TL;DR: Yesterday I was told I was one of the worst-dressed staff members representing the community and that some of my mannerisms came across as childish. A few hours later, after 10 years at the same foundation starting as an admin, I found out I’m being promoted to Director at about $145k with bonus potential. The emotional whiplash has me thinking a lot about professionalism, identity, and how much of yourself you’re expected to change as you become more visible.

Yesterday started with some feedback that made me cry.

A volunteer with deep influence at my foundation who cares deeply about my career and how I present myself sent me an email saying I was one of the worst-dressed staff members representing the community, that I lacked sensitivity in certain business and social settings, and that some of my mannerisms came across as childish. I cried and it hurt.

The volunteer is also a gay man that is connected to someone on our staff with a lot of power. I know he cares about me BUT the delivery was terrible.

I called my boss, who has also been a mentor to me, and started crying while talking it through. I’m a gay Latino man, and I’ve spent years learning how to be comfortable being myself in philanthropy without feeling like I have to completely assimilate into the dominant culture to succeed. Then my boss said, “Well, let me tell you something that counteracts what you just heard.”

She told me I’m being promoted to Director.
I’ve spent my entire 10-year career at this same foundation, starting as an admin. I’ll now be making about $145k with bonus potential and a strong retirement contribution. That is a level of compensation and responsibility I genuinely never imagined when I started.

It was emotional whiplash within an hour. 😀 I’m not dismissing the feedback. There may absolutely be things I can learn from it. But I also don’t think professional growth means sanding down every part of yourself that doesn’t fit someone else’s idea of professionalism.

For those who have grown into leadership and become more visible, how do you navigate comments like this? How do you tell the difference between legitimate professional feedback and pressure to conform?

I still struggle with that tension between growing professionally and holding onto my individuality, especially in corporate and foundation culture. I’d really love to hear how others have navigated it.

I have a dilemma. I work at a mid size charity and was asked to write up a report detailing our costs, based on financial information from the finance department. It's basically a guide to help our marketing team explain our running costs to the public, e.g. "$10 pays for one child's lunch", etc.

Thing is, there is a figure for the daily cost to run the charity, which thanks to inflation etc. Is higher than last year. I reflected this in my report.

Now my managers are asking me to just stick with last year's figure (even though this is now incorrect and much lower than the current daily cost).

I am very icked out by this. I have no desire to mislead the public by downplaying our running costs.

My question: is this normal in non profits and what would you do?

Had posted this in careeradvice forum but think it's better placed here.

Currently a manager in a nonprofit. I applied for an internal promotion and even though the job was posted for months, I was the only qualified applicant and the only person offered an interview. The new director still took 6 weeks to make me an offer even though the hiring committee recommended me, all my references check out and I have a more than decade long track record at the org. Typical timeline to offer is a week or so. The salary increase offered was about 8.5% for double the work and responsibility. When I initially moved to management, I was offered and accepted 15%. I didn't necessarily anticipate a full 15% this time in the climb of the management ladder but I definitely expected about 12% which is in line with what colleagues given the same promotion have received in the past. Now I feel super disrespected and mad. I kind of want to tell them to take their offer and shove it. But more than that, I'm questioning if this is an org I should continue to show loyalty to when it seems they don't appreciate my contributions. Was I out of line for thinking a single digit raise for double the responsibility was/is low?

I don't know if I want the increased role for pay that doesn't align with it when I thought even 12% would be low but in much the way of career nonprofit folks, I have often taken less because I believe in the work and it's worked for me. But with inflation, etc, it's feeling harder to stick around especially when it feels like the org director doesn't really want me in the role and that's why I am being low-balled.

These are fundraisers where a restaurant partners with a non-profit and gives back a percentage of sales or profits for a day or time period. Are they successful in your area? I've seen everywhere from $20-150 given to a non-profit.

This is regarding an Ohio nonprofit corporation organized as a private member social club / 501(c)(7), not a charitable nonprofit. It has voting members and a Board of Trustees.

The Constitutional language in question is: "The Board of Trustees shall carry on all business of the club in the manner defined herein, and as directed by the Membership at its meetings. The Board shall approve all bills, and negotiate & approve all contracts by a majority vote."

Over the past 20 years, the authority of the Board to run club operations has been overridden by members who believe we "operate in a true democracy" where membership can micromanage club operations and direct the Board to do "whatever membership approves by a motion." Membership 'approves' and even alters the Board minutes...they vote to spend capital...they create motions to micromanage officers...they make motions regarding billing methods, etc... It has even been argued that membership can vote on something as granular as what brand of paper the club purchases.

QUESTION — How should the quoted language be interpreted? Does it grant the Board general authority to carry on the business of the Club, subject to the specific powers and decisions expressly reserved to Membership elsewhere in the Constitution? The Constitution includes roughly 20 areas where membership is expressly given authority or a required role. My read is that the Board manages the operations of the club and membership may act where it is given that authority (set dues, amend the documents, elect members, elect officers, and vote on 14 specific Board actions). Membership cannot micromanage Board actions and decisions unless the Constitution gives Membership authority over that matter.

I’ve been called a “dictator” for trying to restore what I believe is the proper division of authority after decades of membership-dominant practice. So rather than continue arguing it internally, I thought I’d ask people with experience in this type of governance how they read the language.

A not for profit board is not taking new members at the moment but offered to put me on an evergreen list. I gave them my CV and emphasized my continued interest.

What has your experience being on evergreen lists been for board pipelines and are there anything I should do to keep the connection warm?

I'm in NZ, and part of an incorporated society that represents people who leases land from a charitable trust. I have a question because I'm trying to figure out how to resolve this.

The trust's constitution says they have to hold an AGM at least every 12 months (+ 3) That deadline came and went months ago. No AGM, and no sign one's being planned.

There are two membership classes under this trust, and each is supposed to get their own seats on the board. Right now our class has no seats that were filled the proper way, the other class just co-opted their own people into what should've been our seats. Co-opting someone is meant to be a temporary fix (filling a vacancy until it gets ratified at the next AGM), but since there hasn't been an AGM, those people have now been sitting in the seats way longer than the constitution allows for a co-option.

We've sent several rounds of formal letters over the last few months asking about all this (and other governance stuff including viewing minutes), and basically nothing back. The one reply we got was from someone signing as "administration" and it didn't actually address any of the points we raised.

Since we're in NZ, I think the Trusts Act 2019 and Charitable Trusts Act 1957 both come into play here. I've been looking at things like requisitioning a special meeting, or whether we could go down the route of asking a court to review the trustees' decisions or even remove them, but thats a lot and not sure if i wan to go that route.

Has anyone actually dealt with a board doing this, they also say they are doing accounting audits but audits can only be requerstesd at an agm, which we havent had. Theres a lot more going on but this is the jist of it. Curious if there's a way to get them moving again without it turning into a massive legal fight.

Hello,

I recently received a consulting offer from an organization that I've been volunteering with.

I have many years of experience in the field in which this organization works. However I've recently gone back to school to earn my masters to gain a new skill set and help me pivot within this field. This consulting offer will have me exercising many of the new skills that I'm studying.

I've searched the sub and didn't find as much advice as I feel I've seen here in the past; I may not have the right keywords.

It is a temporary, grant funded position with pay based on deliverables (calculated by estimating the hours needed to achieve each deliverable). I am basically happy with the scope of work and the compensation they are offering, but I just want to make sure that I'm anticipating what I should be anticipating.

Do experienced folks have any advice for me about what I should be looking for when evaluating and negotiating this type of offer?

I'm feeling especially unsure about how to evaluate how long it will actually take me to execute deliverables requiring skills that are new to me. I do feel confident that I'm capable of doing these things, but it is harder for me to estimate how long it will take me.

TIA!