We’re committed in Kingston to aligning our strategic plan to Y Canada’s. We need to be pulling in the same direction.

Our work on the Brand Valuation committee as part of the National Resource Creation and Capacity Building reference group, has profound implications for what and how we deliver service, as well as how we communicate to our local communities and nationally.

Our potential to do more in service of children, families and communities is great. There is much work for us all to do. When this work is done, it will mark a date in time that will be seen as critical turning point for YMCAs in Canada.

Congratulations on another great post! As a Y volunteer I’m excited to see the organization come together around both the organization and a cause bigger than itself – young people. The more the organization rallies together, the greater the potential impact. Thanks to Mary K for your commitment to Y Canada’s strategic plan. Sean – totally agree – this is a critical turning point for YMCA’s in Canada.

I agree, Scott – we are indeed on the precipice of a new era for the YMCA in Canada, with a golden opportunity to significantly increase our impact on the health of children and families from coast to coast.

In response to your question, I believe that our NRCCB initiative, led by Laura Palmer Korn, is addressing this issue in my area of responsibility (philanthropy). I am very excited and entirely committed to moving forward with my YMCA peers in philanthropy in Canada, as this strategy unfolds.

P.S. Is there anything we can do to broaden the discussion on this blog?

Hi Folks,

Sorry to be joining this conversation a little late. I’ve been pretty focused on the National CEO Forum…a great success!

I completely agree that the National Resource Creation and Capacity Building Initiative is a critical opportunity for us to set the future direction for the YMCA for Canada. In particular, as Shaun and Jocelyne point out, the branding work is foundational to creating the conditions within which a new YMCA can thrive. We may discover that “healthy children and youth” is part of a larger positioning for the YMCA but we need to determine and aggressively communicate our “cause” and our impact.

I am so glad that we reached an agreement on the need for more alignment in our strategic plans across the country, Mary. I am very much looking forward to moving from 53 local strategic plans and a disconnected YMCA Canada “work plan” to a plan for the YMCA for Canada.

Scott

Great conversations with this site and excellent comments/input!

We continue to mention that we have a Federated Model. At the meetings I have attended the topic gets discussed the model questioned. But do we really have an appetite to explore options? I do not have the years of service of many in the conversation but my perspective is – we are slow to change. In fact slower then government and I don’t know for certain we really want any risk that comes with change. We ask but do we really want change? There are pro’s and con’s to the model as with any model. But the entrenched model may be hindering our ability to create change. Change needs controls, but moving ahead will keep us relevant. I’d like to see if there is any agreement that it is in fact hard for us “get agreement”. Then understand what the stumbling blocks would be. If they exist – let’s move em or go around em! And remember, just one man’s opinion!

Thanks, Pat. I think you are absolutely right…we are very slow to change. I believe the mood in the country is changing, though. In the 100 or so interviews I conducted in December and January with YMCA leaders, every single person told me that nothing is untouchable in terms of the national change agenda. I think there is a greater internal readiness, in fact eagerness, to change than ever before in my career. It is very exciting. If you look at our entire history, the YMCA has changed dramatically over the years. We have adapted our mission to meet the needs of our times. This is now our generation’s time to adapt and I think we can and will. I’m not sure that we need to change the “federated” model, but I do know we need to build a stronger federation for greater impact.

Thanks,

Scott

Thanks for the response Scott. There is significant value in the Federated Model if it is recognized that decentralizing should occur in that model, and that the focus ins not centric. Under stress, too often the model defaults to central control. If it has, or appears to have, “a one-size needs to fit all” mentality, or “large is better” then I’m not for it. I believe that’s the “elephant in the room”. The value comes if – the Federated models consists of centralizing common services with collective agreement. IE: towards creating operational efficiences Ex: centralize IT, procurement for “standard” products while accepting not everything is effective if centralized. Controlling fundraising as an example in the Federated model may not adequately serve all, given the diversity of our communities needs. However we do it, to make the federated approach work all parties must be invovled in defining the roles and responsiblities, understanding the value and sticking by each other.
Great to have the chance to speak my peace and I look forward to the results of discussions at the AGM, planned CEO/CPO meetings, and National Board minutes.

Thanks again, Pat! The answer lies in building a stronger National Council to ensure ongoing engagement of all members of the federation.

Scott