course material

1. (Mt) – Read the following two discussions and comment on them by
• Collapse SubdiscussionPia Eisenberg Person A 11:22amSep 3 at 11:22am Manage
Discussion Entry Jewish Family and Children’s Service of Greater Philadelphia (JFCS) has a
robust program for adults living with disabilities. This is just one of many programs that
JFCS implements in the larger community—not only the Jewish community. JFCS’ largest
annual donor supports this program, known as PLWD: People Living with Disabilities. This
donor has an adult daughter with intellectual disabilities who participates in the program;
and while her daughter is well provided for, the donor is truly concerned for others in the
community who do not have the same means as her daughter. Over the years, the donor has
increased her giving significantly to provide enrichment activities and life skills education
for JFCS clients in this program. However, she always made it clear to me that her ultimate
charitable goal was to build a residential facility for adults with special needs. She also made
it known that she would be willing to give JFCS a seven-figure gift to name a residential
facility if we were to build one. This presented several dilemmas for us, which begged the
following questions: Is this something JFCS should pursue? Is it financially prudent for JFCS
to build and operate a residential facility? Is this even mission-aligned? Equally important, if
we determine that this is something we should NOT pursue, how do we make this key
stakeholder understand, without alienating her, that owning and operating a residential
facility is not part of JFCS’ mission? Lastly, how does a non-profit walk away from a
potential seven-figure gift? As you can imagine, this situation was fraught with unknowns
and a highly-valued stakeholder relationship was at risk— thus the matter required
finessing and management. We decided to approach this by conducting a due-diligence
process in which we visited comparable residential facilities to determine the operational
and financial aspects of owning/running a residential facility, interviewed thought leaders
and families involved in housing for adults with intellectual disabilities, and discussed the
possibility with our Board of Directors. I informed the donor that we would be conducting
this research and kept her apprised of our findings along the way. Simultaneously, JFCS was
in the midst of a strategic planning process that coincidentally was completed around the
same time as the due diligence process. Both processes informed my follow-up conversation
with the donor. The due diligence process told us: o o o It would not be financially prudent
for JFCS to own a residential facility. It is not best practices for an organization to both own
a residential facility and provide the programming at the facility. Running a residential
facility is not mission-aligned for JFCS. o Families of adults with special needs do not wish
for their loved-ones to live in residential facilities and have developed more creative

2. options for the adults with special needs. Interestingly, the strategic planning process
identified the need for JFCS to build a therapeutic center to carry out our well-established
group programming. This would ultimately enable JFCS to connect our clients to the
community and provide our donors with opportunities to experience JFCS in a hands-on
way, which we saw as a long-term sustainability plan for JFCS, given the younger
generation’s desire to be a part of their charitable involvement. Armed with the information
gathered by these two separate, but coinciding processes, I was able to have a productive
discussion with our donor. I explained why JFCS could not partner with her to build a
residential facility but offered to introduce her to another organization whose mission
aligned with that particular charitable goal she established for herself. I also took the
opportunity to share the vision that came from our strategic planning process to build a
therapeutic center in a prominent area of the region and asked her to be the lead donor for
the building. Without hesitation, she said, “I’m in.” With her lead gift and a successful capital
campaign, JFCS now owns and operates an 18,000 square-foot enrichment center in Bala
Cynwyd. I think it is important to point out that this ended well for JFCS because we were
able to reference two processes that informed our decision to NOT build a residential
facility. The donor understood that we didn’t just make a random decision, thus she still felt
valued and heard. Additionally, JFCS was willing to walk away from a sevenfigure gift
because what was being proposed by our donor was not mission-aligned and did not meet
the organizational goals dictated by a formal strategic planning process. It is because of our
approach with this key stakeholder and our desire to stay true to our mission that I believe
this stakeholder management effort was effective. ReplyReply to Comment • Person B
2:36pmSep 3 at 2:36pm Manage Discussion Entry The first thing that came to mind after
reading this prompt was the planning of my sister’s bridal shower several years ago. The
event was held on a Saturday afternoon at one of her favorite restaurants and was a casual
lunch gathering that included about 70-80 guests. As the Matron of Honor, I was responsible
for spearheading the planning and had a number of different stakeholder relationships to
manage, including: my sister, my mom, the other bridesmaids (my co-planners), the guests,
the staff at the venue, and the florist who provided centerpieces. In an attempt to manage
stakeholder relations, I began communication about dates, budgets, and details with my
mom and the other bridesmaids very early on in the process, discussed with each one what
type of role they felt comfortable with in the planning, and checked in regularly with them
about any updates anyone had throughout the process. During all of these planning
conversations and check-ins, I also made sure to keep my sister and her style/tastes in
mind, as she was the specific stakeholder that we were planning the event for. I decided
how to approach the stakeholders who were serving as co-planners largely based on past
experiences that I had had as a bridesmaid – and made sure to incorporate what I found
helpful, while avoiding doing things t hat felt unproductive or frustrating to me. I believe
that my approach with this group of stakeholders was fairly effective. I began our planning
conversations by suggesting certain ideas for dates, venues, formats (based on my sister’s
preferences), budgets etc., but made sure to invite feedback and ideas from everyone. It was
really important to me to be transparent about costs and make an effort to keep expenses
low, as spending exorbitant amounts of money on showers is a common complaint in the

3. bridesmaid world. In the end, we ended up blending a variety of suggestions into what
became the plan for the shower and to my knowledge, everyone felt like their input what
heard and respected and avoided feeling shocked or blindsided by any of the financial
details. Another thing that I believe helped me to find success in this example of stakeholder
management was my ability to use different approaches with different stakeholders in
order to draw out their strengths. For example, one of the bridesmaids had a neighbor who
owned a flower shop, so she was instrumental in selecting appropriate center pieces and
negotiating a discounted price. Another bridesmaid worked for years in the restaurant
industry and felt very comfortable making arrangements for the venue, food, and beverages.
Those who felt more compelled to take on a passive role were tasked as the ones who
would be in charge of selecting and dispersing invitations and managing the guest list.
Identifying different roles that suited the various personalities from our group was very
critical to helping things run smoothly. I’ve been referencing my co-planners quite a bit, but
of course there were other stakeholders involved as well and I also found it helpful to
approach these different groups in different ways. The other bridesmaids and I found that
our various stakeholders preferred different forms of communication and becoming
familiar with what to expect in that manner aided us in the success of our planning efforts.
For example, while all of the bridesmaids and I preferred communicating through email or
text (including invitations), we acknowledged that there would be older people on the guest
list who would be accustomed to receiving a physical invite in the mail. Therefore, we
decided to send out e-vites to younger guests from our generation and physical invites to
those from older generations. We include my e-mail and cell phone, but also my parent’s
landline, as options for RSVP, as I knew some of my older family members are not fans of
cell phones in any capacity. Similarly, we learned that the manager of the venue preferred
communicating via email, because she worked many off-hours, but the florist preferred
speaking on the phone, as he felt more comfortable explaining his ideas verbally. Being
flexible and open in our communication styles, based on the preferences of these various
groups of stakeholders, served us very well throughout the process. Because we began the
planning process early and had clear communication, there were not many surprises that
we had to address. But there were a few small things that occurred the day of the shower
that were able to be managed thanks to my dad. I did not list him as an original stakeholder,
because when it came to the actual planning or attendance at the event, he initially did not
have a role. However, when the restaurant informed us that their ice machine had broken
the morning of the event, my dad was able to pick up several bags that we used during the
shower. When my cousin showed up with her with her 3 year old son (to the kid-free
event), she apologetically explained that her sitter cancelled last minute, but she did not
want to miss the celebration, and my dad volunteered to take him to the park for the
afternoon. When my sister’s car was full of gifts, but there were still a few big items to take,
he was able to call a neighbor with a truck to transport the rest of them to her house. As I
type this, I realize that although I did not include my dad as a main stakeholder initially, he
was sort of a peripheral one by proxy; if a positive relationship had not been maintained
there, so that we were able to call on him when unexpected situations arose, the day could
have gone a lot differently than we had planned. Overall, I believe that the management of

4. all stakeholder groups went well in connection with planning this event. I credit the
planners’ early and ongoing clear and transparent communication, capacity to be mindful
and considerate of the needs of other stakeholders, and our ability to be flexible when last
minute changes occurred as the reasons that this event was able to be successfully planned
and carried out.