As vice president of development for the national office of our organization, I am working with a board that is basically asleep. What's the most effective method to remind board members of their responsibilities, specifically regarding fundraising activity and seeking the support of other CEOs?
The role of each board member should be clear from the time you recruit him or her. A summary of board responsibilities is part of our new board member orientation. One board member actually went so far as to summarize what in the by-laws is relevant to board member responsibilities. When a couple of the board members seemed to have forgotten their duties a few months ago, I pulled out the summary and attached it to the board packet for the next meeting, saying that there had been a question about duties and that they are spelled out in the document. It had a salutary effect.
In my experience, setting annual goals for the board as part of the organization’s goals is effective. Schedule time at your board meetings every three or six months to review progress toward goals. Last year we took another step and created annual goals for every committee. These are derived from the organization’s goals, and like all good goals, are quantifiable (can be easily measured) and time certain (have a deadline). We review committee goals halfway through the year and again at year’s end. You can also have each committee chair rate the committee members annually and share those ratings with the board leadership. We also put out a grid of board attendance each year.
You can also have individual annual goals for each board member. We take a portion of each annual retreat for the board members to state what they expect to do in terms of time, talent, and financial support in the upcoming year. And we give these planning sheets back to them at the end of the year, when each board member does a self-evaluation. Some boards have just one-year terms for new members, and then the board leadership discusses with the board member whether they want to and should continue for a two-year term. Others have a probationary period for the first year of a three-year term, and a check-in at the end of that first year.
If you have some or all of these steps in place and some members are still nodding off, then I’d suggest a survey like one our board recently took from a national organization that focuses on nonprofit boards. It asks questions about the primary areas of responsibility, testing to see if the board members know what is expected, and whether they were getting the information they need from staff. They also rate their own performance in each area. Fiscal oversight, strategic planning, the mission and fundraising are some of the items addressed in the survey. Then show the results to the entire board and have a frank discussion about the results. If that’s too painful for you or the board chair, hire a consultant to do the survey, interpret the results, and facilitate the discussion. By the way, the board leadership should be the ones enforcing the expectations, not you or the executive director. If that’s not happening, you have a leadership issue. Peer-to-peer works best in keeping the board functioning at a high level, just as it does in fundraising itself.
If it makes you feel any better, this same national firm studied my industry and concluded that boards in our sector generally tested low on fundraising. So you’re not alone in looking for something like No Doz to cure the problem.
Comment
Thanks for your insightful response to my original question regarding a sleeping national Board. I will take your advice seriously, putting it into an action plan. Getting these Board members to go along with the plan is the challengd. This national Board are in stark contrast with highly-engaged Chapter Board members. When one sits on a national Board, there’s a sense of relaxing, being one-step-removed from the action at Chapter levels. Quite understandably, this ‘separation’ tends to see national Board members preferring to donate product and cash at tangible-results-oriented Chapter levels. That’s fine - except this organization must retain its national Builder Board membbers in order to attract building-industry-related suppliers & contractors (who, quite rightfully wish access to do business with these national builders). And, these suppliers are much more financially capable and deeper-pocketed than Builders themselves. That’s the conundrum.
Thanks for your insights. As a student of this multi-constituency game, your words give me confidence moving forward. I’ll check in with you to let you know if anyone’s following. Semper Fi. - jonathan steele
»» Posted by: Jonathan Steele on April 17, 2007 05:54 PM