A sense of urgency. Experts like John P. Kotter say it’s a key and necessary ingredient for successful organizational change. Without it, even the best designed efforts amount to little more than going through the motions.

But many nonprofits are so accustomed to working in adverse conditions – doing more with less, making compromises, and inhabiting a reality in which the stretch goal is to be “sustainable” rather than to truly thrive – that they may be desensitized to what urgency really feels like. Like the proverbial frog in the pan of boiling water, these organizations have adapted so well to an increasingly hostile environment that perhaps the impetus to do something about it comes too late.

Take strategic restructuring. It is encouraging that partnerships are now viewed as a positive strategic choice rather than an option of last resort, but the flip side is that we now see more nonprofits coming to the table with the view that collaboration is “nice, but not necessary.” Many of these are on solid enough footing to continue working on their own, but fail to recognize that this also makes them better positioned to engage in restructuring and more attractive to potential partner organizations. Lacking a sense of urgency, they may hesitate to own the process or really invest in moving it along. The risk here is that the window of opportunity to proactively choose a collaborative strategy rather than being compelled to it may not be open for long. Should they find themselves facing a real crisis, they may wish they had acted sooner.

Succession planning is another good example. Five or six years ago, reports like “The Leadership Deficit” touched off a sense of real urgency across the sector. The Boomers are retiring! Who will be left to lead our organizations? The mass exodus didn’t exactly manifest as predicted, as we all now know, but how many nonprofits have taken advantage of the reprieve as an an opportunity to engage in recruiting talent and developing leadership for when the day does come – as it surely will – when new leaders must take the helm?

Nonprofits face an increasingly complex set of challenges and opportunities, from major demographic shifts to competition from for-profit providers to political pressures and global economic uncertainty. The water’s getting warmer.

Do you feel the heat? Is it time to make a leap?

In considering a strategic restructuring of a nonprofit organization it is critical to understand, and have agreement on, the nature of ownership of a nonprofit.

Ownership is very different in the nonprofit sector than it is in the for-profit sector. The reality in the nonprofit sector is that no one individual or group such as a management team or board can own a nonprofit organization.  There are no stock shares to be owned or traded. Any assets owned by the nonprofit must remain with the nonprofit.  If a merger of a nonprofit takes place, the assets of the nonprofit must remain within the surviving corporation.   (Similarly, if a nonprofit dissolves independent of a strategic restructuring process any assets remaining after resolving all liabilities must be transferred to another nonprofit serving a similar mission.)

Nonprofits hold special tax status in order to accomplish their mission with the resources developed under that tax status. Therefore, in a sense, through this special tax status, the nonprofit is owned by the public – this is why nonprofit corporations are sometimes referred to as “public benefit corporations.”

Board members, staff, clients, and the public have a profound interest in the organization’s future success and its ability to provide needed programs/services.  The board and staff have the responsibility to manage and make decisions for the organization that are in the best interest of the community and the mission served.

When an organization considers a potential strategic restructuring partnership, the leadership must consider this decision from the perspective of what is in the best interest of the mission and the people or issue it serves – first and foremost.  Clearly, the roles of employees and board representation are important factors in the process of considering the most appropriate organizational design.  But ultimately, the nonprofit’s mission and ownership by the public must be the priority in decision making.