental resources in the delivery of services to the community. Often the employees and volunteers who deliver services and deal with clients and the public do not realize that, to the observer, they not only represent the nonprofit, they “are” the nonprofit. Consciousness raising regarding public image, particularly in service delivery and at special events, is an important step in maintaining a positive public image.
Although there are many ways to raise staff awareness, two effective methods are training and using public observers to help critique service de- livery. Training for employees and volunteers should emphasize why maintaining public trust is essential and how staff behavior can either en- hance or detract from the nonprofit’s current good image. Modern culture has embraced the Top 10 List as a means by which essential points can be conveyed, including important dos and don’ts. If the list is printed on brightly colored paper and widely distributed, it will serve as a reminder to all.
Public relations training and consciousness raising can also be achieved through the use of role-play. As part of their training, employees and vol- unteers might be asked to work through typical scenarios, with other members of the group offering insight and recommendations. Conscious- ness raising is intended to increase the overall awareness of public image and help all staff to understand how they can be better representatives of the nonprofit to the community.
Another means of increasing employee sensitivity about image issues is the use of public observers. These individuals are recruited by management to observe service delivery techniques, customer service methods, and the quality of interaction with the public. The findings of the public observers, who are never identified, are conveyed to staff and volunteers at regularly scheduled in-service sessions. The sessions give management an opportu- nity to debrief the staff on the observer’s comments and recommendations.
The observations and recommendations need to be general in focus, and can serve as a springboard for recommendations on improving service. If specific counseling needs to be done with a staff member, it must be done
in private. As the staff becomes used to the public observers’ input, they can become more attuned to the correlation between their actions and public perceptions.
Mission and reputation risks highlight the need for the nonprofit’s board and management actions to be in harmony with the mission of the organization. Although a nonprofit can never avoid a frivolous claim or lit- igation, the reputation that the organization has built and maintained over the years can be a crucial factor in helping it to defend itself and remain a valued member of its community.