C (4:13)

Vu, did you bribe her?

A (4:16)

Did you?

C (4:18)

Of course.

A (4:19)

Of course you did. Vu, welcome. And thanks for your work and thanks for finally sitting down and writing this book.

C (4:27)

Thanks for having me on your podcast, Joan. It's always fun just. Yeah. Being in conversation with you.

A (4:33)

So one of your book blurbs says you are irrepressibly charming and searingly honest. I actually know this to be true.

C (4:44)

Why are you so nice today? Huh?

A (4:47)

It's early on in the podcast because of this. I figured your book would have a badass title. I too was directed to a title by a publisher. Cause Google searches matter. You know, what would you have called the book if it was left. If you were left to your own devices and nobody actually persuaded you to call it something different.

C (5:09)

I actually threw out like 20 different titles to the publisher and they hated every single one. There was one that was like, this shit is all made up or burn it all down. And then at one point, I Woke up at 3am and I was like, the platypus. The Platypus Principle. I was like, oh, yes, that's what we need. We're more like a platypus. Right? Isn't that a great symbol? We're not. We're not unicorns anymore.

A (5:34)

Oh.

C (5:36)

We're like this weird amalgamation of different animals squished together. It has like one like venomous barb on its foot that it uses to envenomate enemies. And it lays eggs and has a, like, it's a weird animal. And I'm like, you know what? That is a good symbol for our sector. So I was like, how about we call this book the Platypus Principle? And they're like, that is the worst title ever and we're not going to go with that.

A (6:02)

I happen to know your publishers and I Can imagine that they all just. That they all must have had cocktails after you came up with that title. Or they needed to have cocktails before.

C (6:14)

They were very professional. Yeah, they were.

A (6:16)

They probably said something like, you know, that's very interesting, Vu. Right. But I'm not sure that the Google search is really going to help people to find a book that is so important for them to read.

C (6:32)

That's almost word for word what they said.

A (6:34)

And you know what? They're not entirely wrong.

C (6:37)

Yeah. So I thought I would just be an adult and put out this boring title book with a very plain cover. You know, it's really professional.

A (6:48)

Yes. I mean, really. I mean, the first edition of my book, I think I was sitting on a garbage can, so I was a little bit more provocative than you. So anyway, Vu, why'd you want to write a book? Lots of nonprofit books are out there. Right. Including mine. Why'd you want to write a book? And. And what gap do you think the book fills?

C (7:13)

Yeah, I mean, I've been writing the blog for so long, I have, like, literally 680 blog posts written by now, and I think it's just way too many blog posts for people to read through. Right. To comb through, what are the important ideas? I just want to just get all of the ideas down to one place in an organized format. So in case I get run over by a truck or something, people are like, oh, here are his important ideas in one place. And also, I want to give people permission to be like, wow, all these things are made up. Right. We don't have to do things the same way, so let's try to do things differently. So I try to feature people doing different things and being successful at it in our sector.

A (7:59)

So when someone's finished reading this book, what would you like them to say about it at, you know, they're having cocktails with somebody and say, I just finished reading Vu's book, and I felt. I thought, what do you. What do you want? What do you want them to feel when they finish reading the book?

C (8:17)

Yeah. I want them to feel, wow, this guy is irrepressibly charming

A (8:22)

and searingly honest.

C (8:24)

And searingly honest. Right. I want them to feel that they have permission to dream bigger and to be more ambitious in their plans and to not be beholden to the traditions and the philosophies that we've all internalized in the sector that I feel like have been holding us down.

A (8:45)

Yeah. I think that's. That's how I felt after I read the book. In addition to this irrepressibly charming part. So let's get to it a little bit. Vu, you. You see the nonprofit sector, and I read this in your intro, as vital as air because our world is deeply flawed. But you argue that nonprofit standard practices cause us to fall into problematic patterns. Talk a little bit about that, would you?

C (9:15)

Yeah, well, let's talk about us being air, right? We're like air because we are really vital to people, to communities. We allow people to breathe just like air do, Right. But like air, we're often invisible. People don't appreciate air until they need it, and they don't appreciate it until it's. It's gone. And they're like, oh, no, I don't have any, I don't have any air. Right. People don't think about, like, senior services. They don't think about, like, food pantries or advocacy organizations until things come up and they're like, oh, shit. I like, I really need all these services. And I, you know, so people don't appreciate us, so that's why we're like air. And at the same time, we don't. We're not assertive enough. And we also are. We're kind of stuck on a bunch of different philosophies. For example, I don't know, like, Robert's rules. So many of us are still using Robert's rules. It's like 100. Who's Robert?

A (10:10)

Did you know that Robert is his last name? Not his first name Exactly.

C (10:13)

Yeah. Henry Martin. Robert, who was like a US army officer in 1878 that compiled these rules into one place that he took from US Congress. And now 150 years later, we're still using them. And we like, well, that's the standard practice. I'm like, no, this is. These are like 150 years old and a lot of communities don't use them. So that's just one example of like, how, how we get stuck in something and think that we can't get away from it.

A (10:39)

It's interesting, I think about this idea and I, I don't disagree with you, that nonprofits exist in this sort of deeply world. So it's kind of hard to create something new that's not flawed because we actually. We're swimming in flawed waters.

C (11:02)

Yeah. And I mean, we'll talk about this in a moment, but like in chapter two, I talk about the horsemen of ineffectiveness in our sector. Right? And the first one is like this suppressed imagination because of all the flawed water that we're swimming in. It has suppressed, suppress our Imagination. And we don't really believe in this world. We don't believe that this ideal world is possible, even though we all have vision statements that say, like, we envision an awesome world where everyone, every kid achieves their full potential and there's no more racism and poverty and stuff. But the way that we operate doesn't actually align with that vision at all.

A (11:42)

It's correct. So I was actually pretty much focused on these. Would you call the nine horsemen of nonprofit and philanthropic ineffectiveness? First, I wanted to know if you have any background in horseback riding or equine therapy or anything like that. No. Okay.

C (12:01)

No. I'm a vegan and I am against riding horses, so leave our horse friends alone.

A (12:07)

All right, so here are the nine horsemen. I would also like to say that 10 Vu is an even number. And you couldn't have come up with like one more to just make it 10?

C (12:22)

It's too predictable. 10. So nine is great.

A (12:26)

Okay, good. So the nine are. Sounds like now I'm going to do my Ken Jennings Jeopardy imitation. Suppressed imagination, white moderation, neoliberalism, fear, which I also have in parens risk aversion and incrementalism, toxic intellectualizing, scarcity and martyrdom, personal integrity, paradox, inferiority complex and self interest. These are the things that get in our way. They sound very grown up, by the way. I'm sorry, I would like to withdraw that earlier comment. You're very grown up with very grown up ideas. And you know, you've even written a book, so you must be grown up. Anyway, we're not gonna be able to go into ride all nine of the horses, but when we come back, we're gonna select maybe two of them and I think there's some really nice and interesting intersections between and among the nine and talk about what they are and what we can or should be doing differently. So we'll be right back. Are you a staff or board member of a small to mid sized nonprofit? Now, you might feel alone, but trust me, you are not. I built the nonprofit leadership lab for the millions who are just like you. You'll find time saving resources when your pants are on fire, opportunities to uplevel your skills, and a warm, nurturing, private community of what we call superheroes. Thousands of board and staff leaders call the lab home and we'd love for you to join us. Learn more@nonprofitleadershiplab.com podcast. So we're back and we're talking with Voule about his new book, Reimagining Nonprofits and Philanthropy. And we're Talking about these things that he calls nine horsemen, horse people. I think it would be of nonprofit and philanthropic ineffectiveness. Now, I will tell you that Vu is a rabble rouser and likes to identify the things that are not working in our sector. And I believe that there is a invaluable role that he plays in that regard. What I really actually have enjoyed about reading the book is that he has thoughts about how things could be different and how you could be different in being in the space as a nonprofit leader. So I just wanted to say that I want to take suppressed imagination for 800. Tell me what's what you mean by suppressed imagination, and let's talk about its root causes first.

C (15:09)

Yeah, well, suppressed imagination is just our inability to imagine, like, bigger, you know, like. I think an example is like when we were talking about defunding the police right now. The police, their budget is oftentimes 10 or more times the budget of education, civic engagement, housing, everything. Right? So we live in a society where we highly prioritize a police force. And of course, over the past few years, people have been calling for, like, an abolishment of the police or at least a reduction so that we can actually focus more money and resources on other things that would make create a society where the police is not so needed. Right. In a safe society, we don't have a strong police presence. And but when that was proposed, even many people in our own community is like, no, we cannot have that. We must have the police. We cannot defund the police. We absolutely must have the police. And I think about how that is such a, like this lack of imagination. Now, where does this come from? I think oftentimes it comes from the way that we've been trained in this sector, the way that funders always squash imagination. You know, you have an amazing, ambitious goal to do something and you're like, well, we need like $10 million to do this. And they're like, we'll give you $8. You can only spend on paperclips on Tuesdays because we don't believe in overhead. Don't use $8 to pay for your salaries.

A (16:43)

That's another one of the horsemen. Hold. Stay with me on this one. Stay with defunding the police for a moment. In your book, you actually help, I think, help people to understand those of us in the sector who might say, I don't really get that. What your argument is is reallocate that money. Yes. Right. Reallocate it to social services, to addressing the problems that lead to a need for Greater police enforcement. I think this is, my gut is that people hear the first part, but they don't hear the second part. The second part is not. So, first of all, everybody knows about media and they cut sound bites right where they want them to be cut. But I also think that our sector needs to be smarter about that. Right. More money needs to go into our sector. Right. To solve societal problems. That will enable us to look at police enforcement in a different way and drive the amount of money we spend on enforcement down. Right. Defund the police. Sounds like it doesn't offer the nuance or the context. Would you agree with that?

C (18:12)

It is in some ways kind of like a rallying cry. Right. And we spend a lot of time kind of cherry picking messages where I feel like other people, other forces, like the, you know, like right wing movements are really good at kind of like controlling the narrative, like you say. Right.

A (18:29)

Yep.

C (18:30)

And they're good at coming up with slogans and etc. And we need to do a much better job, for sure.

A (18:37)

Yes.

C (18:38)

Being able to do that. Yeah.

A (18:39)

Yeah. I think that's really true. And it's why I actually so firmly believe that communications in a nonprofit organization is actually not just about press releases and, you know, announcing the B minus celebrity who's going to host your gala. Right. I think communications is a program. It is about educating people about what you do, why you do it, and why it's so important.

C (19:08)

Yeah. I mean, corporations spend a ton of money on marketing, and we don't have that because we consider that overhead. That's also a lack of imagination.

A (19:16)

Yes. The other thing that, for me, that's rooted underneath, and you talk about it as some of the other nine. Suppressed imagination. I think about scarcity and I think about fear as root causes of suppressed imagination. I also think about boards, and I wanted to know if you think about those things, too.

C (19:37)

I think about these things way too much, Joan. I really need to get some more hobbies.

A (19:42)

You know, I play pickleball because I'm old enough now that I could do that.

C (19:45)

Did you know pickleball was invented over here in Washington state?

A (19:48)

Yes, I do know that. That is actually why you. You always serve from the Northwest. Swear to God. It's true.

C (20:05)

Yes. You better leave that in.

A (20:07)

Yes. And you know why they call it pickleball, right?

C (20:12)

Because their dog was named Pickle.

A (20:13)

Yeah. Yeah. You know, you're from the Northwest. You know this. Okay, go back.

C (20:17)

I've never played pickleball in my life.

A (20:19)

It's fun. It's really Actually super fun. And because the reason old people play it is it's a smaller court so you can actually hear the person on the other side of the net. Okay, now back to our regularly scheduled program, Fear Boards Scarcity. Right. We, our sector lives in this world where spend less is a good thing. And to innovate might mean to invest in something new.

C (20:53)

Yes.

A (20:53)

Right. And investing in something new might be something incredibly great idea that you, as a nonprofit leader, want to bring to your board. And what do they say to you, Vu?

C (21:07)

Well, they often say, no, Right. They say, that's too risky. We've never done that before. We've always done it this way. We don't have the resources for it, et cetera. That's one of the things I mentioned in the book on the chapter on boards is like, boards have been such a problematic force, force in our sector, and we need to reimagine them too. Right. We don't have to have the same sort of stodgy board structure that we've always had. They have a whole lot of philosophies that are not very conducive to this work.

A (21:38)

Well, there are two reasons in my mind that are worth noting here. One is they are recruited without an understanding of what their job is and how important it is. And they are recruited as risk managers. Their job is to make sure nothing goes wrong. Like if. Right. If you are among the most powerful volunteer leaders of an organization and you believe your job is to make sure nothing goes wrong, do you think that your imagination is going to run wild? I don't think so. Right.

C (22:12)

Well, that's why we need to reimagine it. Right?

A (22:14)

Right.

C (22:15)

I think, like, boards have been recruited, like you said, to be very narrowly focused on their own organization. In the book I was talking about, like, let's be more expensive. Why don't we have them be really focused on the entire ecosystem here? Why don't they start thinking about other nonprofits, too, and how we can all work together more effectively? In the book, I talked about an executive director colleague who got yelled at by his board chair because he passed on a funding opportunity to another organization. He's like, hey, maybe you should apply for this. And his board chair got mad at him. He's like, why are you helping another organization? Like that is such, like, a limited sort of imagination. Right. Because if we were expansive, we were imaginative, we would be helping one another because we'd be more effective together.

A (23:04)

So let's use that as an example. Vu. How do we fix that?

C (23:08)

Well, I would say we need to really re examine all the philosophies around boards that we have. Like, I do not like the idea that have been entrenched in boards, for example, that the board is the boss of the CEO. Like, I don't think the board is the boss of anyone. The board is like a body that is there to do a specific purpose, but they've gotten like this overinflated ego that they're like, we're your boss now. And we all kind of believe that it's a checks and balance sort of system. Kind of like the way the US Executive branch and legislative branch and the Supreme Court. I mean, I'll be the best example right now.

A (23:44)

Not the best.

C (23:45)

When it was working, they were balancing one another. But the, the U.S. congress and Senate, they're not the boss of the President of the United States. Right. They can remove them from power. They could impeach and remove them, but that doesn't mean they're the boss of the President. Right. So, but we need, we seem to believe that the board is the boss of the, of the CEO. So we need to get over that.

A (24:07)

Right.

C (24:07)

I also don't like the idea that the board is so focused on money. Right. I don't like this give and get policy. I don't like the 100% board giving policy because it has entrenched us in this idea that boards are about money. And then once we're entrenching that, we start gravitating towards board members who tend to have money or who are connected to money. And so this is why so many boards are so glaringly white in our sector.

A (24:32)

I think that's true. So I am sitting here thinking, okay, there's somebody listening who say, yeah, but I am expecting, like, if my board is not helping me raise money, then what do I need them for?

C (24:50)

Well, there's governance. Right. They still have a very important role. And again, if we free up our imagination, we can start thinking about some more interesting roles for them.

A (24:59)

Yes.

C (25:00)

Like being able to connect to other boards and start thinking broadly about connecting nonprofits and helping the ecosystem. And also, they can still help with fundraising.

A (25:10)

Yes.

C (25:11)

They just joined the fundraising team. Why do they need to have power in order to fundraise? Do they need. No, they just join the fundraising team.

A (25:18)

I think that that's absolutely right. And I think it goes all the way back to recruiting. And what I said about scarcity is, what's the number one question? There's the top five questions I get asked. How do I Find board members, right. As if somehow or another they were lost. Right. And it becomes a butts and seats strategy. And so you don't recruit interesting people with diverse backgrounds, people with lived experience, people who bring different things to the table, who can actually have generative conversations and imagine what's possible. Because they don't all think the same. And they're not all just asked. Could you please go find some rich people? I mean, I literally did a strategic planning gig a number of years ago where I stood in front of the board as I was outlining how I was gonna approach the gig, which I call strategic visioning, not strategic planning. Cause it's not a plan. And the board member literally said to me, joan, all you really need to do is find us a billionaire. Like if people could just hear themselves. But this whole notion of recruitment from a place of scarcity. No one will want to be on my board. I can't find someone, I can't find someone who has access to rich. We're just recruiting from a place of scarcity, from a place of fear. And we're not using that, as you describe it, imagination to think what would happen if my board was really different.

C (27:05)

Right. We're also recruiting from a place of boringness. The board is a very boring structure. I think we can start thinking differently about it. Like in the book, I talk about some different things people have been doing. People have been using native circle structures to facilitate board meetings. For example, instead of this top down hierarchical Roberts rules structure. Yeah, I talked about one organization that actually started paying board members was an arts organization. And I think they paid everyone, I think $150 or something per board meeting. And because it's an arts organization, they need to get artists onto their board. But artists are usually very poor and so they can't participate. And then you, you force them to fundraise and they feel like crap because they don't know any billionaires. And now why would they join your board?

A (27:55)

Do you think board members should be paid?

C (27:57)

I think that is something we should consider, especially if we want to think about like, how do we get, you know, like single parents and students and low income people and artists and other people onto the board. Like, why are they. You know, we've been so fixated on boards as a vehicle for fundraising and not for. As the board is like, like a, like a holder of community values and

A (28:21)

vision, you know, I mean, and when you think about how much work a board chair does, if it's a good board. Right. Those are big jobs. And who do they normally go to? They normally go to people who have some affluence and are usually retired.

C (28:38)

Right.

A (28:38)

And white.

C (28:40)

Exactly. That's why there's such a lack of diversity. And now, I mean, the last thing I say about boards being paid is, I mean, look at corporate boards. They pay people a lot of money.

A (28:49)

A lot of money.

C (28:49)

You can get like 20, $80,000. I think if you're on Tesla's board, you get like half a million a year or something.

A (28:55)

Yeah, maybe not a good example right now, but let's stay with white and go to another one of your white of your horse people and talk about white moderation. What do you mean by that? What does it look like?

C (29:13)

White moderation is from Martin Luther King Jr. S speech, from his letter from a Birmingham Jail where he was talking about, the biggest threat to justice are not people burning crosses and wearing hoods and being overtly racist. It's the people who are very nice, who believe in your vision of a just and equitable world. But they are more focused on being civil and nice and not causing tension and doing things the right way and following rules and order and stuff like that. And I think that in many ways, our sector has become one giant white, moderate people, very nice people who are more fixated on, like, doing things right versus doing the right thing. There's a clear difference between those.

A (29:55)

Is this the unique purview of white people? Is that why you call it white moderation?

C (30:01)

I think it's. I mean, again, it came from mlk. It is definitely a purview of white people because white people are the dominating force. Right. In our society, for sure. But it also is a force that affects everyone, all of us. I know lots of people of color who are prone to white moderation. You know, like, they're more focused on, like, oh, can we, can we not. Vu, can you stop cussing so much when you talk about fascism? Like, one person got mad at me because I was talking about fascism and I used the F word. And they wrote like a feedback note saying, oh, you know, I like what Vu said, but, like, can he not use the F word? Can he not swear so much?

A (30:42)

And what's at the heart of that? The heart of that is to the nice people in search of middle ground somehow. And that if you can, is it an increment? You mentioned incrementalism. Is it about, like, If I get 20% of the way there by being nice and moderate, that's better than burning down the house?

C (31:11)

Well, I think it caused the danger with white moderation is that it causes complacency. Right. You may get to 20%, and you're like, okay, I'm done. We got to 20%. You know, we're good. Why are you complaining? Isn't. Aren't you happy with 20%? Right. Why? Why? Why you keep going? Why you keep causing more tension and stuff? And a lot of people from marginalized communities are like, no, 20% is not good enough. We're still suffering. We're still oppressed. We need to go to 100%. And oftentimes the white moderate's like, no, 20% is good enough, but it's not.

A (31:47)

So it's interesting because there's a connection between what we were just talking about and this, which is going further than the 20% provokes fear on the part of your board is risky, right? It's a little scary, right? You know, it was. You know, there were established LGBT organizations in the 80s, but it was Act UP that did some of the most that. That went way past the 20%. Right. And they had a very different. They actually, to your point, had a very different model and decided that they could take those risks because nobody was opening the door to talk to them. And I think that's a piece of it, right. Is that in varying kinds of advocacy movements, there's a period of time in which no one is opening the door to you, and you either walk away, which is not the stance of an advocate, or you try to break the door down. Right. But then the movement evolves. And I've seen this with the LGBT movement. I'm sure you've seen it with others, where the door gets opened and you get let in and you feel like you have access that you don't want to jeopardize. And that lead, I think that can lead to that white moderation that you're talking about, is if I get let in and I start to light a fire, I'll get locked out again.

C (33:23)

Yes, it's completely understandable, but I'm not so sure we can actually achieve many of the things that we want in this sector or in the world, if we still are beholden to that fear. I was talking about an organization that. Remember when Black Lives Matter was really big and we were. I think it was after George Floyd. Yeah, yeah. The murder of George Floyd by the police.

A (33:50)

Right.

C (33:50)

And then, you know, and a lot of us, many people in our own or in our own sector could not say that they support Black Lives Matter because it was so controversial. There was one Organization over here in Seattle. In Seattle, which is a very progressive city, relatively. Right.

A (34:04)

Indeed.

C (34:05)

Yeah. And one organization my friend worked at, Ben Ruler, right. He was talking about how, like, the staff were like, we need to support Black Lives Matter. Let's send out a letter to our donors and everyone saying that this is what we support. And they were afraid that when they did that, that they would lose several donors, and they decided to just do it anyways. And what happened was that, yeah, they did lose several donors, but for every donor that they lost, they gained, like, five new donors because they were sticking to their principles and values. And so I feel like a lot of our fears are not based. They're based on assumptions that may not be proven to be true.

A (34:47)

I've been mindful as I watched Heated Rivalry, which you did a hilarious blog post about, by the way. Then I ran Glad back in the day when many, many, many donors were upset with a show called Queer As Folk. And they were like, no, that's like. It's like defamatus. Like, all the stuff we're fighting against. We wanna watch Will and Grace, right? And I said, so I'm supposed to go to NBC and tell them that they're the only TV show where there's a male lead that doesn't have a boyfriend or have sex. That is Will. And I'm supposed to somehow or another punish Showtime for Queer as Folk for giving us images of a posse of gay men in Pittsburgh who do their thing. Like, you know. And yes, I lost donors. I totally lost donors. But I also stood on principles at that time, right? And I think that's really, really key. And now Queer As Folk, he did Rivalry makes Queer as Folk look like, I don't know, the Care Bears. Three's Company or something.

C (36:07)

Three's Company.

A (36:10)

Yeah. All right.

C (36:13)

So did you watch Heated Rivalry? Wait, we gotta talk about Heated Rivalry.

A (36:16)

Yes, we've watched Heated Rivalry. Yes. But that's a whole nother episode, and we don't have too much more time left. We're gonna take one more break, and when we come back, I want to focus on the sort of the end of your book and some of the general strategies that you've proposed to affect change. And then you get to end by doing that thing you do so well, which is to talk about how much you love the sector. So stay with us. We'll be right back. Today's episode is sponsored by DRG Talent. I go way back with drg. This team is passionate about strengthening the nonprofit sector. Their work goes well beyond A holistic executive search process with strat plans, comp analyses, culture surveys, leadership 360s, and the list goes on. I refer clients to DRG regularly, and I'm excited to be able to say this with a microphone in front of me. These folks are good and they care. Reach out to them. Drgtalent.com and tell them, Joan Gary sent you. So Vu, in your last chapter, you offer your thinking about overall strategies that we need to be thinking about to affect change on a more systemic level. Especially if I am a younger person, which I am not, with no positional authority. I've already made it clear that I'm not a younger person because I indicated that I play pickleball. So talk a little bit about some of the specific things that you recommend in your book. Don't do all of them, because then people won't want to buy the book. And we're actually. We want a few people to buy it. Strategies that we need to be thinking about to affect change on a systemic level. Give us a couple of examples of what I'll find when I read your book.

C (38:03)

Yeah, well, we'll definitely need to be more. We need to organize more, for sure.

A (38:07)

Right.

C (38:07)

The sector does not do enough advocacy work. We do not do enough organizing work. And that is one of the most important things that we need to do is to mobilize our communities to organize and so on. I mean, depending on the areas that we have. Like I talk about, you know, like, shared leadership. We need to start rethinking leadership structures here as more people move away from this hierarchical models of leader of leadership.

A (38:33)

Can I pause you there and say, have you seen an example of that working well?

C (38:39)

Yeah, I see plenty of examples of co directorships working very well, but we also need to kind of stop this. Like, does it work well, we don't explore it, then it probably won't work well. Right, Right.

A (38:51)

Fair enough.

C (38:51)

I mean, look, the solitary leader. There's so many of them who are burning out.

A (38:56)

Yep.

C (38:56)

So can we say that this existing model is working well? Probably not. Right?

A (39:01)

So why not try something different?

C (39:03)

Yeah, why not try something different? I mean, in fundraising, we got to start thinking about how we change the way that we fundraise to end the Hunger Games and, you know, like, start talking to our donors about, like, where their money and wealth comes from. So that is. That's. Those are some of the things that we can start thinking about more.

A (39:21)

What about people without positional authority? How do we. I mean, I see it all the time with executive directors who are not younger, who find younger people on their staff to be disruptive. I mean, holy smokes vu. This sector is supposed to be disruptive. No.

C (39:44)

Right. It is supposed to be. And I can see how frustrating it is for many younger people. This was also one of the reasons why I wanted to write this book because I feel like a lot of these ideas are things that younger people be like, hey, that's kind of what we've been proposing forever. And no one listens to us. Can we have a flatter structure? Can we have four day work weeks? Things like that. And a lot of the older people are like, nope, that's not how we've always been doing it, so we're not going to change. And then they wonder why younger people are leaving the sector, not wanting to come in in the first place. Right. So I, I, I, I understand how frustrating it is for younger people out there.

A (40:24)

Yeah.

C (40:24)

You know, one, we really need your voice. Like, your fresh perspectives are very vital to this work because you have not been beaten down yet by the systems and you still have your imagination. So don't let your imagination be suppressed by all the stuff that you're dealing with here. Right. So keep going. And then to be strategic about it, I remember being a young person a very, very long time ago and being frustrated because all these elders were like, no, we don't want to do that. We're not going to do, we're not going to disclose salary ranges on our job postings or whatever it is, you know, and it was hard and I had to be very strategic. Like, I had to go and like, talk to other elderly people who get it right. And then ask them to deliver the same message that I was delivering because it was different coming from that. And so organizing differently is something we need to do.

A (41:21)

I didn't have this question before, but it seems the issue of organizing is making me think about Minnesota. And what are you seeing there? I mean, what are you seeing there? Are you seeing some stuff that's giving you hope in terms of how people are responding to what's going on in Minnesota?

C (41:41)

Absolutely. Minnesota has been amazing. I mean, it shows just like what we're up against.

A (41:47)

Yep.

C (41:48)

And also shows the amazing power of people in resisting. I mean, there's so many stories of just amazing community organizing and neighbors protecting one another and standing up against fascism. There's stories of allies just be putting their bodies on the line, like white allies, like being in the front. You know, it's amazing. And it's actually been giving me a Lot of hope for our society. I feel like if we can all channel the spirit of Minnesota, I think we can actually do a significant amount of good in the next few years.

A (42:22)

It has been interesting to me, and maybe I'm missing it, but it feels to me like the organizing is being done organically as opposed to the institution of blah blah blah.org is leading the blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. I don't know and I'm not sure what you're seeing in terms of collaboration among nonprofits out there. This is something I'm going to dig into because I'm really interested about the intersection of organic neighbors who are just out there doing and organizations and how they are operating and what the intersection is like. And I just wondered, have you. Is something you've. Anything you've seen about nonprofits in Minnesota?

C (43:10)

I have a few friends in Minneapolis.

A (43:13)

You have just a few friends. You only have a few friends and they're just in Minnesota.

C (43:18)

I mean, I'm so interrupting me, Joan.

A (43:21)

So you want to restate that?

C (43:24)

Yes, of course. Keep that in. We have. I mean, there are. I hear from my friends in Minneapolis about like, yeah, it has been. Everyone just plays their parts, you know, like, the nonprofits are doing their parts, the neighbors are doing their part. And that's kind of what we need right now.

A (43:40)

Right.

C (43:41)

You know, like, we need to stop like this turfiness that we have. I would love it just fun to just give out more money, you know, and not be concerned about, like, where it's going to. Like, we only give you money if you're a fiscally sponsored organization or 501C3. We won't give it to individual. We won't give it to mutual assistance associations if you don't have a formal paperwork. Blah, blah, blah. We won't give you money. Like, why there's some amazing people, like the groups of neighbors doing incredible stuff. Give them money. So then continue doing that.

A (44:09)

Right.

C (44:09)

Like, this is what I mean by, like, doing things right, you know, with the rules and regulations versus doing the right thing.

A (44:16)

Yeah.

C (44:16)

Which is a lesson that I think we need to learn from the conservative movements. Like, they don't. They're not so stuck on these rules and processes and stuff.

A (44:26)

Right. So it seems anyway. I mean, it would be. It would be interesting to have a deeper understanding of that. But I would agree with you that it seems that way. But I think that there's a certain lack of process because there is a message.

C (44:45)

Yeah. And they have lots of money to come up with those messages.

A (44:48)

And they have lots of money. Yes, exactly.

C (44:50)

And that's kind of what we need.

A (44:53)

So Minnesota gives us hope. And I thought maybe we would end where you begin your book. And just as much of a rabble rouser as you are. I think one of the things that makes you irrepressibly, whatever the hell it

C (45:06)

was, charming, charming, modest, humble.

A (45:11)

There you go. Irrepressible.

C (45:14)

Irreversible.

A (45:15)

Is just how much you care about the nonprofit sector and the power that it has. And it has a very personal connection for you. And you breathed the air of the nonprofit sector when you arrived here from Vietnam and with a lousy haircut. And just leave us with a few words of why this sector means so much to you.

C (45:40)

Yeah. When I first arrived in the United States, we didn't have anything. My family and I left everyone we knew behind us and we barely had clothing that was warm. We didn't have pots and pans and, or jobs or food or whatever. And when we arrived here, it was in Philadelphia. It was all these non profits and all these just amazing people who came together to help me and my family.

A (46:07)

How did they find you?

C (46:08)

Probably through a non profit. They hooked us up with a sponsor family. They brought us, they helped my parents find work. They brought food to us. They gave us warm clothing and cooking utensils and all sorts of stuff. And I think about, like, how I don't. I was so young. I was eight years old. I don't remember the name of any of these people or, or any of the organizations that helped me in my family because I would want to tell them that. Yeah. Because of what they did, you know, inspired me to go and get my master's in social work so I could pay it forward. Right. So I just want this why I'm so appreciative of the people in our sector because this work that we do, it is oftentimes invisible. Right. You may be helping this 8 year old boy who just arrived from Vietnam and he probably didn't have the language skills or his wits about him to tell you that what you did, like, transformed his life several years later and inspired him to go into this path. Right. So everyone is creating amazing ripples that they may never see.

A (47:16)

Yep. Touching people. Right. Touching the lives of people they will never, ever meet. I always think that's really. That's legacy stuff, you know, that's just like, if you can make a mark like that in your life, it's pretty priceless. And so it is with that that you are as fiercely committed to helping the sector Fulfill its promise.

C (47:38)

Yes. I'm really grateful to our sector. We definitely have a bunch of shit we need to work on for sure. Right. But that is. And we are messy. Nonprofits are very messy.

A (47:49)

I've heard that.

C (47:50)

But we're also awesome, which is what I was proposing to you. It should have been called messy but awesome.

A (47:56)

Nonprofits are messy but awesome. Okay, well, maybe my next book. Maybe we'll write one together. I don't think it. I don't see it. But who knows?

C (48:07)

It might take a lot of mushrooms.

A (48:08)

Yeah. Okay. Fair enough. We're gonna leave it right there. It is a really unique way of living in the world, Vu, that you can both be an endless champion for a sector, and also because you see its promise to really stir the pot up, to push for it to be all that it can be. And I think that there are people who see more of the latter than the former, but it is the combo platter that makes you a force to be reckoned with. So I really enjoy every conversation we have, and I think that you are just a real gift to the nonprofit sector. And I just want to say thank you for joining us. Thank you for this really boring book cover again. The book is called Reimagining Nonprofits and Philanthropy. I like the tagline. Unlocking the full potential of a vital and complex sector using platypuses. No, wait. What is the plural of platypus? Platypi.

C (49:15)

Platypus Principle. All right, well, platypuses, maybe. I don't know. I don't know if it's Greek or language.

A (49:20)

We'll save that for next time. Anyway, thanks a lot for the conversation, Vu, and for all your good work and for this great book. You can find it wherever books are sold. Amazon. Anything else you want to say about where to find the book or anything like that?

C (49:36)

Yeah. Support your local bookstores, everyone. So Elliot Bay over here, and you

A (49:40)

can buy them in bulk. There's a bunch through Porchlight, I think. Right through Porchlight. So if you. Anyway, add it to your bookshelf and vu. Thanks a lot. Really appreciate your joining me.

C (49:52)

Thank you, Joan. I appreciate you.

A (49:54)

All right, in the meantime, thank you for joining us. Thank you for the good work you do. Stay safe, stay as sane as you can, and we'll see you next time.

B (50:09)

Thank you for spending time with us today. We hope this conversation provides valuable insights as you navigate the messy but meaningful world of nonprofits. A Special thanks to DonorPerfect for sponsoring this episode and for their dedication to empower nonprofits like yours to do more good. For more resources to support your work, visit joengary.com podcast. We think you'll find a lot of helpful things there. Most importantly, thank you for all you do to make the world a better place, one small or large step at a time. Talk to you all next time.

A (50:52)

Sam.