Founder’s syndrome occurs when a nonprofit’s founder struggles to let go of influence or control after stepping out of a leadership role. It’s not driven by ego alone. It often stems from love, fear, and identity. The founder’s sense of self is closely tied to the organization’s success, making it difficult to release the reins even when it’s time for others to lead.
Every so often I hear the question: “I love development, but I hate making asks. Where does that leave me?”
Small nonprofits are the backbone of community care. They’re often faster, closer to the ground, and more trusted by the people they serve. Yet when crisis funding becomes available, many small organizations watch the dollars flow to the largest, most well-resourced institutions.
If you work in development, you don’t need anyone to tell you the job has changed. Expectations have gone up, resources have gone down, and stewardship, arguably the heart of sustainable fundraising, often gets pushed aside in favor of chasing the next dollar. Many fundraisers describe feeling like an ATM with a pulse.
When a nonprofit hires paid staff, especially development professionals, the board’s Fundraising Committee faces a new challenge: staying helpful without getting in the way. The line between governance and operations can blur easily. It’s tempting for well-meaning board members to step in and “help” with staff duties, but that can create confusion, frustration, and even slow the work down.
So what should a Fundraising Committee do when the organization already has a staff-led development program?
A 501(c)(3) just lost its fourth remaining board member, leaving three to remain, the base requirement. The board recently voted to dissolve the nonprofit and wind-down operations. The organization is currently tapping into its reserves. One of the remaining board members asks: