Resources

Governance Excellence of the Heart

One week we were finalizing the details of how the governance self-assessment session could help his association’s leadership discover opportunities for strategic growth and vision that could shape the organization’s direction in preparation for their next chapter. Just a week later, through tragic, unexpected circumstance, my colleague, CEO of his organization, suddenly passed.

In the wake of such loss, after pausing to reflect and remember an amazing colleague and what he brought to our community, there was still a facilitation contract in place with a date quickly approaching. I reached out to the association’s leadership that had been put in place – did they want to proceed? Would they like to delay? Would they like to rescind, without recourse, and we could find another opportunity if it was still best fit for the organization? After taking time to reflect and assess, the organization decided they wanted to proceed with the session as planned.

 And so, I found myself a few weeks later standing at the door of their building, hesitating for a moment to ring the buzzer for entry. There was a strong sense of something missing – like I was about to enter an echo chamber. This exploration of governance that I always find to be exhilarating – asking hard questions, hearing the passion of leaders through varied voices, eliciting moments of connection and discovery as they craft how they can lead better together – this time it felt like I was about to lead an exploration, a journey, without a partner who had designed the map with me.

The governance self-assessment session typically covers many of the topics that you would expect:

  • What choices can a Board make to use their time creating the future instead of fixing the past?
  • How can we create listening mastery as a Board skill set?
  • What does ‘strategic’ actually mean to your Board?

Yet, walking into the room, what I realized is that for this conversation, just weeks after tragedy, governance excellence might have a different definition:

  • What is the role of the voice of leadership in comforting a grieving community and leading through loss?
  • How does the leadership stay focused on the future, continue to inspire hope in the possibility of tomorrow while not ignoring that the absence of the leader they had in that journey also means that the journey may look somewhat different (not less than, just different)?
  • What role does the leadership play in the impact of this loss on the staff – those who saw and worked with the CEO everyday? What is the right level of interface there?
  • Through this focus and care (of finance, of strategy, of operations, of culture, of reaction) of so many others, has the Board given itself the space to recognize the loss, and incorporate space to process what this means for leadership?

So often we focus on the challenge of leadership where Board service transitions every year, requiring an effort of training so that those holding the top positions in our organizations are able to execute their responsibilities from a place of depth of knowledge with a breadth of tools and resources available to aid them in their work. Governance excellence requires so many qualities: commitment, patience, prioritization of the organization above personal interest, the desire to listen to others – even if they do not share your perspective, the willingness to support a single voice/decision outside the Board room, even if the vote didn’t follow your personal vision.

Yet, this experience keeps bringing me back to governance excellence of the heart: the ability to articulate the emotional reaction that the community may feel to tragic or shocking events, the emotional intelligence to serve as empathetic listeners – listening to member perspectives to understand and not reply (thank you, Stephen Covey), the strength to bring a community together to honor that which has been lost AND focus on the bright future ahead.

Ultimately, governance excellence means leadership not only provides fiscal oversight and growth direction, they not only ensure that legal risk is mitigated, they are not only focused on strategic vision, direction, and measures. It also means in moments when an organization experiences disruption, experiences loss, that their leaders can serve as a meaningful voice – speaking the words that their members might be feeling – and then articulating what must always be the north star – a hope and a path to a brighter tomorrow, honoring those who led us to today.

Excellence in vision. Excellence in inspiration. Excellence in execution.

Excellence in care.

Knowledgeable Boards: A Choice, Not an Assumption

Non-profit associations function on an interesting governance premise – we have volunteer Boards of Directors who are relied upon to set the vision and direction the organization should take in pursuit of their vision and mission. All-too-often, Boards gather around the table with the intention of representing a larger membership, and in some cases, industry, but are only informed by their own experience or personal network. Seeking insight and broader perspectives is an active choice on the part of governance and the association, and of the many paths to achieving listening mastery for our leadership, we most often rely upon reports as pre-reads before the Board meeting. In focusing on this as a vehicle of knowledge growth, the level of knowledge mastery most often falls in one of the following levels – written in ascending knowledge potential:

1. Come as you are – This is when items appear on the Board agenda without any corresponding background/analysis/information. In these cases, we are asking Board member for input strictly based on their own experience and personal reference. While we rely upon their ability to put the association interest first in all decisions, these processes are absent of larger voice.

2. Pages of reports – The reports of committees, councils, special interest groups, components, task forces, and staff all make up the pre-Board meeting reading packet. While we may lament our Board members don’t do a full read of their materials, we are relying on them to read every page, pulling out the key points that they need to bring to the Board table at the meeting.

3. Executive summaries – Each report that is included as a pre-read or on the Board consent agenda includes an executive summary top-page – bullet points of the top things that the Board should know/pay attention to in the report. These allow the Board to quickly assess the most important conclusions and questions remaining from each report, identify patterns, and ask deeper questions where the conclusions presented necessitate exploration.

4. Information reflection – Board members are asked, as they read through the pre-read reports, what information surprised them or warranted surfacing for further discussion. This high-level exercise expresses an expectation to Board members to incorporate the report they read into their discussions and decisions.

5. Correlated decisions – This last level incorporates a methodology of asking, when a vote is called on an issue, what reports/information a Board member suggesting a specific approach is incorporating into their motion.

Of course, Board members can’t know everything about all areas. Yet, if associations don’t provide the proper information and direction, and there isn’t intention on the part of the Board on what is intended when it comes to broader reflection, then we are left with Board decisions based on limited perspective. When it comes to setting the course for any organization – we need our Boards to be as knowledgeable as possible. As you prepare for your next Board meeting, which level of knowledge will your leaders bring to the table?

We Need to be Inclusive Speakers

If you have ever presented at a conference, you know the routine. The request for early submission of slides, trying to fit in last-minute tweaks, getting to your room (typically set in the same manner as an audience about to see a performance) and trying to make sure all the technology is actually working all before the attendees filter in to their seats. Rinse, repeat. As educators, we give so much focus to the quality of the content we are presenting that all-too-often we don’t pay enough attention to the learning experience we are creating in the presentation of that content.

The truth is that we don’t always know who is going to be in the room as a learner – and we certainly don’t know what challenges they may have learning in this typical format. As the educator, it is up to each of us to not only present the best content possible, but to also do so in a manner that will account for the varied learning needs of our audience. It is up to each of us to be more inclusive speakers. As we start a new year, here are just a few thoughts on how to adjust our presentation approach to account for varied needs:

1. Use a Microphone – We may perceive that it is a small room, not a great deal of attendees, or that we have a naturally booming voice. We may even ask if someone in back can hear us if we don’t use a microphone. Here is the thing – if someone does have a disability where they can’t hear well, they may not want to publicly raise their hand. If there is a microphone available, it is not a blow to a speaker’s ego to use it – instead it allows everyone to hear a speaker better, accounting for all learner’s ability to hear well.

2. Font Size Matters – While the amount of copy that should be on a slide (or using slides at all) is a whole separate post – let’s assume for the moment that slides with copy are still some part of your presentation. As you create those slides, is the font size ideal for you sitting in front of your computer? If it was projected and you were in the front row? We know that room configuration varies – sometimes the learning space is long and narrow so that those attending may be a far distance from the screen. If they can’t see what the slide says, then whatever it was meant to teach will not land. We don’t know what visual obstacles our learners may have – and while there are a number of ways we can try to help them see what we are presenting, at a bare minimum our slides should be able to be read just as easily by the person in the back of the room as the person in front of the room.

3. Stretch Break (i.e. it’s no fun to be a sardine) – While the exact timing of how long an audience can remain seated, without moving, and still be mentally engaged is a point with many opinions – as speakers there are a few reflective questions that can help. Is my session so long that people would appreciate a 5-minute bio break? Are there subject matter transitions in my presentation where having the audience stand and stretch for a moment (and even give each other a hi-five for interaction) could serve as a brain sorbet, cleansing the mental palette for what is coming next? Are people seated so close to one another that taking a moment to stand and stretch (or sit and stretch!) will help them reengage with the learning?

Want more ideas? Check out these resources:

1. 100 Things Every Presenter Needs to Know About People – by Susan M. Weinschenk, Ph.D. takes research on how people learn and provides accessible approaches to how speakers can make greater impact.

2. Inclusive Speaker Orientation – This free online course from the Linux Foundation starts with a broader understanding of Diversity and Inclusivity and then narrows focus to how we are more aware in our sessions.

Audience Feedback Loops

As organizations engage in the process of creating a strategic vision and subsequent plan, there is an important question in the process that should come between their why (i.e. their vision/mission) and their how (i.e. their goals/measures of success/action plan) – the question of who.

As they look ahead, once leadership has reached consensus on the impact they want to make in the future – why they will exist – for member-based organizations the next question concerns their audiences. Namely, as they look at a future horizon, who are the audiences they will primarily serve in the next 12 months to progress down the path to their multi-year vision.

Once chosen, an organization’s Board will need to hear from and about these audiences in greater depth. After all, while we task the Board of Directors with discussing items of import to the organization and making subsequent fiscal, legal, and strategic decisions, we rarely structure feedback loops of input so they consider perspectives outside of those they bring to the table from their own experience or network. Simply put – if they have prioritized focusing on creating programmatic solutions that address the needs of core audiences, then they should hear on a continual basis the perspective and needs of those audiences to best align their decisions.

 Here are just a few ways to structure connection of audience voice with Board listening:

1. Audience Advisory Groups – These groups need no official term of service. When someone joins or participates in your organization and belongs to one of the core audiences that you Board has identified, have an open offer to add them to that audience’s advisory group. Typically, these groups can be sent 2-3 questions of strategic input 2-4 times a year. Those that join the group never have to meet in person, never have to travel to serve, and can still give their voice to your organization, presenting a broad range of response to the Board for consideration.

2. Core Audience Task Force – As the audiences the organization prioritizes continues to evolve as disruption changes the landscape, it can be useful for a Board to form a unique task force for each audience to focus on outreach and listening. Rather than a permanent committee, these can exist for as long as the audience is a priority, and the scope of how the Task Force listens to the audience can evolve over time. The Task Force can choose to run ongoing phone interviews, informal focus groups, or quick-impact polls on social media as a few examples. As the results continue to be collected, those findings that are heard time and again can be powerful input points for Board consideration.

3. Board Audience Representatives – Once streams of input start to flow up to the Board level, there will be a need for translation and transmission of what was received. One approach is to assign a singular prioritized audience to a corresponding single Board member. These Board members can be given standing time on the agenda, even if for a few minutes, to share what they are hearing from the audience they represent. When major items of organization focus and investment arise, these Board members will add the perspective they have heard from their prioritized audience. By creating an expectation of listening mastery to designated Board members, their work should, in turn, elevate the listening mastery of the Board as a whole. 

Listening as a Board Competency: Strategy Input

As nonprofits, there are a number of universal areas of oversight where a Board of Directors needs to function – domains that include fiduciary, legal, strategy in all its iterations (vision, direction, planning, accountability, transmission), and governance/volunteer models. In their role, Boards are brought together in meetings, receive reports, dialogue on key topics, and make decisions that ultimately create the path that the organization will pursue. What is all too often missing are ongoing lines of input that expand the Board awareness of what is happening in the field and within the organization outside of their own perspective and network. This is the first in a series of articles on the need to develop listening as a board competency.

Strategic planning is part and parcel of the Board experience. Though methodology may vary, some areas they may focus on include creating a future vision for the organization, align the current mission/vision, focus on the audiences the organization needs to prioritize, their representative needs, and the solutions the organization is best fit to provide. A key step that is all too often missing in the strategy process is providing the Board with varied sources of input to the strategic conversation they have during planning. While for some organizations this need is fulfilled by environmental scans or member satisfaction surveys, these methods – while providing an accurate snapshot of a moment in time – don’t account for ongoing shifts in our ever-changing environment. If in their planning we want our Boards to be considering perspectives besides their own, we need to better seed the avenues of input where they can choose to listen.

One example of how to do to solicit broader strategy input comes from The American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE).  AIChE recently provided an open call for input into their upcoming strategic planning work through an online survey. While the deadline has passed, you can see how they framed it here. There are a few interesting points to note:

·      They are explicit about the channels where they are seeking input: The information is being solicited through several vehicles, including focus groups (via Webex), Engage discussion questions, and this survey.

·      They are not only looking for member input: AIChE is seeking input from current members, potential future members, and stakeholders. AIChE invites all chemical engineers and bio-related engineers across industries and specializations — as well as student engineers and stakeholders in allied professions — to complete this survey.

·      They are explicit in where they are seeking input:

  • Trends that impact our profession and the industries in which we work and study
  • What chemical and bio-related engineers — at all career levels — want from a professional society
  • Products and services sought by members and customers
  • Membership needs and professional concerns of specific member types — including students, young professionals, and graduate students
  • Strengths and weaknesses of AIChE
  • AIChE’s role in government policy
  • They are also explicit in the input commitment: Clicking on the link below will take you to a survey where you’ll be asked to complete up to six questions.

It will be interesting to hear what kind of response they receive from which audiences, and how that shapes the strategy they craft – but even the premise, that there is something to learn and listen to from the community at large, will start their strategy work from a broader perspective.

Take-away questions to think about from this approach:

–         Should an organization’s strategic vision and plan be for the membership, or with the membership? The American Chemical Society attempts the latter with their summary of the goals in their plan, what they have achieved, and a tab for each where members can get involved in pursuing continued success.

–         In an age of too-many-surveys, how can your organization solicit continual feedback and insight loops that don’t get lost in the survey-clutter, and aren’t single snapshots in time like environmental scans or member satisfaction surveys?