By Julie Adamen

To recap from Part I, I have found that board members all have some combination of (personal) Agenda, Ego, Available Time and certain Personality Traits. But I have discovered that in almost all cases Board members have a Sense of Duty to their community, which drives them to serve.  

Beyond the above traits, the single thing they all have in common is their personal and professional diversity. From retirees to members of the workforce, from homemakers to executives, male and female, all racial and religious spectrums as well as those with or without association experience - Boards are an endless combination of 1) reasons they serve and 2) who they are personally and professionally. This incredible mix of dynamics affects how they develop as a functioning or non-functioning body. Board development is a case study in social dynamics,  and understanding these hurdles in development will give any manager a better handle on their interaction with the Board(s). But wait! Those are not the only dynamics that shape our Boards. There is more, much more. Let's continue our exploration of the political and social phenomenon of Board Development by considering just a few of the other dynamics.

Leadership

When any group of individuals is thrust together with a set of tasks to accomplish, they will sort themselves out in to a hierarchical system of leadership. It's no different for community associations.

Formal hierarchy. The formal hierarchy of an association is determined by two things. First, the governing documents set forth the offices, i.e., President, Vice President, etc. Who holds those offices is determined at the organizational meeting of the Board, usually held immediately following the Annual Meeting and/or Election of Directors. There, the members of the Board decide among themselves (sometimes actually voting by secret ballot) who will become President, Vice President, Treasurer, Secretary and members-at-large. This structural dynamic can have profound effect on whether or not the Board is able to gather information, deliberate, make decisions, take action and move forward.

Informal hierarchy. When a Board sorts itself in to specific offices, not always are those appointed placed in the position best suited for their talents. Thus, you may have a very weak president who is guided along by others within the Board possessing more charisma, influence, leadership, experience and talent to the betterment or the detriment of the organization. This is not something you can ignore. A weak president can leave the manager vulnerable and exposed if that manager is unable to create a relationship with the de facto Board leadership.  It is crucial to understand not just who is the titled (formal) leader of the Board, but also who really is in power.

Issues affecting Board development

The learning curve. Even in well-established associations, many circumstances provide that new Board members are less-than-informed when they take office. Here they are, having obtained their positions for varying reasons and all from different backgrounds, thrust in to a situation where they aren't sure what to do next, why to do it, or how. This is where the manager comes in: To guide the Board to a good understanding of their responsibilities and even more guidance on how to carry out those responsibilities. The learning curve may be steep or it may be shallow depending on social dynamic of the Board, and the manager's ability to assist them in their development.

The "scope of work" involved in being a Board member: Surprise!  Most new Board members have no real concept of the amount work facing them once elected. In addition to the "normal" functions of attending meetings, setting policy, choosing contractors et al,  new Board members are surprised at the amount of political work within the community that falls upon them. They find, as do most politicians, that talking about those decisions around the clubhouse is easy: The hard part is selling those decisions to the membership.  There is a lot more going on than meets the eye in any community, but just how much under current is truly a shock to most new Board members, and something to be recognized and accounted for by management, especially in the first months of a new Board.

Lack of a bigger picture. Those Board members elected on a narrow agenda - good or bad - are often in for a rude awakening as they realize it is a mere blip in the greater noise and scheme of politics, financial issues and of course the biggest surprise… More effectively pursued agendas of other Board members.  This can seriously hamper the development of a functional Board and can color all manner of policies and decisions due to the resentment of one Board member towards another: When a Board member loses position, or "face" in this manner, a crippling schism within the Board is a common outcome as hurt feelings trump logical discourse.  It can seriously hamper a Board's ability to effectively govern for weeks, months - even years.

Trust development.  Always keep in mind that a new Board of Directors will take some time to develop their inter-Board relationships as well as their relationship with management, staff and vendors.  As these relationships develop, so does their sense of trust. The chicken-and-egg conundrum being they must begin to develop trust to work together, but they must work together to develop trust. This period, this "no-trust" zone, can be very frustrating for the Board and for management as they struggle to form a cohesive group.

The Manager's role in Board Development

Taking in to account all the combinations available when community members are elected to serve on their Board of Directors, we are reminded of how complicated the job of community manager can be.  Most times, managers make split-second decisions on how best to manage new Boards without thinking about all of the variables that went in to each Board's make up. Some times that works, other times, not so much.  The manager may have made assumptions about the Board that seemed expeditious at the time; yet ultimately proved to be counterproductive for everyone involved. Here are some of the more common erroneous assumptions managers make about their new Boards that can cause heartburn for all involved, and some better ways to think about those situations. 

The Board will have immediate trust in the manager. Would be that it were true, but it is not, because they don't know the manager. Plus: They don't know each other or the business and they've never worked together as a group. To top it off, they have been thrust in a role of responsibility and accountably far greater than they anticipated. This scenario is not conducive to trust because they have no certainty based on past experience. Trust is developed through experience and over time, and is a fact with which management must live.

Better for all managers to assume they will have earn the trust of the Board of Directors. Despite the fact that the Board has a contract with a management firm and likely has gone over that contract with a fine-toothed comb, they really don't know what the manager actually does or if the manager is trustworthy. Do your job willingly and happily, answer their concerns.  Resist telling the  Board  a laundry list of functional  To Do's for the association. It doesn't build trust and can come off as a smokescreen. Show them trustworthiness by accomplishment and example. Remember, the more management bloviates about how much they know and how the Board should trust the manager's guidance, the longer it will take that Board to do so.

Instant social cohesion among the Board.  Very seldom is a new Board instantly cohesive. Remember - not only are they a product of their current or past work environment, socio-economic background, ethnicity or what have you, they may not even know each other! Board members need to learn their own and each other's boundaries, skills, strengths and weaknesses in order begin forming the well-oiled machine they will (hopefully) become. The social cohesion will be strengthened when personal, professional and agenda commonalities are found within the group. Those commonalities then become part of the glue that binds differing individuals. 

Assume a lack of cohesion among a new Board.  This means lowering management's expectations on the quality and quantity of the Board's decisions made in the first month(s). Let  them sort themselves out with as little input from management as possible. During this time, provide information and advice when asked, or when things are truly running off the rails. By doing this, the manager establishes themselves as an impartial consultant v. a perceived political operative - another big step on the way to gaining trust. Remember, the manager has no agenda.

The Board will get up to speed very quickly on the issues facing them. When a new Board comes in the manager often assumes that if they give the Board a packet of contracts, governing documents, a list of what is currently going on and a list of things that need to be taken care of immediately, the Board will immediately understand the issues, trust the information given them and make decisions right away.  Usually, this is not the case. In fact, overwhelming a new Board with documents and issues will more likely paralyze them with Information Overload rather than move them towards making decisions.  Maybe better to give the majority of information to the Board leadership, then, with their help and blessing, prioritize issues and judiciously present them over a period of time.

Assume the Board is moving at a regular, or even slow, speed, not Mach 10 like a busy manager.  Give them all the association information they need, but don't expect instant absorption. If there are specific, critical decisions that need to be made right away, they should first be reviewed separately with the Board President, allowing them  to formulate their own direction prior to taking the issues to the full Board. When a Board is new, they will respond better to "one of their own" (another member) than with an "outsider" (the manager). This process also allows the Board President to establish their political position of leadership with the rest of the Board.

The manager's job is to instruct the Board on what to do. Managers know their job inside and out and they know the Board's job inside and out, thus, it's natural for that manager to want to move from Point A to Point B as quickly and efficiently as possible. This means "teaching" Boards what they need to know and how they need act. Efficient, yes. Politically expedient? No. Adults do not want to be told they don't know what they are doing, and that is exactly how the "instructor" mentality of a manager is interpreted by Board members.

The most effective management style to apply is to GUIDE, not INSTRUCT, the Board. When the manager makes the mental switch to guide ("Show the way by leading and advising") instead of instruct ("Give directions for some task"), they are allowing the Board the freedom to grow, trust each other, develop social cohesion, sort themselves out as they see fit, take the time they need to get up speed and begin to trust the manager as an advisor. The manager is also giving themselves the gift of professionalism and credibility by being an impartial consultant, stepping in only when necessary and appropriate with information or advice.
   
In the early stages of Board development, there is much to be said for management standing back and allowing a Board to grow into its own identity.

It's all about trust

Whether among individually, among themselves or with staff and vendors, the function of a new Board all comes down to who can be trusted. Trust is the glue in social cohesion that changes a random group of individuals gathered together for the community good into a productive functioning Board. Barriers to that trust can be any one of a thousand variables that affect and afflict a group human beings thrust into a position of responsibility and yes, power over others, just a few of which we addressed in this, and the previous, article.  It's one of things that make management's job fascinating and exasperating all at once, as we struggle to heard this disparate group to the best outcomes for the community as a whole.

Recognizing the diversity of Board(s), and allowing them to develop with measured, appropriate input from you can make your life as management easier, and the Board, and the community's, life better.

Adamen Inc © 2010 All rights reserved.