Home   Resources   Articles   The Renegade Board

Symptoms and Cures - The Renegade Board


A few years ago I was invited to conduct a workshop for fifty CEO's and board members of non-profit organizations on the topic of trustee leadership. This is a subject near and dear to my heart but not yet normative in the field of governance. As I looked out at the tables of mostly pensive faces and attentive bodies, I thought of the tremendous influence each of them had in shaping their institutions and in developing an even larger network - community. My task was to remind them of this.

I began, “The board is composed of individual leaders and is a leadership group. The latter descriptor reflects its unique role and responsibility for governance of an organization.” I went on to describe depth education for the development of trusteeship and conducted some brief group discussions. During a 15 minute break I had the opportunity to speak with a number of CEO's and was disconcerted with what they had to say. In low toned voices or whispers they confided: “I would not trust my board to do this...They don't know this they don't know that...I keep my board at arm's length, that way they can do less damage...If you let them get too involved they try to take over...I make them visible and give them recognition but don't let them get too involved...Have you ever seen a board that operates like this (as trustees)?”

This litany of confessions was sobering.  Not one person wanted to make their concerns public. I knew that if not discussed, their resistance to giving the board more authority would not be adequately addressed. I realized how threatening my call for stronger governance leadership was when juxtaposed with their perceptions and experiences.

After the break I found a way to address their anxiety and fear. I theoretically tackled the shift in the balance of power when a staff driven organization really acknowledges the authority that the board has. The problem they and I then began to address was how to negotiate the shared authority between staff and board. In retrospect, I was helping them to avoid having a “renegade” board.

Balancing Staff and Board

Board members are generally the “best and brightest” in the community.  They are smart and accomplished citizens with well deserved reputations for getting things done.  They want to be of help and they want the organization to succeed. Given this, why do so many CEO's feel the need to distance and/or protect themselves from their board?  I believe it is because of experiences with boards that lose their way - boards that manage poorly and exercise authority rather than lead. It takes extraordinary effort to create boards that know how to lead – boards that know how to exercise authority appropriately and constructively.

The CEO and staff have the constant press of day-to-day responsibilities for service delivery. Their focus in working with the board is on the completion of administrative tasks and accomplishment of program and financial goals. Concerns about the board's leadership ability surface only when there is an immediate need or crisis. CEOs will continue to lack trust in their capacity to lead until boards recognize that they share the major responsibilities for the development of their governance leadership.

Too often, boards just “show up” and rubber stamp staff decisions. These boards are no worse than those who constantly assert their power and step over boundaries to intervene in, or perform staff functions. Reading about board and staff roles and responsibilities is a first step toward remedying this problem. However, a full and open discussion followed by negotiation of roles, responsibilities, boundaries, and accountability is essential. There is no substitute for doing this. The consequence of not is the emergence of a renegade board.

Symptoms of a Renegade Board

So how do you know if your board is headed down a renegade path? Here are just a few symptoms to be on the look out for.

  1. Uninformed: The board as a whole is not well informed about the organization's history, culture, capacity, and programs.

  2. Decisions are made by a small group: A small group (i.e. executive committee) operates as the full board. The decisions are made and brought to the board as a fait accompli.

  3. Disconnect between the CEO and board President: There is not a constructive partnering relationship between the CEO and the board President.  Instead of seeing each other as equals, one pulls rank and treats the other as a subordinate.

  4. Defensiveness: When a serious problem arises, the board reverts to scapegoating and blaming, reinforcing the tendency to deny or avoid conflict.

  5. Lack of diversity and respect: The ability to hear and respect differences in the board or with staff is dramatically reduced causing innovation and imagination to suffer.

  6. Groupthink: There is peer pressure for members to think and act alike; resulting in “stepford” behavior.

  7. Lack of communication:  Committees operate in isolation, establishing fiefdoms. They may fail to include staff in their deliberations and decisions.

  8. Few benchmarks: The board does not have a process by which it determines whether it is doing a good or bad job of governance leadership.

  9. Dishonoring norms: Board members observe inappropriate behavior from their peers, but don't confront it in meetings or observe established norms.

  10. Narrow-mindedness: The “kill the messenger” mentality is in operation, and negative feedback precipitates an unhealthy sense of board cohesiveness and closed mindedness.

The Dangers of a Renegade Board

The renegade board begins with the best intentions but, because it has no clear sense of identity and responsibility, it is subject to being reactive when any adversity strikes. It isn't tethered to an overarching sense of vision and mission. It lacks sufficient knowledge of the organization, but realizes that it is legally responsible for what happens, causing it to easily move into panic and premature problem solving mode. 

Lacking understanding and clarity, it inevitably crosses boundaries, setting up defensiveness among the staff who lack the depth of relationship necessary to trust and have little history of the boards' ability to deal effectively with problems. Behavioral measures that distinguish between board interference and appropriate involvement are lacking and the executive and governance relationships are likely to suffer because the boards' intent to help does not match its impact. The system begins to experience increased anxiety and the first casualty is communication. 

Furthermore, the renegade board runs on faulty information which heightens anxiety. When this happens, its attention focuses on everything and everyone except how it is functioning. It takes strong trustee leadership to understand these dynamics and take the necessary steps to lessen the anxiety of the board before trying to fix the real problems confronting the organization.

Developing a Healthy Board

Without being tethered to something greater than their own individual commitment and lacking clarity about roles and responsibilities, a well intentioned capable group of volunteers can end up becoming a renegade board. The best way to prevent a renegade board from forming is through continuous board education and development. This needs to be the highest priority in not-for-profit organizations, as the organizations existence relies on it.

I will leave you with a few tips for maintaining the health of your board:

  • Root all new members in what it means to hold the organization in trust™
  • Honor the norms for governance leadership
  • Discourage groupthink
  • View defensiveness as a red flag and give time to deal with the issues creating it
  • Assume best intentions but acknowledge the gap between intention and impact
  • Take responsibility for closing the gap
  • Don't be afraid to apologize – admission of making a mistake helps people to let go of the past and move on 

Lastly, remember that nothing lasts forever, not even a good board. It takes constant work – the retention of competent executive and staff leadership depends on excellence in governance leadership. Invest in it!

 “The misuse of power is most dangerous when leaders acting out of a sense of entitlement and excessive moral certainty, make secret decisions, restrict information flow, and exert unilateral control over a situation!”
The Center of Public Leadership
Harvard


Author: Katherine Tyler Scott
From Leading Ideas, newsletter of Trustee Leadership Development (TLD). Used with permission of TLD.

Katherine Tyler Scott is a Co-Founder and Managing Partner of Ki ThoughtBridge and author of several publications on governance leadership.

"This kind of training transcends deal-making and helps improve work and family relationships."

- Negotiation Workshop Participant
Comcast