NA0447

The Balancing Act:

Making Tough Decisions
Colleen M. Sharen, Brescia University College

In early November 2014, Chris Green, Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Family Care
Canada (Family Care), was preparing for a board meeting scheduled to take place the
following week, where Chris would consult with the board about a difficult decision.
For the past 24 years, Family Care had run a national awareness campaign aimed to
reduce violence in Canadian communities in early December, commemorating a mass
slaying that had shocked the country. In 2014, the advertising agency hired by Family
Care proposed a new approach to the campaign to broaden its reach to young men and
women. However, one of the chapters of Family Care was uncomfortable with this new
approach.
As a leader, Chris felt torn. It was essential to respond to the concerns of the
chapters, but at the same time, it was necessary to ensure the relevance of the
organization with the next generation of men and women. How should Chris lead the
volunteers, staff, chapters, and board through this decision? Although this was
technically an operational decision, and thus the purview of the CEO, making the
decision without the input of both the member chapters and the national board could
undo all the hard work Chris had put in to develop trust with the member organizations.
Yet, speed was of the essence. The advertising agency needed a go/no go decision on
this campaign within the next ten days if they were to execute the campaign effectively
and on time. If they missed the time frame, it was likely that they wouldnt get the
media coverage they needed.

FAMILY CARE ORGANIZATION

Over 150 years old, Family Care was one of the largest, oldest, most established non-
profit organizations in Canada. With 30 chapters across the country, Family Care was
a federation, which as a whole constituted a movement for social and cultural change.
The local chapters paid membership dues to the national office and were the national
offices primary constituency. The national office did not provide direct service to the
community; rather, it played a dual role serving the local chapter organizations and
providing leadership for the movement in policy development, advocacy, social
marketing, and strategic initiatives. A national movement allowed the chapter
organizations to amplify their voices at a national level.

-----------------------------
Copyright 2016 by the Case Research Journal and by Colleen M. Sharen. This case is based
on a real situation, organization, and characters. However, the characters and organization are
disguised. The author would like to thank the staff and volunteers of Family Care Canada for
their participation in the development of this case. Funding for this case was provided through
the generous support of Brescia University Colleges alumnae and friends.

The Balancing Act: Making Tough Decisions 1

 Independently incorporated with an independent board, each chapter had paid
executives and volunteer board members who were leaders in their own right. Chapters
could leave the federation should their board decide that they were better off outside
the movement. Family Care chapters were multi-service organizations that focused on
issues of poverty, violence, education, access to work, leadership, and housing,
depending on the needs of the local community that each served. Chris stated that
...the mandate is really to serve families who are in need of housing, who are
experiencing poverty or violence, who are in need of employment services,
families who would otherwise be marginalized. Our services respond to (the)
needs (of families) right across the country.
The national office was independently incorporated and therefore had its own
board. The national organization employed eight people, including the Director of
Advocacy and Policy Development, Marketing and Communications Manager,
Director of Membership Development, the Director of Finance, the Manager of Fund
Development, and their respective staff teams.
Dominated by baby boomers, Family Care had been working hard to decrease the
age of its paid and volunteer leadership to engage more young people in the leadership
of the movement. The national office was in the midst of planning a summit to celebrate
and develop young leaders in the movement. Chris saw the recruitment and
development of young leaders of diverse backgrounds as critical to the sustainability
and continued relevance of the movement in the future.

CHAPTER RELATIONSHIPS
Local chapters set the national organizations policies at the annual meeting of the
national organization and the national board ensured consistent administration of these
policies. The board, national staff, and local chapters collaborated to develop the
national organizations strategic plan.
Because the Family Cares role was to serve as a national coordinating body, the
local chapters were the national offices primary stakeholder. The national office staff
worked closely with the local chapters throughout the year to develop programming
that met the needs of the local chapters. For example, Lily Fields, the Training and
Development Director worked with local chapters to create national mentorship
programs, organizational capacity building programs, and ongoing leadership
development programs. Annette Lockhart, the Director of Policy and Advocacy,
worked closely with the local chapters to develop national positions on social policy
issues that represented the point of view of the movement as a whole. This involved
constant communication with local chapter staff about the values, beliefs, and the needs
of local chapters. Getting alignment among 30 local chapters required that the entire
national office staff use multiple leadership skills including communication, listening,
persuasion, collaboration, compromise, and decisiveness. If a decision was highly
controversial, risky, or complex, the team might undertake a national conference call,
to encourage conversation and input. According to one of the chapter CEOs:
Communication is the key to successful relationship building. Chris does a
great job consulting, but also makes sure that the chapters leadership
understands the rationale for decisions made by the national office. Are they
aligned with the values and principles of the movement as a whole? Trust has
been built because of Chris transparency and focus on the values of the
movement. Even if you disagree with the decision, you get why the decision
was made.

2 Case Research Journal Volume 36 Issue 4 Fall 2016

Generally, the relationship between the national office and the local chapters worked
well, although occasionally there was friction. Sometimes, to meet the needs of the
movement as a whole, the national office would make a decision that a local chapter
did not support. Chris took time to listen to the concerns of the local chapter and to
explain the rationale for the decision. Wherever possible, the team tried to modify the
decision to address the concerns of the local chapter. Keeping 30 local chapters happy
was an ongoing challenge. While the national office was usually successful in balancing
competing visions, they occasionally failed. In fact, two member organizations had
withdrawn from the movement in 2012/13.

THE BOARD AND FAMILY CARE CANADAS GOVERNANCE MODEL

Family Cares national board of directors was elected by the 30 local member chapters.
The board consisted of 14 members, five of whom formed the executive committee of
the board, including the chair, vice-chair (English Canada), vice-chair (French Canada),
secretary, and treasurer. Recently, Family Cares nomination committee focused on
improving racial and age diversity in the national boards composition.
Every attempt was made to ensure that all regions of the country were represented
on the board. While the board members did not explicitly represent specific chapters,
they recognized that the chapters were the primary stakeholder of Family Care, and so
board members were especially sensitive to the concerns of the local chapters. Chapter
CEOs and volunteer presidents often communicated directly with national board
members, especially when a particular decision was controversial. This often resulted
in chapter concerns and conflicts with the national office being played out in board
meetings.
Family Care followed a policy governance model, wherein the CEO managed
operations, while the board managed the CEO and ensured compliance with policy.
Legally, the board held fiduciary responsibility, that is, the board ensured that the
agency maintained financial stability, paid its bills, and met all financial accounting
standards. Board members were liable for any financial failure or legal actions taken
against the organization.
In practice, the division between operations and policy was not so clear cut. On
rare occasions, Chris took operational decisions to the board, usually when the decision
involved financial or reputational risk, or when a decision was particularly controversial
among the local chapters. Chris found that the wisdom of the board members added
perspective and ensured greater support once the decision was implemented.
The board met monthly, with members who resided in the greater Toronto area
attending at the national office, while members not located in Toronto participated by
conference call. Once a year the entire board met in person at the Family Cares annual
meeting. Chris attended all board meetings, board executive committee meetings, and
had frequent communication with the board chair and the two vice-chairs. While the
board usually supported Chris recommendations, like any manager-board relationship,
there were times when the board disagreed with Chris.

CHRIS GREEN
Chris had a storied history of leadership in the non-profit sector, having led, managed,
and operated shelters, employment programs, and housing programs that helped
women, children and youth in some of Toronto's most economically disadvantaged
neighbourhoods. A graduate of York University, Chris previously led several similar

The Balancing Act: Making Tough Decisions 3

 community service organizations for 15 years before joining Family Care as CEO in
2006. In addition, Chris was the vice-chair of a local hospital board. The recipient of a
multitude of awards for community leadership over the years, Chris noted that:
Leadership is about knowing who I am. When I know who I am, then I can
lead with conviction. I can lead with clarity; I can lead being condent
knowing that I'm leading a movement of people. I can lead with passion and
integrity.
Sometimes its about leading from behind. So leadership is not only about
being in the front, but actually empowering others to be able to be out front,
recognizing the skills and the expertise that are around you. I need to be able
to lead from the centre. I use [the people, skills, and resources] that are
around me, and am condent that people have the answers. I dont have all of
the answers all of the time.
The Family Care national office staff believed that Chris highly consultative
leadership style sometimes slowed down decision-making, and thereby reduced the
time available for implementation. As Annette noted, Chris is a visionary, inspiring us
to tackle some of the biggest social problems in Canada, but it can sometimes be
difficult to know what the vision means in action. Sometimes I dont know if were
accomplishing our objectives.

ANTI-VIOLENCE CAMPAIGN
Violence within families was an important issue for Family Care. While violence
occurred in families in all socio-economic classes, it had greater negative outcomes for
those in poverty, who had fewer resources to address violence, less awareness of the
help available in the community, and less confidence to take action.1 For the past 24
years, Family Care and its chapters had run an annual anti-violence campaign. The
campaign took place in early December, commemorating a mass slaying that had
shocked the nation. Chris noted that:
As we were approaching the 25th anniversary of the campaign, we noticed that
we always went to Parliament Hill to do a press conference; we always brought
along some Members of Parliament; we always put out a press release. Weve
always done what weve done. Part of who we are has been predictable.
People knew and trusted the organizations name. Our name says integrity.
Our organization is pretty safe; we've never gone out of the mold of who we've
been seen to be.
Garrett Pressman, Marketing and Communication Manager at Family Care, led the
development of the annual campaign, engaging a nationally recognized advertising
agency in order to develop the communication strategy, including the message, website,
and all ancillary materials. Garrett noted that the annual anti-violence campaign
delivered old-school messages through traditional communication channels such as
print, television, and web. The traditional audience for the campaign was women over
the age of 40.

ENGAGING A NEW AUDIENCE

In an early October 2014 meeting with Garrett, Annette, and Leah George, the Fund
Development Manager, the advertising agency presented a plan for the traditional
campaign. At the same time the agency recommended that Family Care consider a

4 Case Research Journal Volume 36 Issue 4 Fall 2016

separate but related campaign that would speak to the younger generation. This second
campaign would broaden the audience for the anti-violence messaging to include both
men and women of the millennial generation (born between 1982 and 2000).
Millennials were constantly on their devices using social media including Twitter,
Facebook, and Instagram. Messages to this generation need to be hip, fast, impactful,
and in bite size pieces in order to break through the clutter. The objective of this new
campaign was to reach people not socially aware of the issue of violence in society and
to communicate that violence, harassment, and bullying were not okay. Garrett noted
that:
The idea was to demonstrate the violence we see every day in our popular
culture. Our radio and video spots featured cuts from a famous video game, an
internationally distributed cartoon television show, and a rap video. This was
material that already existed in the world. Although it was spliced together in
a series of rapid cuts, it was not manipulated. This is the content that youth
are watching and absorbing every single day. I was shocked to see just how
violent this media is. Younger people watching may have no frame of
reference to identify the violence they are experiencing.
The advertising agency proposed that Family Care create a social media campaign
that would raise awareness among younger Canadians about the inappropriate use of
violence as a form of entertainment. The campaign would provide a way for people to
join in on the conversation and to call out violent behaviours and content online.
According to Garrett:
The message was to be aware of what you are consuming and look at it with a
critical eye. To start to question whether violence is appropriate in video
games, music videos, cartoons, and other media. The message was not about
banning or censoring.
In addition to the radio and video spots, the campaign would consist of a website,
outdoor advertising, infographics, media release, and a social media campaign on
Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram. The campaign would even include a large
advertisement on the exterior wall of the building that the national organization shared
with the largest local chapter in the country.
As the advertising agencys account managers presented their ideas, Garrett
thought, What are my colleagues and the rest of the movement going to think of this?
It will either go very well or very badly. The agency had developed a rough cut of one
of the videos. They were all stunned by the degree of violence depicted in these three
well-known entertainment properties. Garrett was excited about the communication
plan because these videos and the radio spots would break through the normal social
media clutter and both the national organization and local chapters could do a lot with
the campaign to further its reach.
Although she believed the videos were powerful and impactful, Annette thought
that the chapters might have some concerns about the tone of the video spots because
the campaign featured or even glorified violence. Annette noted, Many leaders in the
movement believed that you dont eliminate violence by putting more violence out
there. Annette knew that some of the chapters would voice concern that these spots
would re-victimize people by triggering trauma among people with lived experience of
violence. Annette, Garrett, and Leah all agreed that they needed to involve Chris in this
decision before moving forward.

The Balancing Act: Making Tough Decisions 5

 THE CONTEXT
At the same time the team was debating about the shape of the anti-violence campaign,
the media was full of stories about violence, harassment, and bullying. Jian Ghomeshi,
a well-known television talk show host, had been accused by a number of women of
violent sexual assault2. A video had surfaced of Ray Rice, a National Football League
player, beating his then-girlfriend in a hotel elevator3. On Parliament Hill, two female
Members of Parliament (MPs) accused two male MPs of sexual harassment. The male
MPs denied the allegations but were suspended from their political party caucus4. In
mid-October, a young man killed a soldier on Parliament Hill in Ottawa and attempted
to kill a number of MPs in caucus5, once again, shocking the nation. This wave of stories
about violence in Canada meant that any campaign about violence that Family Care
introduced was bound to experience scrutiny from the general public. At the same time,
the news about violence in the community illustrated the need to address that violence.

THE QUANDARY
The team learned that the largest chapter in the country, the Toronto chapter, had some
serious concerns. This chapter operated an apartment building which provided
subsidized housing geared to the income of the tenants. Many of the residents of this
building were survivors of violence. Family Care leased office space from this chapter
in a building adjacent to the apartment building. Not only was the Toronto chapter
concerned about the philosophical approach to depicting violence, they were also
concerned that the proposed ad on the exterior of the national offices building might
trigger trauma among the residents of the apartment building.
Brought into the conversation by the team a couple of days later, Chris noted that:
I saw a real opportunity to break through with this campaign, depicting regular,
everyday violence in society that we dont necessarily think about because it
is so easily consumable. We had a real opportunity to make an impact by
reaching a younger audience of both men and women and engage them in the
discussion.
Within the federation, one of our sayings is that we need to be bold But we
really haven't been bold, we've been safe, not really taking on the issues with
the sort of boldness that's necessary for cultural change we want to be
cutting edge; we don't want to be catching up. If we're really serious about
ending violence in society, what are we going to have to do differently?
While the campaign had the potential to break through to a new audience, Chris
also recognized that there were some significant risks to the organization if they
proceeded with the campaign. In addition to the concern about the re-victimization of
residents, Chris worried that the producers of these well-known entertainment
properties might take legal action because the campaign could be perceived as reflecting
negatively on their properties. Another worry was whether the media would take a
different spin on the campaign, for example, focusing on the issue of censorship, rather
than on the message about violence. Could politicians who were looking to make noise
present some counter message? And what about the impact of the campaign upon the
member chapters? Would a chapter that was uncomfortable with this campaign pull
out of the federation in response? How might long-time supporters, individual members
of the community, react to a radical change in the way the anti-violence message was
delivered? Was there any likelihood of a negative impact on both local chapter and
national fundraising? Chris said:

6 Case Research Journal Volume 36 Issue 4 Fall 2016

 It's my job to gather and weigh the opinions of the local leaders of our
movementI needed also to be aware and understand the public and the issue
from a national perspective providing a national framework, a national
understanding, and a national lens. Weighing where the issue is nationally,
politically, and in the media. And then, I needed to assess how this campaign
will help us achieve our goal. This decision was so important because we were
considering doing something that was not in our character.
What was the right balance between playing it safe like Family Care always had
and taking a risk to engage young men and women in an important conversation?
This decision was operational, and as such meant that it was the CEO's decision to
take; however, the board would be evaluating the quality and outcomes of this decision,
and it would influence their assessment of Chris leadership ability. Should this issue
go to the board for input, or should Chris just make the decision without board input?
How should Chris lead Family Care, including the board, national office staff, and local
chapters through this decision? Chris needed to finalize the agenda for next weeks
board meeting with the board chair tomorrow. And if they were going to execute
effectively and on time, the ad agency needed a final decision in ten days. It was time
to figure this out.

NOTES
1
Personal Communication (September 21, 2015). Interview with Chris Green.
2
Globe & Mail (November 3, 2014). The Jian Ghomeshi scandal: What we know so
far. Retrieved October 23, 2015, from
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/the-jian-ghomeshi-scandal-what-we-
know-so-far/article21379820/
3
Maadi, R. (2014, September 10). Law officer says he sent Ray Rice assault video to
NFL in April. Retrieved October 23, 2015, from
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/football/law-enforcement-official-says-he-
sent-video-of-ray-rice-to-nfl-in-april/article20522257/
4
Wingrove, J., Curry, B., & Hannay, C. (November 6, 2014). Trudeau suspends two
MPs over personal misconduct allegations. Retrieved October 23, 2015, from
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/liberals-suspend-two-mps-over-
personal-misconduct-allegations/article21453310/
5
Brown, I. (2014, October 24). In the footsteps of a killer: Retracing Ottawa
attackers bloody path. Retrieved October 23, 2015, from
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/in-the-footsteps-of-a-killer-
retracing-attackers-bloody-path/article21306644/.

The Balancing Act: Making Tough Decisions 7