Looking for Decision/Performance Measurement Tools? Here's a New Take

Eleanor Adams' report, Towards Sustainability Indicators for Museums in Australia, was released this month offering museums -- and all cultural institutions -- a set of pilot indicators built on a combination of economic, environmental and social factors. "Whether they acknowledge it or not," Adams writes, "museums are inextricably linked to sustainability principles....However, most museums seem to be inherently unsustainable organizations."

Certainly museums occupy huge environmental footprints, deemed by many directors of large and small institutions as "energy hogs". But libraries and performance spaces aren't far behind in energy consumption and insatiable need for storage.

How can -- should -- environmental sustainability shape vision and mission (and vice versa)? They're inextricably linked, right? Adams gets at this by remixing established programmatic and operational metrics with environmental impact indicators and clustering them around "four pillars of sustainability": environment, society, culture and economy. Might these pillars be the essence of cultural organizations?

Here are some of her indicators for the Environment pillar:

Sustainability Goal: To use resources in the most efficient way possible.
Suggested Core Indicators:

Total energy from non-renewable sources used over 12 months
Total water used over 12 months
Ratio of waste recycled to waste sent to land fill in 12 months

OK, that makes sense. What about some Economy pillar indicators?

Sustainability Goal: To have a balanced and diverse budget
Suggested Core Indicators:

Ratio of Government funding to ‘other sources’ of income
Number volunteer hours worked in 12 months
Ratio of 12 month growth of collection to 12 month growth of income

And the Society pillar?

Principle of Sustainability: Calibre and Diversity of Current and Potential Staff

Number of workers with a PhD in their relevant field
Number of qualified applicants for the most recent curatorial opening
Percentage of staff involved in decision-making processes broken down into age, sex and cultural or minority group backgrounds
Ratio of staff who are within the first 10 years of their career to those within the last 10 years of their career
Ratio of paid staff to volunteers
Number of staff attending training sessions in regard to the organisation’s sustainability plans
Rate of staff turnover
Rate of board turnover

If you've made 2010 the year to get serious about developing criteria for measuring your organization's performance, definitely add this report into your mix.

What Would Make You Turn Down an Invitation to Join a Board?

THERE'S SO MUCH WRITTEN ABOUT RECRUITING BOARD TALENT, I thought I'd spend a little time thinking about it from the prospect's point of view. Clearly, there are boards where the line is long to get on them. But what would make you turn down an invitation? Here's a short list to get the conversation started: 1. You've had no prior exposure to the organization. Your immediate reaction is "did you pull my name out of a hat?" (Is that lady in the picture the head of the Nominating Committee?) Seems as though there must be a hidden agenda at work (like you're rich and once you become a board member you'll pour all your resources into the organization) or the organization is simply looking for any warm body to fill a seat. 2. The organization doesn't have a good reputation. There's something to be said for street cred. An organization that's floundering may be strengthened by your participation or you may find yourself sucked into...

What to Do With Dead Wood on Your Board?

MY POLL ASKED WHAT ONE BOARD DYNAMIC YOU would change this year and the top response was "remove dead wood". For my first post on this topic I'd like to start with two obvious facts: 1) most boards have some non-performing or under-performing board members AND 2) most boards already have mechanisms in place for removing dead wood...or at least the non-attending dead wood. Those mechanisms are found in the Bylaws and perhaps in a board job description. Few boards, it seems, invoke these mechanisms, mostly out of fear of offending the offender. We end up side-stepping the dead wood, dancing around it, ignoring it, wishing mightily it would go away. Oh, and complaining about it. So, even though the dead wood isn't doing much, it's sapping the energy and focus of many others. (There must be a Law of Physics about this!) Where to start and how to implement? While removing dead wood is not the most pleasant of responsibilities, it does not need to be -- and s...

Change for Your Board in 2010: A Polling Update

WE'RE A DAY INTO MY LAST POLL (SEE RIGHT) AND the responses are clustering in two areas: 1) removing dead wood from the board and 2) using better/different tools to make decisions/evaluate performance. There are still six days left for your colleagues to cast their vote! In the meantime, those of you who are in need of tools for decision-making might want to check my posts on taking stock here , here and here .

Leading by Design

Search This Blog