C1: To Serve or Solve? The Human Services Dilemma

The financial challenges of being a human service nonprofit in the U.S. come as no surprise to leaders in the field. (See Social Current’s 2018 report, A National Imperative: Joining Forces to Strengthen Human Services in America, for a refresher of the harrowing statistics.) Human service organizations scrape by on government contracts that, in many cases, fail to cover the direct cost of delivering the service, let alone the indirect costs required to run a high-quality organization. Staff at all levels are underpaid, which leads to burnout and turnover, and, in the, end the organization’s beneficiaries suffer.

This situation is not new. We at Bridgespan have seen it in hundreds of human service organizations that we have advised over the last 25 years. And it surely started long before that. So why does this persist? Why don’t human service organizations walk away from bad contracts? Our experience suggests that the biggest reason is a good one—the desire to help people in need. There is also a bit of inertia that factors in, as well as the desire to not lay off staff and not see the budget decrease, but the biggest reason is mission.

However, in recent years we have seen an increasing number of nonprofit leaders question whether continuing to execute government contracts is really the best way to advance their mission. These leaders have found it helpful to think about two different ways of achieving their mission—”serving” and “solving.” “Serving” refers to providing direct service, typically funded by government contracts, following program models prescribed by those contracts, and doing so within the financial resources those contracts provide. “Solving” refers to trying to change the status quo approaches to human services, often through innovation and advocating for systems change. While it might be tempting to say you want your organization to focus on “solving,” it is not an easy shift to make. There are valid reasons to continue “serving,” and ways to optimize it for impact and sustainability.

This session will explain the differences between “serving” and “solving” and share what it takes to do each well. Participants will leave with a framework they can apply to their organization, have a chance to reflect on their ambitions for their organization, and learn from examples of other organizations that have used this framework. In this interactive session, we hope to share what we have learned from our work and gather your feedback and learn from your experience navigating this dilemma.

Learning Objectives

• The difference between “serving” and “solving”
• Why it is important to clarify your ambition
• What capabilities, resources, and relationships to build, given your ambition
• How to navigate common challenges in pursuing your ambition, such as making a case for more philanthropy

Presenters

Alex Neuhoff
Partner
The Bridgespan Group

Rohit Menezes
Partner
The Bridgespan Group

Back to event