The Empty Chair Syndrome

An analyst for a forensic crime lab, an attorney who works with the poor, and a young entrepreneur…all walk into a two-day board training session.

Sorry…no punchline.  It actually happened last week.

No joke.  These three were joined by 35 other board members, plus nine CEOs, at a foundation-sponsored board leadership and development program for nine non-profit ministries. Before the program ends, these highly committed board members will miss four days of work at their day jobs this spring because they want to improve their competencies in their board jobs.

Lately, I’ve been stunned at the commitment level of hundreds of board members.  One university professor had unavoidably missed two board meetings recently, so to be both physically and mentally present at a board meeting last month, she skipped a long-planned, albeit short, family vacation.

I’ve noticed that when board chairs—and the whole board—set the bar high, the “empty chair syndrome” is not a problem at board meetings.
 

Fruitfulness starts
with faithfulness.

And when boards are plagued with absent board members and unexcused absences are the norm, and not the exception, it's past time to address the syndrome.

My Christian camp and conference center colleagues often say, “You can’t minister to empty beds.” We could turn that around for board members, “You can’t spiritually discern God’s direction with empty chairs.”

Sometimes the empty chair syndrome has a simple solution:
   • Perhaps the board meeting agenda needs to be more compelling—with background reports, ready-for-the-minutes recommendations, and think pieces.
   • Maybe, as John Maxwell suggests, you need to have the meeting before the meeting.
   • Or maybe the board materials need to arrive sooner (7-14 days in advance)—with a call-to-prayer request for the fork-in-the-road decisions ahead.
   • Or the chair needs to reiterate the board attendance policies—and have one-on-one conversations (in person, if possible) with board members teetering on the edge.  (Sometimes there are legitimate reasons for absences, and with relief, a board member might appreciate the grace given to step down.)

Well-executed board meetings inspire high commitment.  And highly committed board members inspire board chairs and CEOs to deliver board meetings that are God-blessed and joy-filled.  We all experience deep satisfaction, and an indescribable sense of God’s leading in our lives together, when we have our board ducks in a row.

Galatians 5:22-23 reminds us, “But when the Holy Spirit controls our lives he will produce this kind of fruit in us: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control…”
 
QUESTION: Are you inspiring your board members to be faithful in board attendance—not for the rules, but for the Kingdom opportunities?

Big Egos and Hallway Power Plays

 

BOARD MEMBER TEMPTATION #6:
“To recruit new board members because of their position versus their passion.”

This is old school board recruitment:
   • We need a pastor on our board, preferably one from the largest church in our city, state or country.
   • We have legal issues, so who knows an attorney that could be on our board?
   • What about the board chair over at First Community? He’s on six boards and his resume is stunning!
   • Yikes! Our board is too old, too male and too white. We need some diversity.

Memo to All Boards:

Old school board recruitment doesn’t work and never did.

 

When you recruit board members for position (without their passion), you rarely get loyalty, high commitment, generous giving, or spiritually discerning decisions.  Instead, you’ll frequently get unexcused absences, big egos, lack of unity and hallway power plays.

It doesn’t have to be that way—and it must not be that way.

Board guru Ram Charan writes, “With the right composition, a board can create value; with the wrong or inappropriate composition, it can easily destroy value.” So getting the right people on your board bus is a foundational priority.
How? Your organization has hundreds, if not thousands, of volunteers and highly committed donors. Many of them, if appropriately cultivated over a 12 to 36-month process, would be extraordinary board members.  So don’t settle for a glowing resume from someone you don’t know, who has little knowledge of you, and zero passion for your ministry.

Instead, take time and invest as much energy, due diligence, prayer and spiritual discernment as you would if you were recruiting a new CEO. “As the board goes, so goes the ministry.” For more help, check out the ECFA Governance Toolbox Series No. 1: Recruiting Board Members.

Questions: Who owns the year-round process of cultivating, recruiting, orienting and engaging board members? Is there a spiritual discernment process in place to guide your direction?

The Train Wreck Waiting to Happen

BOARD MEMBER TEMPTATION #5:
“To tilt, perhaps by default, toward one of the three unhealthy board scenarios—and miss the extraordinary opportunity to leverage the ‘Governance as Leadership’ model.”

Richard P. Chait, William P. Ryan, and Barbara E. Taylor, co-authors of Governance as Leadership: Reframing the Work of Nonprofit Boards, write that there are three unhealthy governance models:

UNHEALTHY MODEL #1: GOVERNANCE BY FIAT.  In this scenario, trustees displace executives. Here the board does staff work.  Sometimes the staff is incompetent so the board jumps in. Often the board enjoys staff work.  Either way, it’s dysfunctional.

UNHEALTHY MODEL #2: GOVERNANCE BY DEFAULT. Here both the trustees and the nonprofit executives disengage.  No one has their eye on the governance ball—and the important work of governance is minimized.  Left undone, it’s a train wreck waiting to happen.

UNHEALTHY MODEL #3: LEADERSHIP AS GOVERNANCE. This might sound appropriate, but it’s cockeyed.  Here the nonprofit staff displace the trustees.  The CEO and/or senior team make decisions that should be in the governance arena.  This happens frequently with founder-led organizations and “good old boy” boards.  Often, the organization appears to be operating smoothly.  Internally, this dysfunction never ends well. Sooner or later, someone will pay.

So it is possible that your board is seeking to be God-honoring in your stewarding roles, but operating from an unhealthy model—quite likely a model that is not in sync with a Christ-centered foundation? 
While this book is not faith-based,
the big idea aligns beautifully with biblical principles.

TYPE III GOVERNANCE. This fourth scenario, the healthy one, the authors label “Type III Governance.”  Here the trustees and executives collaborate.  They both understand their appropriate roles, but unlike most boards, the staff affirms the board members when they upgrade to “generative thinking.” (My take: governance as leadership maximizes the spiritual gifts of board members per Romans 12, Ephesians 4 and 1 Corinthians 12.)

So what’s “generative thinking?”  The authors use a variety of definitions to explain this cognitive process of excelling boards: sense-making, reflective practice, framing organizations, personal knowledge, etc.  I liked “sensible foolishness” the best.

Generative thinking goes beyond “fiduciary governance” (Type I) and beyond “strategic governance” (Type II).  This “Type III” approach typically involves three steps:
   1) Noticing cues and clues: different people can take the same data and arrive at different meanings;
   2) Choosing and using frames: understanding the “fuzzy front end” of a product development process, for example; and
   3) Thinking retrospectively: the counter-intuitive high value of “dwelling on the past” to understand patterns that might impact the future.

“Generative thinking is essential to governing,” the authors point out. “As long as governing means what most people think it means—setting the goals and direction of an organization and holding management accountable for progress toward these goals—then generative thinking has to be essential to governing. 

"Generative thinking is where goal-setting and direction-setting originate. The contributions boards make to mission-setting, strategy-development, and problem solving certainly shape organizations.  But it is cues and frames, along with retrospective thinking, that enable the sense-making on which these other processes depend.”

Yikes!  Think about this final zinger from the authors: “And a closer examination of nonprofits suggests something else: Although generative work is essential to governing, boards do very little of it.”

Inspire one or more board members to read this book—and report on it at your next board meeting or retreat.

QUESTION: The authors comment, “in their ‘day jobs’ as managers, professionals, or leaders of organizations, trustees routinely rely on generative thinking, so much so they have no need to name it or analyze it. They just do it. But in the boardroom, trustees are at a double disadvantage.  Most boards do not routinely practice generative thinking.”  They add, “When it comes to generative governing, most trustees add too little, too late.” Do you agree?








 

Embracing the Loyal Opposition!

Here’s the fourth “board member temptation” on my list:

BOARD MEMBER TEMPTATION:
“To rely on my past board and organizational experiences—and rest on my laurels—versus becoming an active life-long learner in board governance best practices.”

This week I attended a CEO/Board Chair Symposium. I was not a presenter, I was a learner.

I was reminded again how important it is to not rest on our laurels (been there, done that, bought the t-shirt).  Over four days of presentations, I picked up at least a dozen take-aways that inspired me to be a more effective board chair. I walked away with empathy, insights and practical tools.

For example, at the next board meeting I chair, I will mention that our best ideas will be more rigorously vetted when we give permission for board members to play one of four roles:
   • Mover—the person who presents the idea.
   • Followers—the board members who support the action.
   • Loyal Opposition—those analytical and discerning few who ask the tough questions and challenge the mover and followers to think about a wider range of issues and, perhaps, unintended consequences that might result.
   • Framers (or Re-framers)—those insightful board members who take a good idea and make it better, or re-frame it (or customize it) so it fits better with your unique mission and strategy.

The presenter one morning, Nilofer Merchant, also challenged us about the importance of listening to the questions that are being asked. (During an exercise at our workshop table, most of us confessed that we were very ineffective listeners. It was embarrassing!)

Now, rather than the majority of board members grimacing at the nay-sayers, I hope we’ll create a culture of embracing and encouraging them—and blessing them for being the Loyal Opposition. (And isn’t “Loyal” such a perfect word for the tone we’d like to create in our board meetings?)

That was just one of a dozen ideas and tools I picked up as part of my own commitment to life-long learning as a board member.

The Apostle Paul embraces life-long learning when he writes in 2 Timothy 2:2 (TLB), “For you must teach others those things you and many others have heard me speak about. Teach these great truths to trustworthy men who will, in turn, pass them on to others.”

QUESTION: How are you inspiring your board members to be life-long learners? Magazine subscriptions, BoardSource membership, webinars, books, articles, “Ten Minutes for Governance” at each of your meetings, or engaging your board with the ECFA Governance Toolbox Series?

Stop and Smell the Culture!

Here’s another “board member temptation” on my list:

BOARD MEMBER TEMPTATION: 

“To assume that all Christ-centered organizations
have similar organizational cultures.”

What happens when a new board member (and even a new CEO) doesn’t take time to study your ministry’s unique and distinct culture? He or she could run the risk of dramatically misreading and misunderstanding critical, historical and theological nuances that matter. Cultures grow either by default or design—and Peter Drucker often shared this warning:

“Company cultures are like country cultures.
Never try to change one.
Try, instead, to work with what you've got.”

Suppose that same new board member, recently named to the strategic planning task force, challenges the board with this often-repeated powerful idea, “Vision helps your dreams become bigger than your memories.”

I love that quotation, but what could go wrong? Well…what if the organization’s founder is still alive and highly influential? What if the focus on the future is misread as a repudiation of the past? What if cheerleaders for your ministry’s history are your major donors? What if the tribal stories are replaced by the “Vision 2020” campaign” brochures? Oops!

Past seminary board chair and corporate CEO, Max De Pree, author of Leadership Is an Art, alluded to culture issues when he said: “One of the important things leaders need to learn is to recognize the signals of impending deterioration.”  He kept a list and observed that leaders, especially in large organizations, fail to see the signs of entropy, including: 
   1) a tendency toward superficiality
   2) no longer having time for celebration and ritual
   3) a growing feeling that rewards and goals are the same thing
   4) when people stop telling tribal stories or cannot understand them
   5) when problem-makers outnumber problem-solvers.  

His list was longer—but you get the idea.My counsel for those board members with rolled-up sleeves and teeth clenched for the next—but possibly premature—visionary initiative? 

Chill out!

Yes—for the Christ-centered board member on a mission—time is short.  But slow down and smell the roses. Enjoy the journey. Pray. Spiritually discern God’s voice. And…before you push too hard on the “Vision 2020” campaign, be sure you understand the unique calling and unique culture of the ministry.

A.W. Tozer said, “It is not what a man does that determines whether his work is sacred or secular, it is why he does it. The motive is everything.” So study your ministry’s culture and you may uncover the rich and thoughtful motivation that explains, in part, God’s blessing on the past. It could be a key to future impact.

BOARD EXERCISE: At your next board meeting, divide into groups of two for 10 minutes, and ask each group to bullet-point your ministry’s unique culture.  Share the results and then ask board members for one-minute fill-in-the-blank responses to: “Wow! I learned that…”

Battle-ready Boards

In my last blog, I mentioned my running list of what I call “board member temptations.”  Here’s another one:

BOARD MEMBER TEMPTATION: 

“To confuse the three hats of a board member:
governance, volunteer and participant.”

Here are four snapshots of recent conversations:

1) A well-meaning board member prodded others at a board meeting, “But if we’re not volunteering in numerous areas of this ministry—how will we know if our ministry is doing a good job or not?”

2) A board chair whined to me that board members are bringing their “volunteer hat” concerns directly to the board meeting—and not addressing those items through the appropriate staff channels. “Those issues have no place on our board’s agenda,” he said.

3) A CEO grimaced that the board had established a task force to research a topic that is unrelated to the board’s agreed-upon policy governance operating model.

4) Another CEO shared that his board members are hopelessly divided on the governance role of the board. Three board members micro-manage, yet the other board members apparently don’t have the character or the courage to address this dysfunction. (The CEO is seeking to “pastor” them out of this hole, but he will likely hit a dead-end and resign.)

THE SOLUTION? Sooner or later, every board must define roles and responsibilities—for the board, the board chair and the CEO. Some boards are proactive and document their operating philosophy in advance—before trouble hits the fan. 

Other boards, sadly, wait for the crisis before clarifying board roles—but that’s a terrible time to do your best governance work. Peter Drucker said,

“Fortunately or unfortunately,
the one predictable thing in any organization
is the crisis.
That always comes.”  

He added that the job of the leader is to build an organization that is “battle-ready.”

The Christ-centered board knows that a board’s operating style is rooted in its theology, its philosophy and the God-given past experiences of every board member around the table. The confusion over board hats (the governance hat, the volunteer hat, and the participant hat) will only get worse if you ignore the signs (like the four snapshots above).

There’s help!  Order the ECFA Governance Toolbox Series No. 2: Balancing Board Roles (The 3 Hats) and view the 12-minute DVD at your next board meeting. Give the Read-and-Engage Viewing Guide to each board member and leverage the ideas in the Facilitator Guide.  Then pray and discern how your board will specifically eliminate the confusion between the three hats.

QUESTION: When a new board member prospect is interviewing three current board members about your board’s operating style, would all three agree on how you balance the three hats: Governance, Volunteer, and Participant?

What Everyone Knows Is Usually Wrong

I keep a running list of what I call “board member temptations.”  Here’s a common one:

TEMPTATION:

“To make board decisions based on anecdotes and less-than-stellar analysis—versus requiring thoughtful and objective data, reports and dashboards that are in alignment with a God-inspired mission statement, Big Holy Audacious Goal (B.H.A.G.), crystal clear annual S.M.A.R.T. goals, and a strategic plan rooted in spiritual discernment.”

So this week when I read the new book, The Practical Drucker: Applying the Wisdom of the World’s Greatest Management Thinker, by William A. Cohen, I was reminded of this temptation. Peter Drucker, the father of modern management preached:

“What everyone knows
is usually wrong.”

The author notes, “What Drucker wanted to emphasize was that we must always question our assumptions, no matter from where they originate. This is especially so regarding anything that a majority of people ‘know’ or assume without questioning.” 

We’ve all been there.  The board is wrestling with an important decision—and a board member pontificates, “Well everyone knows that ABC equals XYZ! Let’s just go with Plan A and move on.”

Caution! We must not be intimidated by the bluster or the “everyone knows” rhetoric of a self-confident, self-appointed spokesperson for personal opinion that masquerades as objective truth.  We must not yield to the temptation to substitute anecdote for analysis. The voice and wisdom of Drucker needs to echo through our meetings:

“What everyone knows is usually wrong.”

In our journey to be Christ-centered board members, our opinions and interactions must be grounded in graciousness and generosity first, and then supported by data and discernment. In addition to the wisdom from the world’s greatest management thinker (who was also a Christ-follower), we are abundantly blessed to have direct access to the One the hymn describes as “Immortal, Invisible, God Only Wise.”

QUESTION: In board meeting interactions, how will you inspire your members to graciously move from anecdote-based decisions to data-based and discernment-based decisions?