On the 12th October Rob published an article raising five questions about a new corporate social responsibility (CSR) pilot from Starbucks in the USA. By happy coincidence, this appeared two weeks after Meridian Swift had published another article challenging leaders of volunteers to be aware of and engage with corporate volunteering. Both articles shared common threads so it seemed sensible to work together to develop the thinking further.
Rob and Meridian got their thinking caps on and devised some further questions that they felt needed asking. These relate not just to the Starbucks pilot, but to employee volunteering more broadly as well. What follows is the product of Meridian and Rob’s joint efforts to try and provide some answers.
How will this affect me, in my office, in my town, and what do I do about it?
Meridian: It’s reasonable to think that since there are only 36 employees participating in 13 cities across the United States, it won’t really affect me at all. However, if you live in the areas served by this initiative, it might. The Points of Light (POL) network affiliates involved in this initial pairing are:
HandsOn Atlanta; HandsOn Bay Area; Boston Cares; HandsOn Broward, FL; Chicago Cares; VolunteerNow (Dallas); Volunteer Fairfax; Volunteer Houston; HandsOn Miami; HandsOn Twin Cities (Minneapolis/St. Paul); HandsOn Greater Phoenix; Seattle Works; and United Way of Greater St. Louis.
The affiliate organizations listed above act as clearinghouses for local volunteer programs. If your volunteer engagement program has a relationship with one of the above affiliates, it’s conceivable that your organization benefits downstream from this resource.
Starbucks has plans to increase their volunteering commitment next year and if successful, they could extend it into other countries as well. In support of this first pilot cohort, the Starbucks Foundation awarded POL a grant and a portion of that grant provides each of the Fellows with an hourly stipend – much like a national service placement awards their living stipend. These 36 Starbucks partners spend up to 20 hours each week at one of the placement sites listed above.
We must realize this initiative will grow and begin to prepare for future changes in how we cultivate and engage volunteers. We have become accustomed to corporate groups seeking one-time projects for team building and to increase their CSR (corporate social responsibility) visibility, but the Starbucks Service Fellows are a whole new level of corporate participation.
Should we be prepared for more of this? Is this where corporate volunteering is going?
Meridian: Oh, my gosh, yes. Consider this direct quote from Natalye Paquin, President and CEO of Points of Light: “We believe this bold program, designed in partnership with Starbucks, will redefine corporate engagement and the private sector’s ability to support civic engagement.”
Others are already jumping on the bandwagon. A Chick-fil-A restaurant in Indiana recently made news when the owner decided to pay his employees to volunteer while his store was closed for remodeling.
We are in a corporate volunteering pivotal time. No, I take that back. Due to societal shifts and social media, we are about to be hit by a tidal wave of corporate volunteer participation. The private sector is getting deeply involved, as I alluded to in my blog post in September. If volunteer engagement professionals do not get on top of this trend right now, corporations will become frustrated at our lack of preparation and ability to provide the level of engagement they are looking for in a partnership. The sad reality is, they will bypass us completely, and they have the talent and money to do it.
Are there going to be businesses who admire Starbucks and want to be like them, so they will attempt to model this initiative?
Rob: Almost certainly, yes. Here’s another quote from Natalye Paquin, President and CEO of Points of Light:
“Starbucks’ investment in the 13 communities served by this initiative will not only spark positive change through more than 17,000 hours of community service, but it also serves as a model for an employer-led capacity-building program that Starbucks and other corporate partners can scale globally in the future.”
It’s important to remember that this pilot seems to be driven primarily as a way to attract millennial employees. As the UK’s Guardian newspaper stated in their coverage of this story:
“18-34 years old are quickly becoming the largest group of employees in the workplace. Business owners, both big and small, are trying to come up with innovative benefits to attract the best and the brightest people of this generation to their company as well as keeping existing employees happy and motivated.”
“According to the 2014 Millennial Impact Report, one-third of Millennials surveyed said that their companies’ volunteer policies affected their decision to apply for a job, 39% said that it influenced their decision to interview, and 55% said that such policies played into their decision to accept an offer.”
Employers of all sizes and all sectors are facing the challenge of providing incentives to hire millennial staff. Baby boomers are ageing into retirement, leaving a shortage of labour thanks to the smaller cohort of Generation X. Competition for millennials will, therefore, increase and we shouldn’t be surprised to see businesses looking to volunteerism related options as a way of winning the recruitment battle.
In fact, the question isn’t really whether we’ll see more of these kinds of initiatives from corporations, but whether the public and non-profit sectors might follow suit as they try to pry some of that millennial talent away from the private sector.
What exactly are these “Service Fellows” doing? A regular volunteer’s job? A regular employee’s job? Or something that can’t replace anyone already there?
Rob: Good question. Right now we don’t really know. However, as our colleague Jerome Tennille pointed out when commenting via social media on Rob’s blog post:
“This model of service is similar to AmeriCorps, and most non-profits are familiar with how to integrate them in. The difference here is that it’s funded by a private entity.”
If Jerome is right then we can expect to see Starbucks Service Fellows stepping into roles similar to those undertaken by AmeriCorps members.
Back in March 2010 our colleague Susan J Ellis wrote an article encouraging managers of volunteers to engage with the then emerging AmeriCorps programme to ensure the roles provided didn’t have negative effects. Chief amongst Susan’s concerns was organisations would hire AmeriCorps members to lead volunteer management, rather than making long-term, strategic investments in this important function.
We would echo Susan’s call today, eight years on. Leaders of volunteers have to engage to make this scheme a success for everyone, not just Starbucks. It is essential that volunteer managers at non-profits are part of the planning as these innovations in corporate giving develop. We need to make sure our voices are heard, influence these schemes for the good of our organisations and clients.
In fact, Susan’s concerns are perhaps more acute for the Starbucks model where placement will only be for six months. Imagine getting a new (and possibly relatively inexperienced) service fellow coming into the organisation twice a year – would your organisation benefit or suffer from that turnover in the leadership and management of volunteers? Please don’t just dismiss these schemes as not volunteering, burying your head in the sand in the hope they will go away. Get involved, speak up or it may be your job that service fellows take
Did they consult a volunteer engagement expert? What arrangements are in place with the POL affiliate nonprofits?
Meridian: I have reached out to Starbucks press and a few of the local affiliate organizations who are recipients of the Starbucks Service Fellows, but haven’t yet had a lot of luck in connecting.
I realize that this is a new program and they may not have enough good information to share at this point but what I have gathered is Starbucks and Points of Light are striving to change the way corporations think about employee engagement and the use of their human capital/resources to support strengthening nonprofits and communities. Since Points of Light is the world’s largest organization dedicated to volunteer service, they are experts in volunteerism, so my guess is there was a good deal of consulting between these two giants in their respective sectors.
Since this is a joint partnership between Starbucks and Points of Light, it naturally follows that Points of Light would choose affiliate partners across the country. There are more than 200 volunteer mobilizing organizations or affiliates, which share a common mission, goals and approach. The affiliates may pair Starbucks Fellows with local non-profit partners, but that is yet unclear.
Is this one of those lofty, not thought out edicts from above that will make a volunteer manager’s life a living hell because no input was asked for?
Rob: As we’ve already noted, Starbucks are doing this because they want an advantage when recruiting millennial employees. Points of Light are doing it because they have affiliates who will “benefit from focused volunteer efforts that align with Starbucks’ global social impact priorities, with a focus on opportunity youth, refugees, veterans and military families, hunger, environment and disaster recovery.”
Whether we agree with those motivations or not (and who are we to judge?), that’s what we know.
Boards and senior managers will rush to engage with corporations with the volunteer management professionals likely to be the last to know what they’ve been signed up for.
This is especially true with CSR programmes where the impetus comes from fundraising colleagues – in the hope the corporate will make cash donations – or communications colleagues looking for a public relations coup.
For schemes like this to be a success the volunteer manager cannot just be the poor schmuck who gets responsibility for making it work dumped on them. That may not have been the case in the Starbucks example, but we can see it happening in future, to the detriment of all involved. Non-profits need their leader of volunteer engagement involved from the get-go and we need to be making this case now, before it’s too late.
Will volunteering be on-site or is it project based off-site?
Meridian: We have no evidence at this time. Whether the service fellows will follow a prescribed national plan or will be allowed to meet local needs remains unclear. It appears they will volunteer in the areas that align with Starbuck’s philanthropic priorities, which include opportunity youth, refugees, veterans and military families, hunger, environment and disaster recovery.
Hurricane Michael recently devastated the areas around Mexico Beach in Florida and according to the Starbucks press release, a Starbucks shift supervisor from Florida will work on hurricane preparedness and hurricane relief with HandsOn Broward. Their involvement may be according to local needs but we just don’t know yet.
What role should bodies like Points of Light have in future, representing non-profits and Volunteer Managers?
Rob: The role of a broker in corporate volunteering can be a really important one, as Dr. Joanne Cook and Dr. Jon Burchell highlighted in their 2015 paper, “Employee Supported Volunteering: Realising The Potential” (summary article available here):
‘The challenge is finding what people in the business will engage with, and the skills that the charities want, identifying this is the challenge and that’s where the brokerage comes in.’
In the Starbucks initiative, POL played a brokerage role between the company and their own local affiliates, matching needs and priorities between both parties. Yet as schemes like this develop and spread the importance of brokers will grow, with a neutral party necessary to help match corporates and non-profits in a fair manner. Key to this will be supporting non-profits to assert their needs rather than just capitulating to whatever business requests. As in any volunteering relationship, mutual benefit is essential, so brokers will need to ensure a level playing field as both parties negotiate the details of corporate volunteering relationships.
We also think brokers and intermediaries have a responsibility to ensure the volunteer management voice is heard in non-profits. As noted before, all too often the desire to work with business is driven by the lure of a cash donation, marginalizing the input of a volunteer engagement professional in favour of corporate fundraising priorities. This mustn’t happen! If volunteer managers are left out of the planning loop then they will struggle to deliver on what their bosses and corporate partners want and need, weakening the relationship limiting the potential for success.
If we were Volunteer Managers on the receiving end of this, what would we like to know?
Rob: OK, over to you. This is your chance to collaborate with us on this article and move the debate forward. Imagine your organisation is looking to get involved in something like the Starbucks / Points of Light initiative. What questions would you have; for the corporation; for your board and senior managers; for other paid staff colleagues in your organisation (e.g. HR, fundraising); and perhaps for your existing volunteers and those coming from the business?
Leave a comment in the comments section below with the things you’d like to know and add your voice to the debate.
We look forward to reading your thoughts.
Rob and Meridian
Jerome Tennille, MSL, CVA said:
Thanks for posting this article, these are all very relevant questions we must ask of corporations and ourselves as the landscape of volunteerism evolves. There’s a part of me however that struggles with the attention this program is receiving. I almost feel this is much ado about nothing, in the sense that non-profits will just do as they’ve always done when integrating interns, AmeriCorps participants or other fellowship members into their programs (good or bad). Meaning, while this was initiated and funded by a corporation, this isn’t anything new in terms of implementation in the community. Maybe I’m naïve in thinking that. To me, the only difference is who’s paying the bill (the company, not the tax payer) and who’s serving (an employee of the company). While there are implications to our profession, I’ll address those separately. But as for the programmatics of this initiative, I’m surprised that more folks aren’t welcoming this with open arms. To me this is the change we want to see with corporations. If there’s a way to have a service fellow serving the community at the monetary expense of a company, that’s a good thing. Folks embrace AmeriCorps, but suddenly when a similar program is fashioned by a for-profit company, we get hesitant. I don’t fully understand the hypersensitivity to what’s being done from a programmatic perspective. If it’s integrating service fellows into the non-profit programs they support at the root of the problem, then it’s an integration issue and an organization’s ability to do that which should be questioned. It’s mentioned in here the turnover experienced every six months as a problem, I agree with that. It’s always the reason I shy away from part-time or project-based employees. Because of the time it takes to invest and train them, only to lose them in six months makes it not worth the effort in some cases. However, that’s an integration problem in my eyes.
And I also want to caution folks to not conflate this service fellow with volunteerism. I honestly don’t know if we have a clear definition of what this is considered yet (by both the company or from the perspective of non-profits). I think it could be volunteerism, but just as easily not be considered volunteerism. Rather, what we can absolutely call this for the time being is most certainly community engagement or community service. But I agree that there’s an onslaught of corporate volunteerism that’s taking off. I’d even argue that my being hired by my current employer is a sign of the times to come. Meaning, companies are getting more savvy with their volunteer engagement and are seeking subject matter experts in the field who do this full-time. And to the point of this article, it behooves volunteer engagement and management professionals to get in front of this before they’re completely circumvented. You stated it correctly when you say, “the sad reality is, they will bypass us completely, and they have the talent and money to do it.” What’s scarier (if you can imagine something worse) is that some companies believe they have the talent (even though they don’t) and will do something anyways and it’ll be misguided. So, this should be a wakeup call to professionals in our space, but also the volunteer administration associations that convene them.
To not get bypassed altogether, more volunteer engagement professionals will need to make that leap from the non-profit sector to jobs in corporate social responsibility (CSR). And to support integration of our profession into the for-profit space, volunteer administration associations will need to make their presence valuable to CSR practitioners who engage volunteers. They’ll need to cross the aisle and seek more collaboration at the same tables than is currently happening.
But again, I’ll go back to the fact that volunteer administration associations are not keen on mingling with CSR practitioners. I would even venture to say that co-mingled groups on the national and global stage are often hard to find as well. For example, there’s a hesitation by CSR practitioners to convene in the same room with non-profit organizations at conferences like Service Unites. Why you ask? Because CSR practitioners have a hypersensitivity to being solicited and pitched at a workshop table. So, it goes both ways. While I see the value in being at a workshop table at a conference like that with a non-profit organization, others in my field don’t. So, it’s important that others with my non-profit perspective gain positions in CSR. It’s the only way to bridge that divide, because right now we’re trying to bring cats and dogs together in the same pin. Points of Light, while a great organization can play and has done a great job at brokering, but there needs to be more convening of both sides if we’ll ever get to that “shared value.” Yes, they’re experts in volunteer management, but just like we don’t always want the federal government regulating at the local level, we need to think long and hard about a national or global entity regulating at our respective local levels. So, it’s important that local volunteer administration associations convene in their communities with CSR practitioners.
All that said, to me it’s more important now than ever before that our profession get its act together, close our eyes and open our minds. Get more active and engaged in convening these types of dialogues OUTSIDE of just the non-profit space. Become more inclusive to CSR practitioners who engage volunteers by opening their doors to these folks at volunteer administration associations. Also, we need to do a better job at cat wrangling these large corporations. Who knows, I might, just might have some insight on how to do that. My two cents.
Again, great article and thanks for stirring the pot.
Thanks Jerome for weighing in, you bring up some really great points and support the primary reason Rob and I decided to collaborate on a shared post: How will this affect volunteer managers going forward?
I can only speak for myself, but the reason I believe the Starbucks initiative is notable is because Starbucks is known world-wide, has a high profile and is emulated by other companies. Americorps doesn’t have high visibility.
And for me, here’s the problem-you touched on it when you said, “What’s scarier (if you can imagine something worse) is that some companies believe they have the talent (even though they don’t) and will do something anyways and it’ll be misguided.” This is the part that has me worried-the lack of preparation and reaching out by the non-profit sector coupled with the lack of understanding of volunteer management by the corporate sector will create a whole, new mess. It’s another silo situation where non-profits distrust corporate motives and corporations distrust non-profits’s ability to get things done.
And, to make matters worse for volunteer managers, their exclusion from planning and senior management will relegate them to “babysitting” status and they will be blamed for any failures. Meanwhile, corporations lending skilled employees will sniff at the lowly volunteer manager and want to engage directly with senior staff.
I sincerely believe that volunteer managers must plan a corporate volunteering strategy they can manage before a group of corporate volunteers is dumped on them by their executive director.
We can’t make our organizations welcome or reject this growing trend, but we can prepare ourselves for our part in how it plays out.