Every few months, a familiar post pops up on LinkedIn about how tough charity jobs are and how outsiders don't understand the reality. The comments quickly fill with stories. One that caught my eye recently involved a tale about a hire who said it's so much easier to advise organisations "who never have to worry about money."
At first glance, this sounds like the sort of hubris that comes from thinking because an organisation doesn't have a billion-dollar budget it's a 'toy' business that anyone could run—and someone with a 'real' business background will find it a doddle. But on deeper analysis this isn't an issue localised to the charity sector.
I've seen this play out many times: someone arrives from a big-name company like Facebook, hired mainly for the brand halo. But often they've never had to build or lead a team from scratch. They thrived in an environment of surplus—endless meetings, huge budgets, and instant credibility from the company name. Put them in a setting where momentum doesn't exist, and they flounder.
This isn't a charity vs. for-profit issue. It's a creator vs. passenger issue. People from high-momentum firms often struggle when dropped into low-momentum contexts. Recruitment needs to account for that. Once surfaced, it becomes clearer what value someone can add in a smaller or nonprofit setting, and how much coaching they'll need before they can really contribute.
These challenges are magnified in the charity sector, particularly when trying to hire senior talent. Time to find a better approach than hiring for brand and reputation.
