Doing good while reading good — join the Nonprofit Good News-Letter.
When money gets tight, the real risk isn't the shortfall — it's what scarcity does to how you see. Here's how to widen the frame before it costs you.
A few years ago I was working with a nonprofit executive director who had just learned that her largest funder was cutting its grant — a substantial chunk of her budget. Within an hour she had a plan: reduce a program, freeze a hire, cancel a conference. Good instincts. Fast response.
What she didn't do was ask a second question: what does this open up?
In the weeks that followed, she confirmed that the program she'd moved to cut was the weakest one in her portfolio — and the freeze gave her room to redesign a position that had been misaligned for two years. The crisis forced decisions she'd been deferring, and the organization came out with a tighter program list and a role that finally fit.
Here's the uncomfortable part. None of those decisions required a crisis. She could have made every one of them a year earlier. It took losing the money to make her ask a question that was available to her the whole time: what does this open up?
Psychologists Sendhil Mullainathan and Eldar Shafir documented this phenomenon in their research on scarcity. When people operate under conditions of scarcity — whether it's money, time, or bandwidth — their cognitive capacity narrows. They become intensely focused on the immediate shortage, which makes them better at solving the present problem and worse at seeing everything else.
Mullainathan and Shafir call this "tunneling." The tunnel makes you efficient at the thing right in front of you and blind to everything outside the frame. For nonprofit leaders, that means chronic resource constraints don't just limit what you can do. They limit what you can see.
The ED managing a cash-flow crisis isn't scanning for partnership opportunities. The development director scrambling to replace a lost grant isn't evaluating new revenue models. The board chair dealing with a staff resignation isn't thinking about strategic positioning. Each of them is deep in the tunnel, solving the immediate problem with full intensity — and missing everything outside the frame.
Stephen Covey called the wider version of this "the scarcity mentality" — the belief that there's only so much to go around, so if someone else wins, you lose. In the nonprofit sector, it shows up in boards that refuse to invest in infrastructure because "every dollar should go to the mission." It shows up in leaders who won't share information with peer organizations because they're competing for the same grants. It shows up in the persistent belief that asking for more — more money, more staff, more time — is greedy rather than strategic.
An organization locked in scarcity mode can survive. It can cut, defer, and hold on. What it can't do is grow, adapt, or seize the moments that would change its trajectory.
I see this pattern in the organizations I work with. The threats always get addressed — scarcity thinking is very good at threat response. The opportunities sit unattended. Not because the leaders are unimaginative, but because the tunnel doesn't let them see what's outside it.
When I wrote Managing Your Nonprofit for Resilience, I defined resilience as the ability to absorb shocks and spring forward. Scarcity thinking handles the first part. It's terrible at the second. An organization that can only absorb shocks — that can survive but never spring forward — is not resilient. It's durable. There's a difference, and the difference is whether anyone is looking for the opening.
The shift from scarcity to abundance isn't a mindset exercise. It's a set of organizational practices that force the opportunity question into rooms where only the threat question normally lives.
Add an opportunity agenda item to every board meeting. Not at the end — in the first half, before the financial report consumes all the oxygen. Five minutes: "What's one opportunity we should be discussing?" The answers will be uneven at first. The habit will change the culture over time.
When a threat arrives, ask a second question. The first question — "How do we respond to this?" — is automatic, and it should be. The second — "What does this make possible that wasn't possible before?" — takes discipline. A funder pulling out is a threat. It's also a chance to rethink a revenue model you've been patching for years. A staff departure is a loss. It's also the first open position you've had in two years, and maybe the role should look different this time.
Invest in one thing this quarter. Scarcity mentality says "we can't afford to." Pick one thing — a training, a technology upgrade, a partnership exploration, a staff position — and fund it. The act of investing, rather than only cutting, shifts the organizational posture from defense to forward motion. It also signals to your team that the organization believes it has a future worth building toward.
Seek out leaders who are building. If your board, your staff, and your peer network are all in scarcity mode, you'll stay there. Find the EDs in your city who are growing programs, launching partnerships, and trying new revenue models — in the same constrained environment you're operating in. What you'll find is that they're not richer or luckier. They're asking different questions. And those questions are contagious.
At your next leadership meeting, before you open the financial report, ask your team: "What's the best opportunity available to us right now that we haven't pursued?" Write down every answer. Then pick one and assign it an owner.
You may be surprised at what your team has been seeing that nobody thought to mention — because nobody asked.
Part of my new focus on the opportunity side of risk management — building nonprofit resilience by hunting for openings, not just managing threats. If your leadership meetings only ever ask "what could go wrong," Nonprofit Good News Premium is where I work through building the opposite habit.