Before you continue READ Part I of The Benefits and Pitfalls of Hero Culture
The fundamental problem with hero culture is that it’s not sustainable. An organization cannot grow beyond the capacity of its heroes. It becomes stymied. Eventually, the pitfalls of hero culture become obvious to everyone in the organization. This is when someone rises to challenge hero culture, and this is when things can get ugly.
For some, this inflection point signals the end of the organization. I’ve been in very tense board meetings after a hero resigns or is fired. I’ve heard some board members say something akin to “The organization cannot go on without [insert name of hero or heroes]. They/she/he are/is the heart/soul/life of this organization!”
We all know this is simply not true. We all know that the heart/soul/life of an organization lies elsewhere—or it should. To my mind, the people an organization serves is what gives it life, and collaborative action in service to others is what gives it heart.
…the people an organization serves is what gives it life, and collaborative action in service to others is what gives it heart.
Of course, I understand the passionate devotion organizational heroes can engender, and I should be very clear that heroes are worthy of recognition and respect. They are dedicated, caring individuals who have devoted a tremendous amount of time, energy, and often resources in service to others. This is what makes reforming hero culture so very difficult. Heroes are beloved or at least considered indispensable. Any challenge to a hero can easily be seen as a challenge to organizational identity itself—so enmeshed is the hero’s identity with that of the organization.
Nothing pushes stakeholders into opposing groups faster than a poorly handled debate on organizational identity. Unless leaders are eager to spend a tremendous amount of time in team-building workshops or studying Venn diagrams, a cautious, thoughtful, and strategic approach to reforming organizational culture is required.
Again, it is by no means easy. Cultural reform needs to be initiated by the board and some members may not even see the need for reform. Ideally, this process should be shepherded by an outside, impartial, and skilled facilitator. Doing so may help an organization avoid the kind of disruption that occurs when organizational reform gets personal.
Nothing pushes stakeholders into opposing groups faster than a poorly handled debate on organizational identity.
I don’t necessarily recommend removing heroes. This is particularly difficult to do if a hero is a founder or a member of the board. Leaders should remove heroes only if they represent an immediate risk to the organization (e.g. exposure to litigation or potentially serious damage to the organization’s reputation) in which case the board has a fiduciary responsibility to act.
The reform process must not focus on the behavior of one or more people within the organization. Singling out a person or group is divisive and counterproductive. I suggest focusing instead on larger issues of organizational structure and goal setting. This can be a natural part of routine planning, provided your organization regularly reviews and revises its strategic plan. If not, set up a process for strategic planning and/or revision work. Dust off the old strategic plan and roll up your sleeves.
Addressing hero culture within the broader context of strategic planning provides a safer framework for discussion about organizational culture and identity. It offers a more structured, consensus-driven platform to address difficult issues. Rather than pointing the finger at heroes and risking conflict, it allows leaders to address how the current culture—one to which all have contributed—limits organizational capacity and what the collective “we” need to do to achieve growth goals and better serve “our” constituent community.
Addressing hero culture within the broader context of strategic planning provides a safer framework for discussion about organizational culture and identity.
The next step is to drill down on operations. Your operations are your strategy in action. An assessment of operations should include tapping that vast well of institutional knowledge that resides in the minds of your heroes. The goal here is to codify existing processes and create new ones so the organization is no longer operating by instinct or tradition and importantly, is no longer reliant on heroics to save the day.
I’ve seen the strained expressions on the faces of heroes evaporate the moment it dawned on them that there is much less stress in their lives if another person knows how to pull a report from the database or field a call from a client. It is possible to challenge a hero’s affinity for the kind of reward that comes from extinguishing fires by helping them see the wisdom and reward in preventing the fires.
There will be some resistance, but instead of causing splintering, you will likely find that this approach to cultural reform strengthens your organization. Inviting group participation in this process is a solid first step toward shifting the paradigm from rewarding individual acts to recognizing the value and reward inherent in collaboration. The focus shifts from crisis and subsequent reward to how best to meet the needs of the client population. This is where an organization should be focused. After all, the people a nonprofit serves are the real heroes of the story.
Kevin George is a Senior Consultant at Pathfinders Consulting Group
Featured photo by Gabriel Bassino