Raise
the Bar: Demand Strategic Thinking and Accountability,
Part II: A Diet and Exercise Regime for High
Performing Boards
This
article appeared in CharityChannel in July
2004.
In Part
I of this article I presented four lessons
that Olympic high jumper Dick Fosbury could
teach boards about raising the bar of their
service. In Parts II and III I will share
a "diet and exercise regime" I
have found to work in conditioning board
members to clear the bar, regardless of how
high we raise it.
Talk with most people and the words "diet and exercise" cause eyes
to shift away in guilt. These are "shoulds" in a culture where 61%
of American and 48% of Canadian adults are classified as obese and where the
maximum expenditure of effort for four out of ten is changing the television
channel with a remote control. For athletes, diet and exercise are "musts." They
are what allow them to function at the level of peak performance. If we want
our boards to function less as couch potatoes and more as Olympic athletes
we need to put them on their own regime of "diet and exercise." This
involves keeping them focused on the vision while:
- Making calculated recruitment decisions
- Setting ground rules for those who join the
board
- Educating members of boards -- providing
them with the tools they need to do their job
- Making decisions based on critical factors
- Delegating work
- Evaluating their decisions and actions
- Holding people accountable for what is and
isn't accomplished
This
week will be devoted to the exercise portion
-- recruitment and ground rules. Next week we'll
wrap up this article with a look at "diet."
EXERCISE
Making calculated recruitment decisions
People don't make an Olympic team because former Olympians know their name
from the community and think they might be good. Instead, they vie for a
coveted place by working exceedingly hard for years and proving their winning
skills at local, state and national competitions. This is often after a coach
spots their potential and invests time and effort in their development.
We must recruit board members in a similar fashion. Rather than trying to sell
those we identify as potential board members on the idea of joining our board
we should test their skills and levels of interest and commitment, selecting
only the best for our team. Putting people on committees and seeing how they
produce is one of the most effective tests available because the proof is in
the outcomes, or lack thereof.
Well crafted questions will provide good insights as well, as long as one really
listens to the responses he or she gets. Some questions that are effective
at ascertaining skills, interest and commitment include:
- What do you see bringing to this board that
will make you a good board member?
- What do you think is the most important job
of a board member and why?
- What information do you like to have before
making go/no-go decisions?
- How would you deal with a situation in which...
? (One example might be you heard the treasurer
announce an anticipated deficit in excess of
$50,000.)
- How would you respond if you were offered
two tickets to a playoff game scheduled for
the same night as the annual gala?
Clearly stating the organization's expectations
of its board members and determining to what
degree the individual is comfortable with committing
to meeting those expectations will also tell
you whether this is the right person or not.
(For additional ideas on recruiting the right board members see Nonprofit
Boards & Governance Review, Recruiting
Strategic Thinkers, Temkin, October 14, 2003)
Setting ground rules for those who join the board
People generally are adroit at picking up a group's norms. However, left to
their own devices they may pick up norms you'd rather they not, such as coming
late to meetings. It is our responsibility as leaders to make the organization's
expectations clear. This means stating them clearly and frequently. It also
means making sure that what we say is consistent with what we telegraph nonverbally
and with any consequences we impose.
We can't be afraid to follow through out of fear that we'll lose board members.
Ineffective board members do virtually nothing for the organization and have
the potential to significantly hurt it. They occupy seats that could be taken
by doers. Perhaps even more harmful, they tend to de-motivate others.
Probably the most basic expectation that I've found to help in creating a muscular
board -- strategic and accountable -- is that everyone will participate. Participation
can be defined in many ways. For some organizations it is sufficient that everyone
raises issues, questions assumptions, and clarifies recommendations prior to
voting on them. Others may also want to see that responsibilities are delegated
fairly, rather than being constantly assigned to the same handful of volunteers
or staff.
If I were to offer an exercise routine to enhance participation it would include
multiple repetitions of the following:
- Staying focused on issues that are related
to the organization's mission and vision. Remember
the impact of visualization when one is working
to clear the bar at a new level and appoint
a mission caller if necessary to pull the group
back if it begins to stray.
- Recognizing,
though, the benefit of "cross
training." Put up a sheet of newsprint
at the beginning of the meeting and use it
to capture points that are off topic. Then,
dedicate some time at each meeting to explore
these. Internet darling Google credits much
of its success to the requirement that every
employee spend 20% of his or her time on projects
of personal interest. The founders of Google
realized early that while many of the ideas
would never lead anywhere, other ideas would
become industry standards.
- Agreeing to put forth no goals without action
plans and no problems without proposed solutions.
Otherwise, it is like exercising without proper
form. There will be a lot of wasted effort
and one's desired results will never be achieved.
- Keeping all discussion focused on issues,
not individuals. There should be no name calling.
One of the most effective techniques here is
to disassociate all ideas from those who initially
proposed them. Once the ideas are out on the
table they belong to the board as a whole and
the goal is to make them work or demonstrate
why they won't.
When we set an expectation that every board
member will participate -- an expectation that
is critical to a board fulfilling its Duty of
Care -- we must make this expectation as easy
as possible to achieve. The reality is that today
with everyone's busy schedules, it can be difficult
for someone to physically make all the board
meetings, even when dates are provided a year
in advance. Consider using teleconferencing or
web conferencing to involve someone who has to
go out of town on business, for instance.
I have a personal preference for web conferencing because everyone can follow
along on the same copy of a written report, slide, or even web page. They can
annotate this copy for all to see and comment on. The board chair can easily
control the interaction, ensuring everyone -- but, perhaps, the aggressive
board member with a tendency to take over the floor -- has an opportunity to
speak to the issues. And, it's even possible to put everyone's pictures up
on the screen or use webcams for live broadcasts. This last benefit is ideal
for a group that doesn't know each other well. Today there are a number of
companies that offer this service for a relatively low cost. Some are even
dedicated to the nonprofit market. But do check out your state regulations.
Some do not allow one or both of these technologies to be used for board meetings.
Your board should already be demonstrating a noticeable difference if you have
made a commitment to these and similar "exercises." Add the "diet" elements
I'll present in the next issue of Nonprofit Boards and Governance Review and
your board will be turning heads around the community.
|
