The board feels it serves no real
purpose other than rubberstamping the leader’s ideas.
The leader goes into a board
meeting knowing there is a landmine but not knowing where it is.
The agenda and the decisions are
predetermined in meetings held between the chair and the leader so that the
board meeting feels like an FYI session.
The default position of the board
and the leader is mistrust.
A board member resigns mid-term
because “my schedule doesn’t allow me to give board matters the attention they
deserve”.
The leader has every decision
queried and critiqued against some invisible standard.
Leaders resign with anemic
explanations for their untimely departure.
The board is disappointed with
the lack of progress made by the leader in recruiting new board members.
Do one or
more of these situations resonate with you? It isn’t a full blown conflict
resolution circumstance (yet), so you aren’t ready for an outside viewpoint
yet. But the lack of conflict may very well be the problem. Parking lot
conversations and backroom deals serve to keep the conflict from floating to
the surface. Or feeding a family and paying a mortgage may be a higher priority
for the leader than the risk associated with resigning and finding a new job.
Refusing to
ignore the problem is the first step toward dealing with the problem. Rather
than taking Tylenol for the governance toothache, it may be time to call a
dentist. The short term pain will be well worth dealing with the long term
problem.
No comments:
Post a Comment