Lack of budget can be such a bad excuse.

Lack of budget and resources is a real problem across many nonprofits. I am not denying that fact.

One of my favorite NPTech people, David Krumlauf, has been making the circuit and speaking with foundations to convince them of the importance of funding technology for nonprofits. The days of "we only fund programs" and "we don't fund overhead" is just so backwards thinking. It is like saying we want to fund you, but it isn't our concern how effective, efficient or if you can get the tools to succeed.

But with that being said, I have heard too many nonprofits talk about and almost hide behind the excuse of "we don't have the budget for technology."

One of the things that I respect about my new job is how they get every penny out of the technology they have. They are able to make magic happen with spreadsheets, a custom SQL database built over time, low cost software, and 1 tech person (until I started).

When someone talks about their low tech budgets the questions I ask are:

1. Are you using your current technology to the full capacity? 
• There are often features, modules, add-ons, plugins, short cuts and other parts of our tools that we just never took the time to explore, implement or use
2. Have you taken time to review your business processes?
• Often we don't even know where our inefficiencies are, are we working smart?
3. Have your prioritized your tech needs to be sure your tech budget is allocated correctly?
• Technology does cost money and you have to make the budget for mission impact technology
4. Have you leveraged nonprofit discounts and donations?
• Look for cost savings on non-mission impact technology
5. Are you proactive in your tech spending or reactive? 
• Fighting fires costs more than preventing them

But even with those questions it is a lost point often because of a lack of time be proactive and\or a lack of staff expertise in business process. In those cases it is best to look for outside support, turn to your board, lean on vendors, look for pro-bono help and start your planning somewhere!

Nonprofits often work on shoestring budgets but make huge impact on real issues. Nonprofits get creative with their solutions. Nonprofits change the world every day, often with very little funds.  They find a way to make it happen. I would love to see some of that effort, creativity and problem solving put toward their core technology (and no I don't mean social media, web or the surface tech). The trains need to run on time.

Blame it on the budget (Part 6 of 11 on Managing Tech 2 Meet Mission)

"We need a bigger budget! We have computers to replace, software to upgrade, networks to secure, staff to train, websites to redesign, emails to send, apps to develop, databases to support, etc." It is like a broken record or the echo in a cave that never ends, the tech department is always asking for extra money.

Often we have the best ideas and all of the best intentions in mind. We know we are asking for the extra money because we need it, not just for technology sake.  Then we make the request and the response simply is "it's just not in the budget." So each year when it comes to budget time, we push for that bigger IT budget, whether it is operating or capital. We make the case for the needed upgrades and replacements. We add in new initiatives and tools. But when the ink hits the paper, does the budget get approved?

Technology has a history of being viewed solely as a cost center. We are an expense to manage. So that is how our budget is reviewed, a list of wants that is easily trimmed.We may eventually need them, but our tech staff can make due with what they have. Besides we all know that no matter what budget IT gets, they will always want more.  There is always that better tool, upgrade, gadget, etc. 

How do we start to change this? It is different for each organization, but one thing is to give the rest of your organization a voice to express why the technology improvements are critical to them. Have the staff that do the daily work tell the story of why technology is needed. Shape the request as if it is a business need, not a technology request.  

IT can't be the one always asking for the IT budget. If the IT department is the only one who is willing to stand up in an organization and say that we need better technology, then maybe you don't really need it. If technology is aligned well and the full organization sees the value, then they could become your budget champions. Instead of the IT director making yet another technology ask, have the staff that need the technology help write the business case for the budget.

One way to accomplish could be to come up a technology purchase request form that ties a purchase to a business need, organizational goal or strategic initiative. Another could be to begin a cross functional steering committee that analyzes the organizational needs and makes technology proposals. 

But some of the best ways that I have seen a technology budget written is simply to tie every purchase to a specific item in the strategic plan, describing how it meets that goal. But be sure to also be very direct in which staff in the org it impacts, as well as what the risks are if the budget isnt allocated.  

The real key is that once you have a budget approved be sure to spend time measuring the effectiveness of that purchase. What impact did it have? What work was improved? How much time was saved? If you used a form to get a department or staff member to suggest the technology, follow up with a survey to that group. If you tied it to a goal or initiative, was it met? Tell the story about how the technology helped. 

To sum it up, it is easy to trim and ignore a technology budget when it is just that IT director yelling in a cave that we need more money.  That request has a different voice when it comes from the rest of the staff as part of a business plan.

Over 11 weeks I am doing a themed series of blog posts. Each week I will write about a chapter of the book called Managing Technology to meet your Mission. This week is on the 6th chapter by By Scott McCallum and Keith R. Thode called Budgeting for and Funding Technology. You should totally buy the book. (In case you are wondering, I am volunteering to do this, I am not getting paid or in any other way reimbursed for this. I just love NTEN and their events.)

IT is not your friend and you are not our customer! =IT planning? (Part 4 of 11 on Managing Tech 2 Meet Mission)

(NOTE: please read the comments after the post, Peter has made some amazing observations and comments. As I thought, Peter is the master of this topic. Thx for the comments Peter, I should have had you just be a guest blogger. And now back to the original post.)

The goal of the IT department is not to make friends. Nor is it a good idea to follow the old thinking that staff in your organization are your customers. IT should act as a partner.

Whoa, slow down Steve, what does that have to do with the IT Planning and Prioritizing chapter by the brainiac Peter S. Campbell in the NTEN book, Managing Technology to Meet your Mission? Well, if you would be more patient, I will get there. I was trying to think what I could add to Peter’s chapter without just repeating his totally accurate and well thought out methodology. Because I cant compete with his knowledge on this topic.

However, I think an element that should be stressed when Peter talks about building that integrated plan that includes technology, is understanding how IT is seen by the org. We can write the best plans, set goals, define metrics and have all the best intentions, but if IT doesn’t have the relationships it needs they wont be acted on.

If you think of the staff in your organization as customers, then your ultimate goal would be to meet their needs working with the motto that the customer is right. In this approach you react to the requests and needs of your customers. Your role is to provide the solution, support or training that they tell you they need.

If you strive to have the friendliest, well liked relationship with the staff, then all you do is strive to make them happy. But sometimes we have to push back on some ideas in order to balance the needs of the full organization. We simply cannot make everyone happy all the time and be their BFF.

We have to act as a partner, we are all working toward the same mission. The relationship between IT can be a friendly one, but our allegiance should lie with the mission and strategic plan. As a partner we work with the other departments, not for them as customer implies.

So tying this all back to Peters “spot on” description about IT priorities and planning. Our ability to participate in the planning process and get invited to the table with access to provide input depends on the role we play. If we are simply taking orders, then the IT priorities will be subject to whimsical changes. If we are there to be their friends, will they heed our advice and expertise?

After saying all of that though, you would be mistaken in not reading Peter’s chapter and implementing the process he recommends. You may just want to be sure you keep the whole picture in mind and read the rest of the book too. The best laid plans….

Over 11 weeks I am doing a themed series of blog posts. Each week I will write about a chapter of the book called Managing Technology to meet your Mission. This week is on the 4th chapter about IT Planning and Prioritizing. You should totally buy the book. (In case you are wondering, I am volunteering to do this, I am not getting paid or in any other way reimbursed for this. I just love NTEN and their events.)

Flickr photos by kalandrakas and by Claudio Cicali and by LollyKnit

Change the Conversation - Firewalls

OK, so I am working on something I want to call "Change the conversation". The series will be all about how technology staff will change the way they "talk" about technology in order to be more effective.

I will have to go back and redo this because I know it is missing things, but wanted to get one done and see what it looks like. So please forgive me for the publishing of a draft video, but here goes.


Any thoughts?

Great tech staff are enablers...

I think Dilbert rocks (ok well some of the time they get a bit weird).


I have heard too many stories about technology staff working day and night, the craziest hours and giving everything they have just to keep things working. These techs love their job and the work they do, just like many other nonprofit, mission driven staff. But these tech staff are maintaining the thin line between the org growing or crashing into complete chaos.

Technology departments arent given the budget or the staff to do what should be done. Rather they are told what needs to be done and they can only use the limited resources they already have. Now of course these staff are gifted and creative enough to rise to the occasion to get the job done. But if you were ever to go back and look at these projects, you would wonder how it ever worked. I always think of "punky power" when I talk about this (old Punky Brewster show reference).

Its as if nonprofits are willing to gamble with all the donors money, staff's time and everything they believe in just to save a few dollars.

Data breach, network crash, embezzlement, data loss, IRS audit, etc. Those are the type of rewards waiting for those who gamble. Waiter, please cancel the order of life cycle management, I think I would rather have the catastrophic data corruption. And even if none of these terrible things happen, just think of the simple result of missed opportunity.

OK, so not sure I have made the point of how great tech staff are enablers though. If we, ok that is a stretch to include me. If you, the great tech staff out there, work yourselves into the ground and push the limits of your not so secure\stable technology without truly stressing the risks to leadership if it (or your) crumbles then are you enabling them to continue that bad practice? If your org is not securing information, creating stable systems and growing the technology support then I say part of your job is to speak up.

Ah well, that is all pretty easy to say when you dont have a job. I still think that part of the reason I dont have a job is that I did speak up about this. But I do know that it had to be said and I know that voice helped others change direction on a treacherous road.