The Charity Regulator’s new Strategy 2025–2027 sets out a vision for a “thriving, trusted charity sector in Ireland”. Shaped by the Charities (Amendment) Act and sector-wide consultation the Strategy signals significant changes in governance, reporting, and stakeholder engagement.
Change is the only constant, and with the rise of AI, Irish nonprofits are increasingly focusing on soft skills developed through life and work experience.
A Talent Pipeline Under Strain
According to a recently published LinkedIn report, fundraising professionals are currently the most in-demand talent in Ireland. In a sector where securing sustainable funding remains a consistent challenge, the competition for skilled fundraisers continues to intensify.
Fundraised income is essential for delivering vital services and advancing meaningful causes. Yet, attracting and retaining top fundraising talent is one of the biggest obstacles to achieving long-term strategic fundraising goals. Our LinkedIn Talent Insights data reveals that the median tenure for senior fundraising professionals is just 1.3 years, with more junior roles averaging slightly longer at 1.7 years.
Solving this talent retention issue is key. It enables organisations to unlock sustainable income streams, reduce crisis-driven decisions, and build long-term resilience into their mission delivery.
Building a Culture of Fundraising
Despite the sector being valued at €1.8 billion in 2022 and becoming increasingly professionalised, many organisations still hesitate to view fundraising investment as a strategic priority. At the Board and senior leadership levels, there is often a lack of understanding about fundraising ROI, risk tolerance, and fear of scrutiny.
Hiring a senior fundraising leader is not just a recruitment decision—it’s a strategic one. The right candidate understands the business of fundraising, donor engagement, and can embed this thinking across the team and wider organisation. The right hire can move your organisation from breaking even to one on a path of high growth and impact.
Three Conflicts Hindering Fundraising Success
At the recent launch of Great Fundraising Organisations, Alan Clayton identified three key conflicts that often impede successful fundraising and contribute to leadership turnover:
Cultural Conflict: Fundraisers are driven by ambition, urgency, and emotion, while service delivery teams tend to prioritise structure, consensus, and evidence. Bridging this divide requires mutual respect and organisational alignment.
Investment Conflict: Boards often prioritise immediate crises, overlooking the importance of future-focused fundraising strategies. Strategic investments may not yield immediate returns, but they are critical for long-term growth and sustainability.
Communications Conflict: Messaging must be tailored. Use emotion and storytelling to engage donors, and highlight impact and outcomes when promoting services. Consistent, purposeful communication builds donor trust and enhances engagement.
Skills-Based Hiring in a Competitive Fundraising Market
We take a consultative and strategic approach to fundraising recruitment—assessing organisational culture, goals, and needs to identify the talent best positioned to drive results.
In a competitive market, skills-based hiring is crucial. Moving beyond traditional career paths opens up opportunities to attract professionals from the private sector who are motivated to transition into purpose-driven roles.
Key transferable fundraising skills to look for include:
Strategic thinking
Negotiation and problem-solving
Relationship-building and community engagement
Commercial acumen and business development
By widening the talent pool and committing to proper onboarding and training, organisations can tap into new sources of talent.
The Ideal Fundraising Candidate Profile
To achieve sustainable growth, nonprofits must invest in top-tier fundraising talent and foster a culture of relationship-driven philanthropy. This unlocks long-term financial sustainability and enables deeper community impact.
The ideal senior candidate will combine strategic vision with authenticity and interpersonal skills—capable of navigating conflict and driving organisational growth. But even the best fundraising professionals cannot succeed in isolation.
Organisations must align around a shared growth mindset. Without Board-level commitment to fundraising as a strategic priority, talent will churn, progress will stall, and impact will suffer. The cost of inaction isn’t just missed opportunity—it’s missed impact.
Written by Sheena Horgan, Director of Advisory Services, 2into3.
There is a certain pragmatic logic in the phrase, don’t let the perfect bully the good, but can this be applied to governance? Especially when the organisation in question is non-profit.
However, socially good the credentials of a charity or organisation, they are no excuse for poor governance. That said, the nature of the sector does require it to balance best practice deliverables, with what is feasible given an organisation’s capacity and resources. Focusing on achieving functional and effective governance, as opposed to striving for perfection, can ensure accountability, transparency, and inclusivity while being adaptable to contextual challenges.
Good governance in the sector, is less about idealistic behaviour, and more about best practice. It should be realistic, first off recognising resource and capacity constraints, and then planning to address these in a coherent and incremental way that prioritises the most detrimental deficits.
Whilst it’s fair to say that not all governance gaps need to be tackled immediately, it is beholden on Boards to scope, articulate and navigate their organisation’s governance pathway. This likely means breaking down the complex governance agenda into manageable and context-sensitive steps. There will inevitably be trade-offs on what can be achieved now and what might be deferred. Asking the key question, ‘what will this governance task achieve?’, in relation to the organisation’s vision and mission and values, can be a helpful lens when considering which aspects are tackled first.
A cautionary warning though, agreeing what good or good enough governance entails, may be influenced by the Board’s entrenched views, group think and biases, and even ‘founder syndrome’. There is a reason why independent external Board Reviews are recommended on a regular basis within the Governance Code. Charities that rely only on internally conducted reviews, run the danger of reenforcing and perpetuating poor governance practices. Over the years, I’ve witnessed light-touch evaluations with little depth or robustness to be a genuine assessment. And I’ve seen how “governance” vocally weaponised in the Boardroom to sustain certain positions and viewpoints.
There is an abundance of case studies on poor governance and therefore no excuse for it to be brushed over. But to offer some guidance that might lessen the fear or enormity of “Good Governance” for charities and non-profits, here’s some simple principles of Good Enough Governance:
Governance structures should enable good decision making, so they need to be effective in practice rather than in theory. Consider policies and processes in this light, asking are they readable, accessible and implementable
Clarify the scope of what’s needed and design a time-line and pathway that allows for continuous progress and iterative governance capacity-building
Governance procedures should reflect, state and deliver their desired outcome e.g., integrity, accountability, etc.
New and revised governance practices are emerging all the time – take hybrid meetings, DEI and AI as cases in point. Taking an agile approach and adapting where required means having governance on Boards’ radar as well as agenda.
If you’re seeking governance support, visit our webpage for more information, or contact Sheena Horgan, Director of Advisory Services at sheena.horgan@2into3.com.
Written by Sheena Horgan, Director of Advisory Services, 2into3.
Embracing Diversity, Equity and Inclusivity (DEI) in organisations has become increasingly recognised as not only a moral imperative but also a strategic advantage [1]. But don’t take my word for it, here’s five evidence-based reasons why DEI matters.
Diverse teams bring diverse experiences and thinking. Consequently, this fosters creativity and innovation, which in turn facilitates superior problem solving [2].
There’s a proven correlation between diverse leadership and financial performance as companies in the top quartile for gender and racial diversity are statistically more likely to outperform their peers on profitability [3].
Organisations that commit to DEI can be more attractive to a broader range of candidates, who, particularly Millennials and Gen Z, prioritise working for employers that demonstrate a commitment to social responsibility and inclusivity. Employees value diversity and inclusivity in their workplace, and it impacts talent attraction and retention [4].
Inclusivity is instrumental in employee engagement and therefore enhancing workplace satisfaction and productivity. The sense of belonging directly translates to job satisfaction, and moreover, this in turn can positively impact productivity and loyalty, thereby increasing outputs and reducing talent churn and the cost of recruitment [5].
Diverse teams are shown to make better decisions because they consider a wider range of perspectives and options which can lead to improved outcomes in business strategy and operations [6].
As an advocate of social impact, of course I’d laud that DEI is important, but for those who prefer an economic argument, as the research here shows, DEI also leads to competitive advantage with substantial benefits across various dimensions of organisational performance.
Which is why Accenture’s recent move away from DEI is a surprising one, ”Accenture scraps diversity and inclusion goals, memo says”. Not just because it’s a management consultancy that depends on the strategic thinking and problem-solving competencies of its people. Or, because it relies on its people’s commitment to Accenture over the competition, so talent acquisition and retention is critical. But because it smacks of hypocrisy flying in the face of its own research, reports, manifestos and PR over the last few years. For example, Accenture (2020), “Getting to Equal 2020: How to Make Diversity and Inclusion a Reality”, Accenture (2018), “When She Rises, We All Rise: Advancing Gender Equality in the Workplace” and Accenture (2019), “The Inclusion Imperative: How to Build a Culture of Belonging”.
I get that the rationale is a reaction to a significant State-side sentiment shift. But whilst some organisations may be benching DEI (no doubt to resurrect it sometime in the future when the winds change), there are many who remain committed – quietly or vocally – to its principles and practices. And these organisations will need partners and advisors who can demonstrate a genuine shared commitment to these values.
And whilst the press release announcing the move cites “… a workplace free from bias, and a culture in which all our people are respected, feel a sense of belonging and have equal opportunity”, this is actually only part of a fuller text from the 2024 360° Value Report: Delivering Value From Every Angle | Accenture that goes on to say in the next paragraph: “We [Accenture] are committed to helping all our people thrive, which includes advancing inclusion and diversity for all genders; people of different races and ethnicities; persons with disabilities; neurodivergent individuals; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex and queer (LGBTIQ+) people; people from different cultures; people with different religious and faith-based traditions; and people from different age and social groups”.
The same report is peppered with mentions of DEI’s importance, including praising its network of 143,000 Allies in Action (as at August 31, 2024) “who advocate for cross-cultural inclusion, disability inclusion, neurodiversity, gender equality, mental health and well-being, racial and ethnic inclusion, and LGBTIQ+ inclusion”.
Championing social impact means advocating for DEI. Delivering DEI and delivering business success are not mutually exclusive – but DEI needs allies, not adversaries.
[1] EY (January 2025) DE&I Interventions that Deliver de-and-i-interventions-that-deliver.pdf
[2] Page, S. E. (2007). The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies. Princeton University Press. This book explains how diversity leads to superior problem-solving capabilities.
[3] McKinsey & Company (2020). Diversity wins: How inclusion matters.
[4] Reference: Deloitte (2017). The Radical Transformation of Diversity and Inclusion: The Millennial Influence.
[5] Gallup (2020). State of the Global Workplace: 2020 Report.
[6] Reference: Nemeth, C. J., & Staw, B. M. (1989). The Tradeoffs of Social Control and Innovation in Groups and Organizations. Social Psychology Quarterly, 52(3), 275-284.
Trump 2.0 has sent shock waves throughout ESG circles and many commentators are suggesting that ESG’s time may be up. Such comments are short-sighted and overlook the depth of the corporate journey of ESG and therefore its resilience in the face of its critics.
Whilst ESG may be talked about as a trend that has found its way onto the agenda, its origins are more deep-rooted than that. Recessions, social unrest, inequality, all contributed to the impetus that saw Corporate Social Responsibility – the buzz term of the 90’s – evolve into today’s more formal corporate and ethical construct, ESG.
As a concept, ESG is not new. Its provenance and progress has arguably been public-driven, rooted in consumer and societal demand to do things differently, better. Increasingly since the turn of the century, shareholders have had to acquiesce to stakeholder activism as the demand for more responsible, accountable business practice took hold.
Park the acronym and examine the principles and what we’re talking about is accountability, transparency and equity. Double Materiality[i] is a critical, not hygiene factor these days. It makes sense that a well-run organisation would take a holistic view of itself examining both the ‘outside in’ and ‘inside out’ perspectives i.e. its impact on the society and environment in which it operates, and the society and environment in which it operates impact on the organisation. Success requires an appreciation of this symbiosis.
Protagonists may argue that without regulation, ESG will falter, but this sidelines the very real ‘carrot’ impetus for ESG – the benefits of deploying equitable labour practices, currying favour with your communities, being efficient with resources, systemising your decisions. The list is long, and having metrics for these, as required under CSRD, furthers the benefits because what you measure matters[ii]. It provides evidence of effect. It improves decision making and it allows organisations to benchmark and therefore to aspire and to improve. All of which deliver two critical organisational asks, reduce risk and enhance investment, so the financially faint-hearted needn’t fear ESG.
Good governance is about making good choices and decisions. Doing so requires good information, insight and an ability to look to the horizon and anticipate what’s coming. Of course, regulation has a serious part to play in this, but do not underestimate the power of people too. There is a reason why many US-based corporates are ‘hushing’[iii] their ESG work, continuing their commitment to the principles and practices but not shouting about it in an unreceptive business environment. The point that ESG somehow hinders economic growth is unsubstantiated and when you consider that the 2017-2020 Global ESG Assets grew substantially[iv], the opposite is more likely to be true.
The bottom line here is the triple bottom line[v]. I’ve advocated that doing good is good for business since the 90s and there is endless amount of research and data to support this truism. But the importance of delivering positive social impact has never been so great as it is now and it is incumbent on all constituents of society – charity, community, voluntary, public, private – to continue our commitment and support of ESG in principle and practice, if not in name.
Written by Sheena Horgan, Director of Advisory Services, 2into3.
If you would like to discuss your organisation’s ESG, social impact or governance needs, visit our webpage here or contact Sheena Horgan, Director Advisory Services at sheena.horgan@2into3.com.
Footnotes
[i] Double Materiality Guidelines
[iii] Guest Post – When Companies Go Quiet: Exploring the rise of Greenhushing – ESG Today
[iv] The Future of ESG: Under the Trump Administration – Michigan Journal of Economics
The latest findings on compensation, HR practices, and sector trends in the nonprofit sector, outlined in The Wheel’s ‘Pay & Benefits in the Community & Voluntary Sector Report 2024‘, highlight specific challenges for CEOs, boards, and governance structures. Here, we examine these from each perspective, considering key related challenges and their implications, and proposing a suite of potential remedies.
Once again, this report demonstrates the need for multi-annual funding to allow charities to strategise, recruit and retain talent; with talent retention selected as a high priority by 88% of respondents, and the top two concerns focussing on accessing / increasing funding (92%) and managing costs (89%).
The tension between delivering on the mission and ensuring financial sustainability is all too familiar to most organisations in the nonprofit space. If a limited budget wasn’t restrictive enough, then the short-term funding challenge requires CEOs to calibrate the least harmful trade-off between rewarding and investing in staff, operations, and infrastructure, and delivering on budget. With funding such a prevalent and thorny issue, exploring (and yes this may also mean investing in) organisational funding capacity can quite literally, pay dividends.
Albeit allegedly a little more muted, the war on talent continues in 2024 and the sector still needs to face off private and public sector competition in terms of pay and benefits. The disparity in how employees are compensated within the wider sector is a problem in itself. When the sector is attractive to employees, the entire sector wins. Raising our game raises everyone’s game.
In particular, strong leadership is critical and the capacity of organisations to attain and retain good leadership is a hygiene factor to success. The opportunity cost of losing senior leaders is immense. Not only are there core strategic and knowledge losses, but financial ones too. Succession planning is an often overlooked but essential Board matter.
A further impact of the struggle to recruit and retain staff, is the pressure it puts on HR teams at a time when they are trying to implement a variety of significant legislative changes, including auto enrolment for pensions, gender pay gap reporting and more.
Time lags for replacing and recruiting new staff mean either a stall in services, or that other members of the team pick up the slack. In some cases, it’s the CEO that is compelled to take on multiple roles, which can come at a high cost. The unsustainability of the situation, as evident in the survey, is high levels of stress and potential burnout.
Every organisation should view their labour resource as an asset and treat it accordingly. This may require being open to interim resourcing solutions whereby the obstacle is as much Boards’ and Executives’ attitudes to such hires, as it is reticence to spend money. Poor resourcing leads to poor service, outputs and ultimately weaker social impact.
It’s clear to all that the shift to flexible work arrangements is a given. Presumably, most CEOs and Boards are already re-thinking organisational and HR policies, but equally care and consideration needs to be given to technology infrastructure, team dynamics and the financial and risk implications of both. Organisations should ensure that any flexible and remote working is thoughtfully explored through an EDI (Equality, Diversion, Inclusion) lens and that employees are both included and consulted in the process to balance operational needs with employee preferences. The end goal should be a positive and productive work environment.
Public and arguably even political expectation regarding salaries and compensation in the sector is too often ‘low salaries, high morals’. However, being purpose driven only goes so far and the charity sector is struggling to recruit and retain staff as illustrated in the turnover rates increase from 9.9% in 2022 to 12.6% in 2024.
The cost-of-living crisis is undoubtedly driving some employees out of sector and organisations need to steel themselves to advocate for, and to justify, competitive salary levels, especially for CEOs and Executives. Equally, boardroom battles that centre around CEO requests for staff wage increases are undoubtedly a regular occurrence. Circumventing Board members’ overtly negative biases on this topic requires careful analysis which includes cashflow projections and funding forecasts, labour market trends and insights, and end user needs and service requirements. Executives should pre-empt and provide such rational arguments, and this survey can provide some of the data.
A total of 592 organisations, with a total of 10,898 employees (full time or part time), responded to the survey, making this is an excellent resource to provide a broad overview of the sector.
However, The Wheel can only analyse and publish data gathered from those who have volunteered their information and, therefore, this report is not directly reflective of, or comparable to all 32,000 plus organisations in the community and voluntary sector.
For example, from the sample gathered, the report does not include data for individuals at ‘Director of’ level and there is limited data available under ‘Head of Housing’ roles, despite the current high demand for Asset and Property Managers.
We understand that The Wheel’s report will serve as a useful benchmarking report to inform decision making for some, but others will require a more in-depth benchmarking tool, including data from directly comparable organisations. We have recently launched a salary benchmarking service which has been established to provide organisations access to directly comparable information, where required – more information here.
The Pay & Benefits Survey signposts clear challenges in how the sector is resourced in terms of both finance and labour. Whilst most Boards considerably understand the financial challenges, but they also need to pay close attention to how they manage their employees – when the sector is attractive to employees, all of the sector wins.
If you’re interested in gaining support with attracting and retaining Talent, contact Shannon Barrett at shannon.barrett@2into3.com. Alternatively, if you require support with your Board’s governance, contact Sheena Horgan at sheena.horgan@2into3.com.
Written by Sheena Horgan, Director of Advisory Services & Shannon Barrett, Head of Talent Services at 2into3.
Anyone involved in leading or managing a charity or nonprofit dreads having to deal with a crisis under their watch. Despite adequate planning, we understand that even the best-prepared organisations can face unexpected crises. Whatever the focus of the crisis – funding, financial mismanagement, governance, safeguarding or reputational – here are 4 key words to help you keep a cool head at a stressful time.
The best way to manage a crisis is to prevent one occurring in the first place. This is what your organisation’s risk management and oversight practices are in place for: to identify potential risks at all levels of your organisation and putting in place effective mitigation or management structures, policies and practices.
Crisis management involves quick decision-making and action. Consider establishing a small team of leaders to develop and implement a crisis management plan. Make sure that their remit, responsibilities and reporting relationship to your Board is clear from the outset.
Key to your management of any crisis – and maintaining or re-building trust – will be how you communicate and engage your stakeholders. Develop a stakeholder map and communications plan that covers all your key relationships, particularly employees, volunteers, supporters and funders.
The best way to resolve any crisis is to ensure that there is appropriate action. It’s not advisable to shy away from acknowledging and investigating the incident, how and why it happened and its impact – and demonstrate accountability by identifying the clear steps that will be taken to redress its impact and prevent it from occurring again.
By prioritising anticipation, leadership, communication, and accountability, you will be in a better position to navigate any crisis that may arise. Remember, a well-prepared organisation is less likely to be caught off guard.
If you require additional support with your crisis management, 2into3 is experienced at supporting organisations to prevent anticipated crises and manage actual crises. Our governance and strategy services can help you to identify and mitigate organisational risks. Or, if the worst should happen, we can support you to effectively navigate through a crisis. In the last year, we have worked with six charities of different sizes to handle a range of funding, financial mismanagement, governance and reputational crises.
For more information, visit our webpage or contact our Director of Advisory Services, Sheena Horgan at sheena.horgan@2into3.com.
With growing consumer demand for ethical business practices and increasing regulatory pressures, ESG principles are not just a compliance requirement – but a strategic approach to sustainability and social impact. In this blog, we outline the importance of a robust ESG strategy and how to achieve the Social (S) component.
ESG stands for Environmental, Social, and Governance. These are called pillars in ESG frameworks and represent the 3 key areas that companies are expected to report in.
This includes efforts to reduce carbon footprints, manage waste responsibly, and adopt renewable energy sources. Companies are assessed on their environmental sustainability practices, and those failing to meet expectations may face reputational and financial risks.
This focuses on how companies manage relationships with employees, suppliers, customers, and communities. It includes labour practices, diversity and inclusion, community engagement, and broader impact on society.
This refers to the internal system of practices, controls, and procedures a company adopts to govern itself, make effective decisions, comply with legal standards, and meet the needs of external stakeholders. Good governance practices include transparent reporting, ethical leadership, and accountability.
Ireland has seen a significant shift in how businesses approach ESG reporting, largely influenced by European Union directives. The EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) has now been implemented in Irish law through the European Union (Corporate Sustainability Reporting) Regulations, 2024 which came into effect on 6th July.
Furthermore, Irish consumers are increasingly choosing to support organisations which align with their values. Companies that demonstrate a commitment to environmental, social and governance responsibility are more likely to attract and retain customers, particularly in a competitive market.
Additionally, investors are now factoring ESG criteria into their decision-making processes. Sustainable investing is becoming increasingly popular, and companies with strong ESG performance are more likely to secure funding. Therefore, focusing on a robust ESG Strategy is critical to the future development and overall success of your organisation.
The Social (S) in ESG is a critical component – strong social impact can enhance reputation, attract investment, boost employee morale, and mitigate risks. Furthermore, the Social (S) element of your ESG Strategy is more likely to be effective when strategically developed. A robust Social Impact Strategy plays a critical role in supporting businesses to achieve their broader ESG objectives.
Many organisations require external support to develop the Social (S) component of their ESG Strategy. At 2into3, we partner with your organisation, working at Board and staff level – engaging employees and members of the community to ensure that your Social Impact Strategy is a living document, owned by your organisation. By the end of this process, you will have a defined Strategy that will enable your business to create meaningful change, build stronger relationships with stakeholders and contribute positively to your community.
If you’d like to enhance the ‘S’ in your ESG Strategy, get in touch with our Director of Advisory Services, Sheena Horgan at sheena.horgan@2into3.com to explore how we can provide guidance and support. For more information on our ESG service, visit here.
What comes to mind when you hear the word “review”? If you think of criticism, judgement, or inspection, you might be approaching it the wrong way. A well-conducted Board effectiveness review provides numerous benefits for both your Board and your organisation, and should be seen as a constructive process instead of a fault-finding one.
Let’s look at five reasons your Board should consider conducting a Board effectiveness review.
Boards are composed of experts in their respective fields. However, in some cases, the skillsets and experience of individual Board members may not be fully recognised and utilised. A strengths-based Board effectiveness review allows you to map the skills and expertise on your Board and ensure they’re being maximised. When Board members engage in tasks that match their experience, it adds to the Board’s overall effectiveness and contributes to broader organisational success.
Regular Board reviews are a core requirement in the Charity Governance Code, and as a Board effectiveness review is an indication to your stakeholders – including funders, staff, volunteers and beneficiaries, as well as the public – that your Board is dedicated to best practice, transparency and accountability.
Nonprofits are operating in an evolving political and social landscape. This context demands Boards to be proactive and adaptable; capable of addressing challenges as they arise and identifying potential opportunities.
A Board effectiveness review helps to strengthen Board engagement and collaboration, to ensure that its committees have the appropriate composition and established duties, and that processes and structures are consolidated. This facilitates effective decision-making, leadership, and communication when faced with change.
So maybe it isn’t all good, and we’d be lying if we said a Board effectiveness review doesn’t consider areas for improvement. By taking stock of your Board’s its structure, dynamics, processes, people, and performance, you have an opportunity to reflect on what perhaps may not be working as well as it could.
What is important here is to focus on what happens next. After hearing constructive feedback from all your Board members, you can create an actionable roadmap to address any gaps and overcome challenges.
Let’s return to the core purpose of serving on a Board and take a moment to reflect on the reasons and motivation behind this commitment. We are reminded of the passion, interest, skills, and desire to give back. A Board effectiveness review serves to remind all Board members of these fundamentals, generating a renewed sense of purpose, clarity, and confidence moving into the future.
Engaging an independent and external third-party perspective in a Board review can offer a valuable objective insight, removing any bias and allowing Board members to be honest and transparent with their feedback. We can work with you to tailor a Board evaluation that reflects the nuances and complexities of your organisation, out of which will emerge constructive recommendations that resonate with your Board members’ experiences.
If you are interested in learning more about what a Board review would look like for your Board, please contact our Director of Advisory Services, Sheena Horgan at sheena.horgan@2into3.com.