Experienced NPO consultant Lizann Peyton facilitated two live online Q & A sessions on the topic of managing board chair and executive director relationships.
Lizann provided many time-tested recommendations for how to strengthen board and executive director relationships. The complete forum is available below.
Be sure to check out Lizann's helpful advice on the subject available here:
http://blog.commongoodvt.org/2010/10/3-questions-with-lizann-peyton/
You're in the right place! Lizann will be on shortly to begin today's forum --- Be sure to REFRESH YOUR BROWSER EVERY COUPLE OF MINUTES FOR THE MOST CURRENT DIALOGUE---
Lizann
Member
Hi, This is Lizann Peyton. I'm a board development and team-building consultant in Norwich, VT and love focusing on the board chair-executive director partnership as a key leverage point in make our nonprofit boards more effective, and in supporting our executive directors who often have to spend too much of their time managing the board, without enough support from the board chair. I'm here to answer your questions about strengthening that key relationship, as well as any other questions about strengthening boards and supportive executive directors.
Lizann,
Thanks for joining us. Could you briefly describe your experience working with the nonprofit community in Vermont and New Hampshire?
Lizann
Member
I've been on the boards of several Upper Valley non-profits, including serving as board chair, nominating chair, and fundraising chair. So I know what it's like to juggle my work and family commitments with a volunteer board role that requires me to pay attention in between meetings.
I've also consulted with over 100 nonprofits in Vermont and New Hampshire to help them with strategic planning, board training, organization assessment, fundraising coaching, and executive search assistance.
As a former grant reviewer for a branch of the NH Charitable Foundation, I had the chance to see over 100 applications a year from small, medium and large nonprofits asking for board development funding - and to learn their patterns of what works, what's challenging, and how taking time out to work on the board-executive relationship helps everything else go more smoothly.
And finally, I had the joy of serving as an interim director for a growing nonprofit and navigating that board-staff relationship myself.
Loved it all!
You touched on this in your answer here - http://blog.commongoodvt.org/2010/10/3-questions-with-lizann-peyton/
And I'd like to elaborate: Do you feel the majority of nonprofit executive directors incorporate their boards to their full potential?
What are some of the most common board inefficiencies you tend to notice?
Lizann
Member
Nick, what patterns do you notice in nonprofit conversations that are happening through CommonGood VT? Are executive directors looking for good board members, and board chairs? What kind of board development needs do you hear about from your statewide perspective?
Nonprofits often gripe that there is a very small applicant pool of potential board members and board chairs.
Where should npo's turn to for recruitment?
What are the qualities of a good board member and effective board chair?
Lizann
Member
Finding board members is really, really difficult in a state with many small rural communities, and even in the larger towns and cities. First, we are blessed - and also challenged - by a population that really cares about supporting our communities. So we have many more nonprofits relative to our population base that do larger cities in the Northeast.
For us, it means that civic-minded folks with time to serve on a board are being asked again and again, and "experience board burn-out" after awhile. We too often end up unable to screen prospective board members for the right skills and mindset (more about that in a minute) because we're just grateful to get SOMEone to fill the board seats.
IDEA #1: Consider a SMALLER board. John Carver says "ask yourself why you need more than 7 people." Seven is enough to get diversity of viewpoints and skills when problem-solving. Smaller group size permits in-depth conversation, with fewer people to spread the air-time between. A smaller group also develops closer and quicker trust, and knows each other's thinking styles well enough to use them in complementary ways.
Most boards feel they need 12-15 members because (a) that's the way it's always been, (b) some people won't show up anyway, (c) more people are needed to get the work done in committees and special tasks, and (d) they need more people invested in fundraising, and (e) they need access to donated skills when it comes time to find a lawyer, marketing help, a builder, etc.
These are good reasons, but if we consistently have trouble making boards effective and finding enough people, isn't it worth considering a smaller board of 7-9 people? More tips in a moment...
Lizann
Member
So - how do we deal with the perceived "down side" of smaller boards?
Committee work and fundraising DO need a larger pool of people. Can we ask past board members, prospective board members, friends of the organization to help out on CONCRETE TASKS and stages of work, rather than a "permanent committee assignment"?
They may enjoy the feeling of accomplishment that comes with breaking the task into smaller chunks, and feel relieved not to have to donate more time for board meetings as well. Or they may appreciate the ability to make a one year commitment, not a 3-6 year commitment.
A good strategy is to approach someone and say, "This is the gift YOU can give this organization, and this social cause in our community: to be on an AD HOC group working on xyz task for 6-9 months. If you'd like to be more involved, that's great, but we know you're a busy person and we'd love to get your help on just this one task."
That task could be the annual fundraising appeal; or a handful of face-to-face donor visits; or a program development group; or a personnel committee; or exploring a potential strategic initiative.
We serve on boards because we want to help the cause, but if we feel we can be helpful and SEE THE CONCRETE RESULT OF OUR TIME, it's a good feeling and we're more likely to tell others in the community that this is a fun organization to work with.
THE CHALLENGE: Added time on someone's part to keep those folks engaged, if the ritual of coming to board meetings is no longer their role.
Can we ask a board member to be in charge of each task group, so the burden doesn't fall on the executive director? Can we invite the outside helpers to periodic board discussions? Do we take them out to coffee once in awhile, or invite them to a board-staff celebration we're already planning?
While it seems time-consuming to "manage" their continuing engagement, wouldn't it be worth it if the group then gets LOTS of work done on the board's behalf?
And then we have fewer board seats to recruit for.
So, a question that stuck with me from the October 5th VIT Workshop ( http://blog.commongoodvt.org/2010/10/watch-it-now-managing-board-chair-and-executive-director-relationships/)was how do do you tell what exactly falls under the responsibility of the staff and what type of tasks/thinking are appropriate for the Board to undertake?
Lizann
Member
RECRUITMENT IDEA #2: Make sure each board member talks to 3 community members about the organization in-between EACH BOARD MEETING. Shouldn't be hard to do - it can be a 5 minute conversation letting someone know of one interesting development. Or even better: ASK them what they think of your organization.
Hard to make it a regular board habit, but SO important in building a larger pool of people who care about the organization. From that comes word-of-mouth on the street about your organization, so when it comes time to ask for money, or ask for board members, there's a larger pool of people already interested in what you do and what you as board members are like.
IT'S THE BOARD CHAIR'S JOB to build board agreement about this expectation, and to put a 10 minute check-in at the beginning of EACH board agenda: "What did we hear from our 3-per-person community conversations this month?"
Lizann
Member
Nick, thanks for an excellent question. You'll notice a little lag time between when you post a question while I'm still typing an answer, so I hope readers will forgive the overlapping topics!
Lizann
Member
My experience is that Boards think more falls under their responsibility than it really does, and they spend too much time going over operational discussions at board meetings and not enough time on (a) forward-thinking strategic brainstorming, and (b) widening their interactions with the community - their "ambassador" role.
First ask, "Is this something that could be handled well by staff? If so, let's trust our capable staff. If not, let's express our worries as CRITERIA for the outcomes of staff action, but not dictation of how they should act."
THE BOARD'S JOB is four-fold:
1. Oversee the effectiveness of programs, finances, and the executive director's relationship with the board.
2. Set strategic direction and 3-5 big goals for the organization
3. Spend lots of time being an ambassador and fundraiser in the community
4. Provide a safe, constructive sounding-board for the executive director to turn to for problem-solving and support.
FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT: We need a quick checklist (which I'm happy to post) of what things a board should oversee -- but it's work that can be done in a sub-group, and work that only has to be done a few times a year - NOT at every meeting.
PROGRAM OVERSIGHT: We need to define what "good outcomes" look like for the people we help, then ask our capable staff to tell us the best way to get there, and have once or twice-a-year monitoring conversations to ask "how do we know if we're achieving what we hope to?" Boards need to have a good hard discussion with themselves, and with their executives, to determine where to stay OUT of program business - for example, do we need to approve restructuring of staff jobs, or do we just need to ask our executive if s/he needs (or doesn't need!) support in thinking it through.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OVERSIGHT: Don't ever go more than a year without providing our EDs with organized board feedback and performance evaluation. They deserve to know how they're doing, just like we want them to give staff annual evaluations. BUT don't evaluate an ED on things you haven't set as goals in advance - whether it's the job description, or specific targets you have set for the agency. The evaluation should be a no-surprises event, and it should be based on YEAR-ROUND, TWO-WAY DIALOGUE between the ED and board chair or executive committee about how things are going. Each evaluation should end with organizational and professional development goals for the upcoming year, so both the ED and board know what the next evaluation will be based on.
Besides the formal evaluation, it is the BOARD CHAIR'S JOB to craft a healthy two-way partnership with the executive director (since the board chair speaks for the full board in executing the role of job supervision). Yes, the ED should help co-create that role, but should not have to be the only one initiating an ongoing dialogue!
Thanks Lizann for moderating today's forum! To our audience, be sure to check out additional resources presented by Lizann on the Common Good VT website here: http://commongoodvt.org/
Be sure to Log-on this Thursday from 1 - 2 p.m. for our second round of live Q & A
See you Thursday!
Lizann
Member
STRATEGIC GOAL SETTING: As we covered in the October 5 VIT Workshop: The board's job is "to define what matters most, then organize to get the work done" as Dick Chait at Harvard says.
It's the board's job to set a few clear strategic goals - in the workshop we said they should be as simple and memorable as bulleted short phrases on a post-it note. Whether the board uses a formal strategic planning process or just a roundtable discussion, it's on the board's shoulders to make sure that future direction is clear, so the ED and staff know priorities and can set their efforts accordingly.
Sure, the ED and staff should be part of thinking these goals through, but they shouldn't be crafting the strategic plan by themselves.
Another image we used was the "star" - each point of the star is a circle of people (committee, task group, or staff) working on one of the strategic priorities.
And then - VERY IMPORTANT - it is the BOARD'S job to schedule regular check-ins on progress toward those goals.
I strongly urge boards to have an annual goal-setting meeting or mini-retreat, with the ED, to review progress over the past year and agree on milestones for the coming year.
I also encourage boards to have a 6-month check-in on progress.
Thus the board's job is not only to set strategic direction, but to see that progress is being made and to discover what course-corrections, if any, should be made based on what's learned along the way.
Lizann
Member
Finally - STAFF'S JOB in the board-staff relationship: Some people say the board's job is to set direction and clarify any major policy questions, and then "get out of the way so staff can do the work they are trained to do well."
What is the value the board alone can add, vs. what are staff quite capable of doing without board help?
Generally the staff's job is to find creative ways to make the mission succeed, have the technical and programmatic expertise to run a top-notch program their community can be proud of, understand clients' and "customers'" evolving needs, build community partnerships to advance the mission, and attend to the nuts-and-bolts details of running the ship - strong financial management, legal compliance, etc.
I sometimes ask myself "if this were a small business with a gifted business owner, could they do it just fine without the board?" John Carver reminds us to set the general boundaries and parameters on what would jeopardize the organization, then let staff lead within those parameters as much as possible.
Looking forward to more discussion on Thursday!
Lizann
You're in the right place! Lizann will be on shortly to answer your board relationship questions --
Lizann
Member
Hi everyone,
Welcome to continued discussion of the board chair-executive director relationship. Last time we talked about strategies for recruiting board members, and ways to define the difference between the board vs. executive director's role.
What questions do you have today?
A question from Kathleen Swanson here at Common Good VT: In situations where the E.D. and board chair have personality conflicts, who particularly should step in and try and remedy the situation?
Thanks!
Lizann
Member
A former board member/board chair who's respected by both is the first idea I would try. Someone not perceived as being on the ED's or board chair's "side." Second: I'd try a neutral, well-respected community member who can keep confidentiality (a faith congregation leader?). Third, a neutral and respected current board member. Fourth, professional mediation.
Personality conflicts are not at all uncommon. Starting the new chair's term with a sit-down discussion of styles, hopes, expectations, and mutual goals for the board often prevents build-up of differences.
Lizann
Member
One of the challenges for executive directors is that each new board chair brings a different personality style and different idea of what their job should be. Board chairs should recognize this may be hard for the ED - or at least requires time to adapt and open conversation about what those differences look like to each person. In the worst cases, it feels like 'whiplash' to the ED!
New board chairs should take the initiative to model collaboration and compromise, since EDs may feel the board chair is in a position of authority regarding the ED's performance evaluation.
Thanks for that! For organizations that encourage 100% giving from their board members but aren't necessarily reaching that goal, what are some tips for getting each and every board member to give to the organization without making anyone uncomfortable or embarrassed?
Lizann
Member
First, I always say to phrase it as "a gift that is meaningful to you," and make clear that dollar threshold is of far lesser importance than showing donors and grantmakers that 100% of the board gave - and gave EARLY, before the annual appeal. If a board member won't make even a minor cash contribution (even $5 if that's truly all s/he can afford), how committed is that person to the organization and how can we ask others to give?
Second - make sure it is ALWAYS discussed with prospective board members in the recruitment phase, so they aren't left wondering and the whole board knows that everybody is aware of the expectation.
Third - always put it on a board agenda for discussion once a year.
Fourth - make SURE the board doesn't know who gave how much. Board members' dollar amounts can be left out of reports to the development committee, with just their name showing on the giving list, so that only the executive director or bookkeeper or development director knows the dollar amount.
Fifth - The board chair or development chair should write a very short personal note to each board member once a year saying "Your gifts of time and work and ideas have been so valuable. A reminder that we also ask each board member to make a financial gift, and hope you'll do so by (x date that you list as a goal for finishing the board giving)."
Lizann
Member
A JOB DESCRIPTION FOR BOARD CHAIRS:
We need to have a written job description for board chairs, but most non-profits lack such a thing. One way is to borrow from templates on the internet, if you google "nonprofit board chair." A second way is to have a board discussion of "what do we think the chair's job should include? and what do we want from our board chair this year, even if it's not a concrete task?"
You might have a different view in your organization, but here are examples from the Minnesota Council of Nonprofits as a starting point:
As Chair of the Board, assure that the Board of Trustees fulfills its responsibilities for the governance of the Institution.
Be a partner to the CEO, helping him/her to achieve the mission of the Institution.
Optimize the relationship between the board and management.
Responsibilities:
Chair meetings of the Board. See that it functions effectively, interacts with management optimally, and fulfills all of its duties.
With the CEO develop agendas.
With the CEO recommend composition of the Board Committees.
Recommend committee chairs with an eye to future succession.
Assist the CEO in recruiting Board and other talent for whatever volunteer assignments are needed.
Reflect any concerns management has in regard to the role of the Board of Trustees or individual trustees. Reflect to the CEO the concerns of the Board of Trustees and other constituencies.
Present to the Board an evaluation of the pace, direction, and organizational strength of the Institution.
Prepare a review of the CEO and recommend salary for
consideration by the appropriate committee.
Annually focus the Board's attention on matters of institutional governance that relate to its own structure, role, and relationship to management. Be assured that the Board is satisfied it has fulfilled all of its responsibilities.
Act as an additional set of eyes and ears.
Serve as an alternate spokesperson.
Fulfill such other assignments as the Chair and CEO agree are appropriate and desirable for the Chair to perform.
Excellent we've had several organizations pose that question to us and will be sure to pass that around.
Another question from Common Good VT and CCTV: What are the advantages of a diverse board? Should an organization strive for board members of different backgrounds, financial status,etc... and if so, what are the benefits of different board members?
Thanks!
Lizann
Member
A good discussion for each board to have on its own, since different types of organizations need different types of diversity.
Be careful not to over-emphasize geography, professional skills, and even age. DO emphasize different thinking styles, life experience, connections to sectors in the community, etc.
The most important functions of diversity are:
(a) to create good teamwork and just enough healthy disagreement so that problems are thought through from perspectives that complement the executive director's...
b) to have a reach into enough different parts of the community (whether geographic, economic, or issue-oriented) that board members cast a wide net for valuable information coming into the organization, "ambassadorship" going outside, and the ability to open doors to important partners.
Don't create token "diversity" criteria if you aren't putting "collaborative teamwork and communication styles" above all else, or you risk a board that can't work well together.
Lizann
Member
A note about economic diversity:
It's something we don't have enough of on our boards, often because current members come from networks that don't include lower-income friends and connections. But it IS very important.
Just be sensitive to the reality that folks with lower income may be holding down multiple jobs, live further out for affordable housing, and lack reliable transportation - so regular attendance at board meetings may be more challenging that current members realize.
Second, remember that they may have less high-speed internet access if board communication and board packets are being sent out by email.
Third, remember that new board members from ANY sector that hasn't previously been well-represented on the board (age, education, income, racial/ethnic group, sexual orientation) may feel more comfortable and effective if two or three "diversity-stretchers" are brought onto the board at once.
Some boards adapt quickly to change in diversity; others need some training, and support in expecting and allowing the board culture to change.
Lizann
Member
And a note about AGE DIVERSITY:
We need more of it!!! Yet it challenges us to figure out ways to adapt board work to the:
- time demands of families with young children (can we make board meetings more efficient, or less frequent? can we rotate the time or location of board meetings?)
- higher-technology communication habits (e.g. is there a "board-only" section on your website where board members can always find board packets, minutes, financial statements, committee updates, strategic plans, etc.? can board members participate occasionally by speaker phone or Skype?)
- lesser financial capacity for large gifts (just make them feel it's OK)
- desire to feel productive and contribute to concrete achievements (are our tasks action-oriented? do we set goals and celebrate when we succeeded?)
And let's ask THEM what changes in the structure or culture of board work would make it more appealing and feasible for them.
Thanks, Lizann. That was very well put.
Another question: For individuals in the process of starting a new nonprofit organizations, are there common pitfalls that often plague newer nonprofits that can be avoided? I feel a board can either make or break an organization that's just off the ground....
Get answers and input from nonprofit community leaders. To get started, login or register.
Beta
