In partnership with Level Playing Field Institute, Commongood Careers conducted a national survey and heard from over 1,600 nonprofit professionals about their perceptions of diversity and inclusiveness in the sector. The result of this inquiry is a new report, The Voice of Nonprofit Talent: Perceptions of Diversity in the Workplace. 

What did we find?  That nonprofit professionals, particularly people of color, put a real value on diversity and inclusiveness and that these perceptions impact their decisions about employment.  A few key findings include:

• Nearly 90% of employees believe that their organization values diversity. However, more than 70% believe that their employer does not do enough to create a diverse and inclusive work environment.
• More than half of employees of all races – and 71% of employees of color—attempt to evaluate a prospective employer’s commitment to diversity during the interview process.
• More than 35% of people of color who indicated that they examine diversity during the hiring process report having previously withdrawn candidacy or declined a job offer due to a perceived lack of diversity and inclusiveness.

What does this mean for nonprofit organizations?  In the report, we outline a number of specific recommendations that nonprofits can implement in order to position themselves strongly in this area, such as building their employer brands and slowing down recruitment processes to allow for enough time to recruit diverse pools.  We believe strongly that nonprofit organizations need to pay attention to these matters now, because as the economy recovers, the competition for the best talent will only increase and the strongest employees are looking for organizations making genuine and results-oriented investments. But you are not in it alone—there are funders, consultants, trainers, nonprofit professionals, and Board members who can help you set and meet achieveable goals around diversity and inclusiveness.

What does this mean for nonprofit professionals? Remember that your voice is important and that suffering in silence doesn’t help anyone.  Please take some time to share your experiences, vocalize what is important to you, and hold organizations accountable.  By being engaged partners in the process, you can help organizations recognize the need for changes – and the consequences of not making changes – as well as help nonprofits take actions to build more diverse and inclusive workplaces.

This report is just the first step in starting a conversation. We invite you to take any or all of the following actions to help sustain a dialogue:

1. Download the full report here.
2. Circulate the report to funders, partners and other nonprofit champions
3. Post your reactions, questions and ideas to our blog
4. Post to Twitter with the hashtags #diversity or #nonprofit

According to the report, many of these programs strive to balance racial disparities in leadership roles. However, these programs often take approaches that look at a singular – and often culturally biased – vision of leadership. As a result, people of color – who are already underrepresented in many leadership programs – end up feeling like they must conform to leadership styles that may not reflect their personal beliefs and values.

We spoke with Deborah Meehan, Executive Director of Leadership Learning Community, to learn more about the findings from the report. Here’s what she had to say:

1. What was the impetus for this research?

A few years ago, the Annie E Casey Foundation commissioned us to explore why there aren’t more people of color leading nonprofit organizations. We were able to access data about demographics in the nonprofit sector in general, but not about leadership positions. The lack of data indicates a problem in and of itself. While there is consensus that people of color are underrepresented in leadership positions, the need for hard data drove this research.

Looking at leadership programs was one way for us to collect data and explore these issues. While leadership programs have stepped up their effort to recruit more people of color, we need to do better. We partnered with organizations in the racial equity field to better understand some of the racial issues that existed within leadership programs.

Many leadership programs focus on specific issues like the environment, education, or health reform.  Some programs believe that work on racial justice is another program’s issue or that they need to focus.  Everyone working in leadership on any social issue needs to understand the ways in which opportunity structures in this country often produce different outcomes for people based on race within all of those issues they are focused on. There is no race neutral approach. We saw this research as a call to understand these issues more deeply.

2. What were your ideas about leadership styles going into this research?

When we did listening groups with current or developing leaders of color, we learned that there are many leadership styles that looked different from more dominant approaches We observed that there appears to be a bias towards individualism – like one leader out in front – in many organizations. Some of the people of color we spoke with tended to take more collective approaches, such as honoring the work of a team and not taking individual credit for accomplishments. As a result, these people were sometimes criticized by supervisors for not displaying strong enough leadership skills. This led us to believe that “one-size-fits-all” models of leadership limit opportunities for people of color.

3. Was there a big “aha” moment in your research?

Definitely. The big “aha” for me seeing the influence the dominant culture of individualism has had on the way we think about leadership in this country. Our attachment to the ideals of individualism has led to a rather distorted view of what it means to be a leader. We tend to think leaders alone are responsible for achieving great things by virtue of their talent.  We miss the point that a lot of talented people don’t have equal opportunities and we don’t act alone. The reality is that leadership often emerges from our social and racial identities that give rise to shared frustrations and aspirations that motivate collective action..

4. Why should leadership programs and nonprofit organizations care about this issue?

If we do not help people in leadership understand the system that is stacking the cards against people of color we won’t help to change it.  School leadership that is only focused on school performance without looking at achievement gaps for different populations in the school will probably contribute to the problem of growing disparity. We’re either going to help solve the problem and we’re going to be part of it.

This is an opportunity for leadership programs to learn how to have conversations about racial and culturally driven values. Leadership programs offer a safe place to look at these issues.

This is an opportunity for people in a hiring position to think about question of opportunity structures and their assumptions about people having had equal opportunity.  What someone has achieved by virtue of position isn’t necessarily an indicator of their ability. Some people because of their race or economic status haven’t had access to get into doors to help them establish credentials. It’s important to bring that awareness to creating opportunities for people from different backgrounds when you are hiring.

A free PDF of the report and a list of resources are available at http://bit.ly/LeadershipRaceForm.

Of particular interest, the Council on Foundations shared a research report entitled “Career Pathways to Philanthropic Leadership.” This baseline study looks at potential keys to success for emerging leaders in philanthropy, as well as offers insights into the total appointment process.

The key findings from this research include:

1. Nearly 80 percent of the 440 foundations appointing CEOs and executive directors during the study period filled them not through internal promotions but from candidates outside the
foundations.

2. Most of the successful candidates held executive positions in their immediate prior position as either chief executive or vice president before successfully landing in their current position.

3. The majority of the successful candidates made the transition from fields outside of philanthropy— primarily from the business and nonprofit sectors.

4. Of the successful candidates, nearly 20 percent were from racially and ethnically diverse backgrounds and about half were women.

5. Thirty percent of field leaders who were interviewed said mentors played a major role in their career advancement.

6. About 85 percent of the interviewees expressed significant skepticism about the willingness of trustees, search consultants, and other hiring decision makers to be influenced by leadership
development efforts (such as fellowship programs that train new leaders) as they contemplate hiring decisions about executive candidates.

The report is now available for download on the Council of Foundations website, and is a must read for current and future philanthropic leaders.

Vision and Philosophy

Organizations have a greater likelihood of achieving their missions if they demonstrate a comprehensive, sustained and sincere commitment to diversity, inclusion and cultural competency in employment practices, volunteer engagement and community integration. We believe that the nonprofit sector workforce itself will be better and create enduring change if it is appropriately representative of the ethnic/racial diversity of the communities being served, and that diversity should be appropriately distributed throughout an organization for maximum benefit. Diversity is more than an activity, retreat or training session. It is a value that enhances the culture and the experience of all those within the organization. It includes the whole range of human differences (including age, race and ethnicity, disabilities, sexual orientation, gender and more), but the initial focus will be on improving the racial/ethnic diversity of the nonprofit sector.

Organizational Implientation

As a signatory to this Compact, we assert our organization’s commitment to diversity, throughout all levels of the organization, exemplified either by the following policies and practices in place and/or our organization’s commitment to put such policies and practices in place:

• We have a written anti-discrimination policy approved by the CEO and/or board of directors.

• Our CEO has 1) articulated a case for why greater diversity is important to the organization’s mission and performance, 2) ensured that strategies are in place that strengthen the diversity of the workplace and build an inclusive work environment and 3) dedicated to obtaining the proper resources necessary to achieve results.

• Our organization has a diversity and inclusion business plan for achieving a diverse workforce recognizing the mission, constituencies and community served by the organization.

• We ensure that racially and ethnically diverse candidates are considered for all job opportunities in the organization to the greatest extent possible.

• We seek out and employ best practices in recruiting, hiring, managing and recognizing diverse employees, and eliminating attitudinal, behavioral, physical and procedural barriers to diversity.

• We implient human resources policies and practices for employees that support a fair workplace, including clear goals and expectations for employees, complete orientation to the organization and their role, rewards and recognition based on merit, supervisors who provide coaching and feedback on performance, and opportunities for development and advancement.

• We frequently evaluate our organization’s successes and opportunities in implienting and improving on best practices for a diverse workforce, and are committed to the value of diversity as an ongoing process rather than a task to accomplish.

• We will report to our board of directors annually on performance toward our diversity goals.

Reporting

• We will publicly share a report on the diversity of our board of directors and staff each year to demonstrate our commitment to improving the diversity of the nonprofit sector.

Is this good advice? Should you delete your college graduation date from your resume? Dye your hair?  What do you think of the spa in Arlington, Va., that offered free Botox treatments for unemployed people? Can you make age and experience an asset?

Take a short survey about age bias in the job market and let your voice be heard.

As many hiring organizations are in the unique position these days of having too many resumes for their open positions, it’s tempting to instantly disqualify candidates who, at a glance, do not appear to be a match the expected profile for an open position.

So when a resume reads “20 years of experience in…” for a position that only requires 5 years of experience, you may be tempted to slide that resume to the bottom of the pile.

However, before discounting candidates based on their years of work experience or seeming “over-qualification,” there are a few things you may want to consider:

1. Establish the core criteria of a position – for example the required skills and type of previous experience – and stick with it when screening applicants. If an “overexperienced” candidate clearly demonstrates success against your criteria, then he’s probably a good fit after all. (Note: this is a best practice for evaluating all of your candidates.)

2. Avoid making assumptions, such as “this person will be unhappy in this position,” “we’ll never be able to afford this person’s salary,” or “someone at this level isn’t a good fit for this role.”

3. Just because someone has held senior management or other leadership roles, don’t penalize her in advance for applying to a front line or mid-management role. (Remember, leaders are team players too.) Again, look for evidence of fit in the applicant’s experience and skills, not simply in their former job titles.

4. When considering candidates who have more years of work experience than required for a job, one question that often comes up for hiring managers is “why would this person want to do this job?” Look for answers in the applicant’s cover letter, or probe on this during a phone interview. There are most likely valid reasons why he’s drawn to your open position or organization.

5. At the end of a good conversation, delve into what it’s really like working at your organization. Paint an honest picture of the role. For example, if you’re concerned that an experienced candidate won’t “roll up his sleeves and jump in,” make it clear that this is an essential part of the role, as well as your organization’s culture.

There have been many studies, reports, and coalitions devoted to identifying the reasons behind the sector’s lack of diversity. The most widely reported roadblocks include pipeline challenges (such as a lack of recruitment channels or networking opportunities), as well as competition for top talent from corporate employers who generally offer higher compensation.

The current economic downtown and increased supply of career changers as a result of corporate layoffs highlights this issue even more. If nonprofits aren’t prepared to capitalize on the influx of talent to the job market, it’s a bit of a wasted opportunity. And if there are still no inroads for people of color to nonprofit opportunities, much of the amazing talent that is now available will not find their way into the sector.

The time to act is now. A number of strategies to address racial disparity in nonprofit roles have been identified, such as getting senior staff to embrace this issue, shifting recruitment tactics away from just job postings, and creating career paths and growth opportunities that can compete with typically more higher-paid positions in the corporate sector.

On the surface, implienting these strategies does not seem impossible, especially during a time when there are overall fewer jobs and a greater supply of talent. But the reality is few nonprofits are able to invest the necessary dollars, time, and people to meaningfully address the task at hand. This is not to say that diversity isn’t a top concern. Rather, most nonprofits are unable to prioritize diversity recruitment, at least not to the degree in which they tend to prioritize other mission-critical initiatives.

(Note: at this point, we should state that we do not intend to discount the great strides a number of organizations are making to address diversity in the sector.)

To gain greater insight into this complex issue, we spoke with Rosetta Thurman, an emerging nonprofit leader of color and the principal of Thurman Consulting, an organization that works with nonprofits to increase their leadership and management capacity.

“There’s no silver bullet to solving the probli of racial disparity in nonprofit roles,” Rosetta said, “However, simply posting jobs on Craigslist and Idealist isn’t going to do it. We need to take some risks.”

Some tactics that Rosetta suggested include: going to meetings of professional organizations such as Hispanics in Philanthropy, investing dollars and staff time in a booth at the National Association of Black MBAs national conference.

She added, “It’s ok to be the only white person in the room.”

Our conversation came back to dollars and time. How can a nonprofit trying to spend as much on program costs as possible justify the expense of most recruiting activities?

“We pay for what we prioritize,” said Rosetta,”If we prioritize addressing racial diversity now, we won’t have to pay forever. We may only need to make that connection one time to start to build a network and create a pipeline of candidates.”

Rosetta then shared a story with me about her own experience coming to a nonprofit employer. When she interviewed for her first job in D.C., everyone she met with was white. In her second interview, she met with an African-American employee who discussed how the organization genuinely offered a diverse and inclusive workplace. It was that experience that cinched it for her. “It’s important to understand why the people of color choose to work at an organization. This cultural competency is a piece that the sector hasn’t mastered. Most people of color do come from a mindset of service, but it often looks different from other routes to the same careers. Organizations need to take the time to understand this, and then create a workplace that is inclusive of culturally-informed points of view about public service”

Bottom line: until nonprofits really focus on taking strategic action to improve diversity, there are a lot of good intentions, but not a lot of systemic change. Let’s be the generation of nonprofit leaders that commits to genuinely building diversity. It is only after making a serious investment in creating recruitment pipelines, deep networks, and viable career paths that we will begin to realize a more inclusive, representative, and diverse nonprofit sector.

The award recognizes organizations with a wide range of missions and visions, but all of those awarded are making significant change in their communities.  Winners this year include ACCESS, “for its commitment to provide economic and social services to Arab immigrants, Arab Americans, and non-Arabs alike, while breaking down the barriers of linguistic and cultural differences;”  Native Americans in Philanthropy, “for its work to promote, facilitate, and celebrate philanthropic giving to Native communities, while providing professional development opportunities and support for Native Americans working in the field of philanthropy;” and The Twenty-First Century Foundation “for its efforts to facilitate strategic giving for black community change, working with donors to invest in institutions and leaders that address challenges within black communities across the country.”

The National Leadership in Action Award Program promotes high-level performance of philanthropic institutions and nonprofit organizations and the award honors innovative approaches to connecting resources of time, money and expertise to the philanthropic work of communities of color.

For a full list of recipients or to learn more about the award, click here. 

In all organizations, diversity of experience and backgrounds has proven itself to be a vital success factor. This can be gained through many types of diversity, including racial and ethnic diversity. Diversifying a team’s membership increases the range of opinions, ideas and opportunities available in decision-making processes. This, in turn, will improve the quality of those decisions, the ease of new strategy implientation, and the organization’s effectiveness in meeting its goals.

Social and human service organizations have are particularly sensitive to ensuring ethnic and racial diversity because so many of these organizations serve a highly diverse constituency. In order to most effectively understand and respond to the needs of their clients and partners, social service organizations know that their staff should be reflective of the communities they serve. Some funding organizations have recognized the importance of these facts and have started to require staff diversity reporting among their grantees.

The social sector needs to continue to improve its workplace diversity, particularly at the senior management level. In order to achieve these goals, Commongood Careers makes several broad recommendations:

(1) Build a hiring pool of diverse talent through constant, year-round outreach to targeted communities and groups, instead of focusing on outreach only for open positions;

(2) Structure your searches so that you can allow a longer hiring window, possibly adding 2-3 months to a search, in order to ensure that every effort has been made to include diverse candidates in the final candidate pool, especially with senior level hires;

(3) Build an internal pipeline of diverse talent by hiring for diversity at lower organizational levels and then ensuring effective retention and career laddering to grow that talent into senior management roles.

Organizations that truly value diversity at all levels have proven to be the most successful at building workplace diversity. Making diversity an organizational priority in all areas, as opposed to focusing on diversity only in recruiting, will make your organization stronger on many levels and will enable you to attract and retain diverse candidates more effectively.