Terry can be opinionated about her experience serving on boards in the nonprofit sector. Most of Terry’s board work has failed to measure up to expectations, and some experiences were downright frustrating. At the last organization, board members were informed a transition from a management board to a policy, or governance model, would improve the board and organization’s performance. When all was said and done, Terry couldn’t discern a big difference. At every meeting, it was the same-old, same-old: board members debated budgets and where the money would come from, and everyone was expected to help raise donations. The agenda never varied. Aspirations for changing the situation of clients or revolutionizing board process failed to materialize.
If this is the sum total of your experience with being a governor, or board member on a governance board, then you’ve been short changed. Financial oversight and stewardship are important responsibilities of being a governor…but they are not the only ones. Many governance volunteers join the board of a nonprofit agency hoping to make a significant contribution. All too soon, the demands made on them as board members, together with the board’s conventional ways of getting things done, erode their enthusiasm. Concerns with sustainability get boiled down to examining ledgers instead of the longer-term well-being of the organization.
Disenchanted board members take heart: governance in the nonprofit sector has a champion in the Institute for Nonprofit Studies at Mt. Royal College in Calgary. The institute has pioneered a process for improving the practice of governance, and the results are encouraging for governors and organizations alike. To support volunteers in their quest for more rewarding governance experiences, the institute has produced a free, online guide, BEING A Governor: A Process for Board Development. It’s a learning tool for coming to grips with the question, “What does it mean to govern?”
The rewards for investing in board development
Most boards make the changeover from management board to governance model in an effort to reduce board members’ involvement in the day-to-day affairs of the organization. There is optimism that the new model will improve the board’s accountability for the longer-term viability of the organization, while reducing friction with the CEO and staff. The transition from one model to another is invariably a time of anxiety and high hopes.
What actually happens next depends on the new board’s attention to developing its governors. If board development is given a high priority, ensuring new members are able to function effectively, governors discover the rewards of serving on the governance model. If ongoing development of governors gets short shrift because of perceived time constraints, or failure to appreciate the significance of a reflective learning process for board development, the board very quickly regresses to old ways of getting its work done. It’s a recipe for disappointment, as governors like Terry can attest.
If you’re wondering if it’s worthwhile for your board to invest in a board development process like the institute’s, consider the story of the Developmental Disabilities Resources Centre (DDRC) in Calgary. Today, the board is at the forefront of changes in its sector, thanks to a commitment to engaging in discussion on what it means to govern the agency. It’s becoming a national leader in delivering services for people with special needs, people born with Down Syndrome or who are autistic. A little over a decade ago, it was moribund – it had lost sight of the agency’s original mandate, its funding had been drastically reduced by government, and it faced an uncertain future. The urgency of the situation forced the board to review the agency’s mission and values. A decision was made to promote inclusion and independence for people with developmental disabilities.
After wrestling with inconsistencies between the agency’s values and its actual delivery of services, the DDRC embarked on a journey to improve its governance. Through a process of peer learning, the organization successfully realigned its values with its delivery model. The board and agency continue to adapt to new challenges as the DDRC establishes a new paradigm for its programs and services.
Three typical roles played by boards of governance
Keith Seel, Ph.D., is the director of the institute. Sit him down over a cup of hot tea and he’ll launch into a spirited discussion of why good governance is rewarding for everyone concerned. Seel is equally frank about why many governance boards miss the mark when it comes to meeting expectations after a changeover to a governance model.
Drawing on the work of Chait, Ryan and Taylor in their book, Governance as Leadership (2005), Seel distinguishes between three kinds of governance.
1. Fiduciary Governance: the board is preoccupied with numbers and other financial matters, to the exclusion of longer-term planning and grappling with what it means to govern; the focus of governors is internal, rather than considering the organization’s wider involvement in the community. Protocol at board meetings rarely varies, and board governors believe their primary purpose is to mind the books, and monitor and approve management’s definition of problems and opportunities.
2. Strategic Governance: the board engages in periodic strategic planning, often in response to funders’ requests and not necessarily because it sees merit in the exercise. Management, including the CEO and other staff, are consulted about strategic priorities. At its most fruitful, the planning exercise opens board members up to new perspectives on the organization’s future in the community, and how to plan for upcoming challenges of a social, financial or political nature.
3. Generative Governance: the board engages in a process of reflective learning, adopting a big picture perspective on the organization and its role in the wider community. Governors learn to ask key questions regarding the organization’s mandate, and their own role in being governors. They become adept at discerning problems and making sense of complex variables. They learn to frame problems, respect differing perspectives, and collaborate by drawing on each other’s strengths. Accountability is high for both governors and staff.
A process for board development
The institute uses a process of reflection, discussion and discovery to abet leadership development on a governance board. This three-step process brings together groups of governors in a peer learning circle, to respond to “big questions”, the kind for which there are no easy answers. Examples of these questions include:
- What does it mean to be a governor?
- How can we work together most productively?
- What is the organization’s responsibility and role in the wider community?
No one thought to ask these questions on Terry’s board. Had they done so, Terry’s governance experience would have been quite different. If you think your board or organization is ready for the challenge, join us for the next installment in this series on improving the performance of governance boards. You’ll learn more about the institute’s process, and hear from board members whose lives have been enriched by participation in peer learning circles.
Andrée Iffrig is passionate about improving communication in organizations. She is the author of “Find Your Voice at Work: The Power of Storytelling in the Workplace”, and co-author with Keith Seel, Ph.D., of “BEING A Governor: A Process for Board Development”. Visit www.find-your-voice.ca for more information.
