Thanks Norman - I agree. Tech should not be part of the Finance Department, which is generally viewed as a cost center. I think it's problematic to say that tech is a cost center. Where do you, and others want to see tech housed?

In many organizations, the IT group has been reduced in size and/or reports in to finance. I've been able to make my role more valuable by adding responsibilities in communications and fundraising and integrating them with my strong background in tech. But this doesn't change the need for technology to be viewed as a critical element in an organization's success. Often products are blamed when things don't work out as hoped when it's really that staff haven't been trained on how to best use the tools they have been given.

What I'd like to see is buy-in: I'd love to see leadership acknowledging that up-to-date, responsive technology is an increasingly critical aspect of a successful infrastructure policy. Because without buy-in, nothing gets done.

It pains me to see organizations where technology is misunderstood or ignored. Chances are you will find pervasive technology infrastructure that hasn't been maintained, possibly for years. It's likely there's no one whose job it is to coordinate all the disparate technology elements that staff use on a daily basis. Maybe the organization has an IT staff person (and maybe not), but chances are that person doesn't have the authority to coordinate what needs to happen.

I think that if you are a technology professional faced with that type of situation, your first task must be creating buy-in (recognizing you might be the only tech person around). Tech work at a nonprofit is often a big enough job in itself, but chances are that selling the very technology an organization needs to management that hasn't historically valued technology or acknowledged a need for it is going to be an even bigger hurdle.

Is that sort of challenge attractive to a younger technology person? Maybe, maybe not.

I think one of the biggest issues is that IT people aren't viewed at "strategists" but as people who can "Fix a computer". I typically describe myself as someone who understands fundraising and development who also just happens to be able to use a computer and data management. There needs to be a shift in ideology in many non-profit offices. Training on basic computer skills needs to be emphasized more so that individuals who are hired for example as data management experts aren't bogged down with printing excel spreadsheets.

Totally agree with you Peter. More nonprofit EDs need to understand technology's strategic importance. Another CIO article says that:

more CIOs are sitting at the executive table and maintaining an active role in strategic business decisions. Eighty percent of CIOs responded that they are a valued member of the senior leadership team, and 69 percent indicated they have significant involvement in strategic decision-making.

Do 69% of nonprofit CIOs have a stake in strategic decision making?

Technology projects live and die by planning and communication. Setting up the servers and installing the software is only about a 20th of a successful CRM or financial system rollout. Too many of the CEOs and COOs that I've reported to have completely discounted the need for organizational interest and involvement in critical software rollouts. As long as they think it can all be delegated to IT to "get it working", technology will continue to be a wasteful investment, under-utilized and unappreciated.

I've posted a lot lately about the salary issues. But this is what comes first: CEO's and non-technical leadership understanding that, in order to truly take advantage of technology, you have to incorporate it into the business planning and strategy, not just affix it to the business process. If they were to get that, and start investing in the potential, as opposed to just demanding it, then we'd have more non-profit CIOs, less IT Directors who actually are CIOs (like me), better technology funding, and far more return on the investments. We'd have better pay for the technologists who are supported and integrated in such a way that they can deliver the value.

Steve - I feel what you're saying! It actually struck me as I read the CIO article... In the article, they talk to lots of CIOs and CEOs, who all talk up the shift of IT from a function of the org, to a part of the strategy. It's everything that nptech leadership has been saying we need for a while now, but I wondered how many nonprofits really see technology as an investment in mission, not a cost center.

Coming from a smaller organiztion without a CIO, I'd say what I feel is missing are networks for current information staff to develop their leadership and support them in what (I hear) can be a lonely role. It also seems like there might not be enough incentive for younger folks to enter these roles - a larger "employment branding" issue for the sector as a whole, but particularly damaging for tech folks, who have other, often more lucrative, options for employment.

Excellent post, Holly! A point worth discussing.

I do feel the pain of a leadership gap within my organization and it is a very frequent conversation. Our retirement fund just changed their rules to allow people that are collecting retirement to come back as full time staff. The thought is to try to keep those retiring execs even longer. And with that retirement income they can take a low paying CEO role at a small YMCA and still make a living, plus have their own Y to run.

Yet keeping these long standing leaders around and fighting to keep those experienced staff around seems to be exaggerating the leadership gap especially in technology positions. These legendary, vast experience leaders generally have little to any experience with tech nor do they desire to learn, since they are that retirement age. So they are very quick to dismiss those young staff with cool, new technology ideas.

"We have been successful for decades this way, why would I want to change when I only have 5 years left. The next person can do it." Maybe I havent heard that direct quote, but actions always speak louder than words.

I often feel like I am discriminated against within my organization because I am young and involved in tech. Ok, maybe that is a harsh way to put it. My opinion means nothing to them since I have never been an exec, I dont have 30 years exp, etc. Even though I know much more about current trends, tools, process improvement, tech, etc than all of them combined.

I think many of our existing leaders dont see the value of technology and are too cautious around their younger staff (future leaders) who latch on to new technology. I get the impression from our most experienced leaders that all I can do is learn from them, that I have nothing to teach them. WRONG! That is one of the biggest reasons I am most discouraged about my role as a future leader in my org.

I also hear about tech staff being given little career advancement opportunity, worked too many hours, under staffed, little budget, etc. But most importantly many of us dont seem to be included or mentioned as mission staff. I am just as or more devoted to the mission as other staff. Yet we seem to hardly be included in strategic planning, mission conversation, events, etc.

OK, sorry this is a very negative comment. I do have some very good things to say and overall I do think we are in a better place each year.