Database Death: What Lies Beneath the Surface

Age : 45 Joined : 08 Mar 2008 Posts : 1850

Recently a Summit Collaborative technologist and I completed a series of site visits to ten nonprofit organizations in one city. Many of the discussions with the nonprofits related to data systems and tools. We came away thoroughly convinced that there is a need to rethink what database planning, management, training, and maintenance is all about.

The vignettes I describe below will remind you of situations in which you have probably have been. They relate to leadership challenges, management struggles, staff responsibility and accountability, and our work as providers. For us, they underscore the importance of connecting the work of technology planning and use to the more basic issues of capacity building and organizational health. Here is some of what we witnessed.

A technology staff person has authority over planning and development of new data systems. Involvement of program staff who generate, use, understand and depend on the data is an afterthought.
Planning for a new database system to deal with federal reporting requirements proceeds without any discussion about training, support and maintenance costs, or the impact on staff attitudes and behavior that will result from the new system.
An organization is considering technology tools before reaching consensus on what data they must collect, crunch, and report out, which will noticeably impact the type of database tools they buy or build.
An executive director has done little to build a team and involve staff in planning work. There are serious communication and staff buy-in challenges emerging that are partially a direct result of his managerial style. We observe him blaming others instead of recognizing his role in the challenges that are emerging.
A database system in place isn't used by a lot of staff and those who do use it make many errors leading to inaccurate data. Some staff continue to use paper forms, pencils, and calculators in spite of a fairly good database system available to them.
A staff that feel held hostage by a vendor who developed a database system because they have no control or institutional knowledge of how to manage, modify and teach people how to use it.
What Lies Beneath
There is a lot going on in these situations. More than meets the eye. Management styles, staff roles and responsibilities, trust, stakeholder involvement, communications, and so much more are underneath these situations. In reflection, we find ourselves here at Summit Collaborative considering the following questions:

What is really going on in these situations and organizations? Do we really know without much deeper analysis?
How much of what we deal with is really driven by management structure and style that are more or less hierarchical?
What is our role as providers as we witness these situations?
Are we supposed to just plant the seeds of change where we observe challenges that go far beyond the 'technology'?
Is it our responsibility to openly share with an organization what we see? If so, who do we talk to? The staff, executive director, both?
How do we as providers deal with the fact that our time with them is limited?
Do we even have the skills to deal with these non-technology issues?
If we don't have the skill, who do we point them to for help?
How do we connect with and communicate what we see to other support providers who work with the organization?
Do we, and if so how do we, communicate what we see with foundations who fund our work with?
An Agenda For Change
Of course the answers to these questions and others are hard to come by. We probably need to do a mix of things and each situation requires a different mix, which is hard work for the nonprofits we serve and for us as providers. We don't have complete answers to the questions raised above, but we offer some things to consider.

Step 1
Capacity based planning:We often talk about capacity in terms of dollars or staff time. Increasingly we see that capacity to plan and implement is far more complex. We as providers want to help them do so many things, to help them see the incredible possibility that advanced technology can have on improving their organization. Disciplining ourselves, however, and urging the nonprofits we work with to take on technology use in a fashion that they can truly absorb successfully is hard. This often means 'less' technology then they want or need. We need to ask them to really consider the ramifications of new systems.

Do they have staff buy-in for the new systems?
Is their team functional enough to carry the initiative without it falling into the lap of one person?
Will the total cost of ownership (training, technical support, etc.) be something they really can handle?
Can they really deploy the new technology successfully while they deal with other major organizational challenges?
Holding the line and refusing to validate a technology implementation plan that we know is bound to fail is hard. Sometimes that means the nonprofit actually gets upset with us, feels cheated! More than a new database what they may need is a coach for the Executive Director, intervention to stabilize a dysfunctional board, revamping of management or communication structures. Helping them connect to other resources to get help might be our primary responsibility as we witness what their real capacity issues are.

Step 2
'Systems' based improvement:Instead of talking about the 'technology' itself, we work hard to focus on information, communication, collaboration, and other 'systems' in the organization. We ask that the people who deal with these systems come to the table to assess how things are working. They look for redundancies, system quality, and opportunities for automation, training and more. Often the solutions have little to do with using advanced technology but relate to simple improvements in paper or human systems.

Step 3
Total value of ownership: a focus on outcomes:Nonprofits often decide to launch technology initiatives on a whim. A board member's brother in law developed new software and offers it to the nonprofit for free. A funder dangles money for free Web site development and nonprofit scurry to set one up. We all know the story! An alternative approach is for nonprofits to assess the real added value to the organization of a particular technology tool or strategy to make sure that there is strong rationale behind the idea. Efficiency improvements are often the most obvious area of added value but many nonprofit go further in articulating value. They ask how a technology tool or strategy will enhance collaboration, build knowledge, and improve marketing or program delivery? Knowing EXACTLY what the benefits and purpose of a particular initiative is will ground the development process and give you something to evaluate when you get down the road a bit.

Step 4
Dealing with technology savvy staff:Technology staff or 'accidental techies' in nonprofits are an important part of technology assessment, planning, and implementation. Nonprofits struggle with properly tasking these staff. How can you involve these talented specialists without relying on them to carry all the work? How do you prevent them from driving the conversations too quickly towards solutions that undercuts adequate assessment and involvement of program and administrative staff? (See Beth Kanter's newest case study titled Database Planning: Leading with Needs not Solutions.)

Step 5
Breaking down the walls:Over and over again we hear stories of nonprofits that hand over control of their database needs to a single staff person, a consultant or vendor. One executive we worked with calls it the 'hot potato' syndrome. Nobody in the organization wants to deal with it so when the MIS staff person, volunteer or consultant shows up; the potato gets thrown to them. Everyone feels good for the time being but later everyone realizes what a mistake it was. Mission critical data systems REQUIRE that the right people be at the table to plan, implement and track use of a system. The technologists are in service as creators and managers of the technology, NOT the system.

Step 6
Controlling consultants and vendors:Nonprofits often forget to follow the most basic due diligence procedures when hiring vendors or consultants. There is continued lament that there aren't more 'nonprofit savvy' techies in the field to serve nonprofits. Is this really the core challenge, the lack of nonprofit savvy providers? The reality is that there are so many technically talented people out there who can serve nonprofits. The agenda for nonprofits therefore is to:

Take a more assertive role in specifying what they want from a consultant.
Concentrate on improving their hiring and contracting.
Having a more 'hands on' management style with providers.
Writing clear requests for proposals (RFP).
Asking the right questions in interviews.
Knowing what's most important to them to determine which vendor to go with.
Setting up proper expectations and timelines.
This is about the nonprofits taking real control of those who serve them. Helping them with these things may be our greatest contribution in the long run and will empower nonprofits to succeed.

Step 7
The Mythology of 'Expertise':
"We don't know enough to make the right decision!"
"We don't even know what the right questions are to ask."
"We have no way of knowing how to assess progress on a technology project."
Most nonprofits we work with feel as if they don't have the knowledge to tackle technology decisions. Once they come to the table however and begin talking, it soon is apparent how much knowledge actually does reside within these organization. Knowledge about how to define parameters so that options can be compared. Knowledge about where to get more information or help where there are gaps in understanding. Knowledge about how to appropriately assess and plot a better direction. Our work increasingly is about unlocking the knowledge riches that lie hidden under a cloud of fear, lack of confidence and hesitancy in nonprofits. If we can do this then we don't have to hand the fishing pole off to nonprofits, we can simply help them dust off the fishing rod they have used before.

Nonprofits that we serve are at a great disadvantage if we close our eyes to organizational health issues that are the foundation for successful technology use. Advanced information and communications technology is transformative. The stakes are much higher then buying a copier. We like to say that technology is 'just a tool' but the truth is that the very technologies we tout as 'transformative' can also lead to the wasting of important financial resources, alienation of staff and speeding up of dysfunction in an organization. More discussion and exploration of these issues and questions by providers, nonprofits and funders may be the healthiest thing we can do for those we serve.