Case study 4: Full-Firm Engagement: Strategy, Operations, and Communications for a Scaling Mission-Driven Organization
THE SITUATION
A national advocacy organization with a fifteen-person staff and a $3.2M annual budget had reached an inflection point. A successful multi-year campaign had elevated the organization's public profile significantly. Unrestricted funding had increased. Board expectations had risen. And the operational infrastructure — built for a scrappier, smaller version of the organization — was visibly straining under the new weight.
The executive director recognized that the organization was at risk of becoming a victim of its own success. The communications infrastructure was not reflecting the organization's current standing. The operations were held together by two staff members who were burning out. And the strategic direction, which had been clear during the campaign, was now diffuse as the organization tried to figure out what came next.
She needed a consulting partner who could work across all three problems simultaneously — not three separate vendors who would produce three uncoordinated plans.
THE CHALLENGE
Strategic: No clear organizational direction post-campaign. Board was divided on whether to expand the policy portfolio, deepen community programming, or both.
Operational: Two core staff managing organization-wide logistics, event coordination, reporting, and communications production. Both near burnout. No documented processes. No backup capacity.
Communications: Website, collateral, and donor materials reflected the campaign rather than the organization's current and future positioning. Major funder relationships required a more sophisticated communications infrastructure than currently existed.
Integration: All three problems were connected. A strategic decision on direction would change the communications priorities. The operations infrastructure had to be built to serve whatever the strategy produced.
THE APPROACH
RSG structured the engagement in three sequential phases with a designated integration point between each.
Phase 1 (Weeks 1–6): Strategy. RSG conducted a full organizational diagnostic and facilitated two board-and-leadership planning sessions. The output was a three-year strategic direction with three programmatic priorities and a resource allocation framework. The strategy was designed to be communicated to funders, board, staff, and community partners — and the communications framework for each audience was built into the plan.
Phase 2 (Weeks 5–14, overlapping): Operations. While the strategy was being finalized, RSG began the operational diagnostic in parallel. The two operational staff were involved as subject matter experts in the mapping process — their knowledge was documented, not bypassed. The output was a full operational redesign: process documentation for fourteen core workflows, a new event coordination system, a staff capacity model that redistributed responsibilities more sustainably, and a reporting infrastructure that served both the new strategic priorities and funder requirements.
Phase 3 (Weeks 12–20): Communications. With the strategy established and the operational infrastructure stabilized, RSG executed a full communications overhaul. Brand voice audit. Competitive positioning analysis. New organizational narrative anchored in the three-year direction. Website rewrite (five pages). Donor communications redesign. A six-email major gifts sequence for the upcoming giving campaign.
Integration sessions at the end of each phase ensured that the outputs of each practice area were informing the others — the communications work reflected the strategy, the operations infrastructure was built to serve the communications cadence, and the strategic framework was translated into language all three outputs could use.
THE RESULTS
Strategic Direction
Three-year plan approved unanimously by board; first organizational strategy in six years with cross-departmental buy-in
Operational Load
Operational workload redistributed across four staff members from two; both core staff reported significantly reduced pressure within 60 days
Process Documentation
14 core workflows documented; estimated onboarding time for new staff reduced from 5 months to 8 weeks
Communications
Website relaunched; major funder described new materials as ‘the most professional thing you’ve produced’
Giving Campaign
End-of-year giving campaign using revised communications infrastructure exceeded prior year by 34%
“We did not need three consultants. We needed one firm that understood that strategy, operations, and communications are the same problem. RSG understood that from the first conversation. Six months later the organization runs differently. Not just better — differently. The infrastructure finally matches the ambition.”
— Executive Director, National Advocacy Organization
