Case Study: Failing to
Use the Board

What’s wrong: The chief executive fails to use the time, talent, and treasure of the board for constructive purposes.

Why this is a problem: As the authors of Governance as Leadership have observed, board members provide necessary capital to organizations: intellectual, reputational, political, and social capital. An organization that is not using its board productively is missing out on opportunities. The board of directors and the chief executive are members of a team, with a shared responsibility to achieve the mission of the organization. When the team is not working together effectively, the organization’s results and reputation can suffer.

Case: Lorna Nathanson was a frustrated and disengaged board member. When she was asked to become a member of the board of the Clowns of America Association, she knew it was because of her expertise in public relations and marketing. She was eager to help the organization.

However, she found out quickly that the board was a board in name only. Whenever she made a suggestion the chief executive, James Randall, would smile and say, “Yes, we’ve tried that” or “We thought about that but we can’t really do it because…”

Nathanson had coffee with a few longtime board members after a recent meeting and found out that this was common practice. They were concerned — Randall always did everything himself, and sometimes not that well. He didn’t know how to ask for help or to use the strength and the expertise of the board. Nathanson thought, “Well, this is going to be a waste of my time for the next three years.”

What could have been done differently: Ideally, a chief executive has an opportunity to recognize each board member’s areas of expertise and other strengths that could be used to aid an organization in accomplishing its goals. Why bring so many smart, ambitious, well-connected, dedicated people together and then not tap into that potential? Effective boards build their ranks strategically and bring individuals on board who are committed to using critically needed skills to expand the reach of the organization. But it is a two-step process — finding the right people and then being prepared to use them. Clarifying expectations for potential board members is also important. In the case above, Nathanson may have had unrealistic expectations about how she would be used as a board member.

What to do now: Working with the chief executive to ensure understanding of need, time, and resources is important. Potential questions for a discussion between Randall and the board chair might be

• How can we appropriately manage board member expectations in this regard?
• How can we ensure that the strengths of board members are fully utilized?
• How can we best manage the process of utilizing board members and best integrate their work within the context and time constraints of organizational need?

Here are some examples that a board and chief executive can do to recognize and increase board value in a way that best meets the needs of the organization:

• Conduct regular strategic thinking sessions about current and future issues.
• Have a “Rolodex” party to see who knows whom.
• Send out an S.O.S. asking for specific help on particular projects.

There is an opportunity for Nathanson to start the conversation with the board chair, perhaps suggesting that some time be dedicated at an upcoming board meeting to generatively discuss board engagement:

• How can we ensure that this board is more engaged, both individually and collectively?
• What would engagement look like?
• How would this further the mission?

From there, specific strategies can be developed that would help to shift the organizational culture and raise consciousness with the chief executive that the board will expect more in the future.

This is an excerpt from the book Trouble at the Top: The Nonprofit Board’s Guide to Managing an Imperfect Chief Executive by Katha Kissman.

More Information
Table of Contents
Introduction