Nonprofits
Hungry Heart Association
When does a change of organizational strategy become mission creep?
The Spring 2004 issue of SSIR contains a case study of the growth and transformation of the American Heart Association’s Western States Affiliate. The case study raises a fundamental question of, when does change of organizational strategy, especially as related to aggressive fund-raising, become “mission creep”? In this case the organization’s income more than doubled in a six year period, resulting in a dramatic increase in support for heart research but reducing its involvment in public education and screening activities. It seems clear that the mission evolved, but does it matter?
Simply putting boxes and lines down on paper doesn’t guarantee that your organization will make better decisions.
Long-term investment in organic agriculture will provide above-market returns, environmental impact, and—in the developing world—enormous social impact.
Q&A with KoAnn Skrzyniarz of Sustainable Brands.
Critics of Obamacare have taken away attention from important aspects of the act such as its focus on keeping people healthy.
The misalignment between the expansive goal of “health” and a cramped
Entrepreneurs are setting up shop in the nation's urban food deserts.
A riveting memoir by Egyptian revolutionary—and Google marketing executive—Wael Ghonim.
COMMENTS
BY Jim Schultz
ON April 21, 2004 04:21 PM
Assuming that the Board made the choice, it doesn’t matter. In the words of John Carver, Boards determine, what good, for what people and at what cost.
BY Marty
ON June 9, 2004 09:04 PM
Mission statements are part of the “silos” in movement that are killing the sectors ability to optimize. We are focused on internal organizational management for all the wrong reasons and in all the wrong ways.
BY Kate Besanceney
ON July 28, 2005 12:36 AM
Missions are the driving force behind a nonprofit organization. It states the reason for existence and its purpose in civil society. Missions can always be revised in order to optimize an organization. For example, look at the March of Dimes that actually achieved their mission to beat Polio. Now, they exist under a different mission statement dedicated to improving infant health. I’m not sure what the definition of optimize insinuates in the previous comment but missions can and should always be revised if there starts to be mission-drift or other opportunities for different programs arise, etc. The sector’s ability to optimize can revolve around a revised mission statement but I still think the mission should exist in every nonprofit as a guideline for its existence. If not, how is the structuring different than a for-profit business that revolves around revenues? The Board of Directors should be constantly reviewing the mission and upholding the values in order to ensure proper governance. If nonprofits did not follow a mission-driven philosophy, which should be clearly communicated to board members, employees, donors, etc. then what is the framework for the nonprofit’s purpose? And how can you consistently communicate it to others?