Once Again: How to Keep a Nonprofit Board Informed.
By: Eugene Fram Free Digital Image
With high performing nonprofit boards, its members will rarely be invited by the CEO to participate in operational decisions. As a result, management will always have more information than the board. Yet the board still needs to know what is happening in operations to be able to overview them.
The name of the game is for the CEO to communicate the important information and to keep directors informed of significant developments. Still, there’s no need to clutter regular board meetings by reporting endless details about operations.
Following are some practical suggestions:
• An executive director, in response to a blog post I presented, provided a most creative approach. He and the board chair have a weekly conference call, usually on Thursday. Other board members are invited to join the call if they have time. A few days later, the ED sends a brief e-mail to all board members highlighting the important events that took place during the week. (He joked that his high school English teacher would never approve of its format, but the board is always full informed.)
• Probably the more traditional way of keeping board members aware of what is happening within the organization is to have staff frequently make short presentations. I have seen this approach used in dozens or nonprofit board meetings without success. Two problems frequently occur. First the staff person is so enthusiastic about an opportunity board that the presentation continues well beyond the allotted time, and, second, board members raise “micromanagement” level questions, that further extend the presentation session. To solve these problems, the board chair needs to suggest to those seeking more than appropriate detail that the questions can be answered “offline.” In addition, the chief executive should meet with the staff person well ahead of the meeting to make sure that the material to be presented is succinct, and the staff person is well aware of the time constraint. A “dress rehearsal” might even be appropriate for some staff personnel
• Another technique is to use a consent agenda. With a consent agenda, routine and previously agreed upon items are organized together in the pre-meeting agenda and then, hopefully, approved as a group. If one or more board members question an item in the group, it is placed on the agenda for the next board meeting. This process eliminates the time consuming effort of having a separate discussion for each item.
• A third controversial way is for the chief executive to meet with board members informally about every quarter. (It is controversial because many nonprofit CEOs feel this is too time consuming.) Occasionally, these meetings are with two directors at one time. At the sessions, the chief executive can discuss the more “entrepreneurial or wild ideas” that might need testing and update board members on operational decisions in greater detail. Some of the meetings can happen quite informally, before or after a committee meeting or after a monthly board meeting. Others can occur at appropriate social events. This is a controversial suggestion, as some CEO’s report they don’t have sufficient time for such a rigorous meeting schedule. My observations of dozens of CEOs indicates that the very best manage to develop the schedule.
It is important to have the executive’s assistant keep track of the meetings and then to have authority to make new appointments to meet the quarterly schedule. Obviously, the CEO would need to meet with the board chair more often. If the board is a national one, meeting less frequently or a scheduled phone call are appropriate. One veteran CEO I know meets frequently with two board members. One is a long serving member, and the other is a newly appointed board member.
Keeping important information flowing to the board is critical to having a high performing nonprofit. It is a significant CEO responsibility.
Gene, thanks for another helpful blog.
I have a private university board with no term limits. Out of 30+ maybe twelve have served for more than 20 years. They did agree to change the bylaws to have term limits (3 x 3). Now the question is how to implement that in a fair way.
Any thoughts on making the transition?
Bob Robert C. Andringa, Ph.D. Nonprofit CEO and Board Advisor 7325 E. Princess Blvd. Apt 3106 Scottsdale, AZ 85255 623-692-7611 mobile firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com Partner, TheAndringaGroup.com http://www.theandringagroup.com/ Partner, boardeffectiveness.org http://boardeffectiveness.org/
Bob: It looks like you are facing a university cultural pattern where trustees remain for decades.(Probably to continue relations with highly valued donors.) RIT’s board has attempted to solve the challenge by having two trustee categories-Action and Emeriti.
Trustees can join the Emeriti group voluntarily or graciously move into it at age 70. The age cutoff was recently reduced 75 to 70. Emeriti trustees continue to be invited board meetings as observers.