Wednesday, September 14, 2011

Board Members & Courage

This article from Venture Philanthropy Partners is excellent, reminding board members that their job is to ask questions, get answers, and bring the level of passion, skill, and talent for which they were originally recruited as board members, to the proceedings of the board and fulfillment of the mission of the organization.

An excerpt.

“They check their brains at the door” is a complaint often heard about business leaders who serve on nonprofit boards. This complaint has merit. I regularly observe business leaders who are reluctant to apply the same rigor, objective questioning, performance expectations, and data-informed decision-making that serve them well in their day jobs.

“I’ve been guilty of this myself. I remember, with great chagrin and embarrassment, how much difficulty I had finding my sea legs when I first joined a nonprofit board. I was appalled by the lack of information available to us, and the little information we did have told me that the organization and its charismatic leader were struggling mightily. Instead of speaking up and constructively demanding the level of stewardship and governance that I took for granted in my corporate board roles, I just got frustrated and said little.

“I don’t think I checked my brains at the door. But I sure as hell checked my courage.

“As I reflect on why I didn’t speak up, I suppose I just didn’t know what my role “allowed” me to say or ask. I was the new guy from the business world without any real experience with the type of services the organization provided. I joined this board thinking it would be a “nice thing to do” and certainly not intending to ruffle feathers.

“I know others from the business world have felt this same hesitation, as well as a related one: Friendships and social ties with the executive director and other board members can blur objectivity and a sense of accountability.

“The net is that too many nonprofit boards are downright afraid to stir conflict, rock the boat with hard questions, challenge executive directors, and hold the organization accountable for its performance. We simply don’t want to “hurt somebody’s feelings” or, God forbid, introduce any aspect of conflict—even when it might spur constructive debate. Unfortunately, when we elevate “harmony” over mission and purpose, our clients/beneficiaries often pay a big price in terms of the quality of services they receive.

“Timid, polite, “collegial” boards may eventually start asking the right questions, but often it’s too late. The questioning finally comes when they’re faced with a problem so severe that they have no choice but to tackle the real issues. By that time, they’re in crisis mode, which, ironically, almost always results in broken glass and busted relationships as well as well as less-than-desired programmatic results.”