While there are notable examples of good governance we regularly encounter practices that disengage both board members and staff. In turn, this hinders performance and devalues the board’s contribution.

Consider some of the symptoms:

• Board members having difficulty distinguishing governance from management and becoming involved with activities related to the day-to-day running of the business. In doing so they become managers which has an unhelpful impact on staff: Senior housing officers can feel micro-managed. More junior officers can feel distracted and burdened – after all, it may seem career-limiting saying ‘no’ to a board member. 
• Senior executives being allowed to overstep their leadership role so board becomes a rubber-stamp to the ideas and plans of the executive. The board may check for regulatory and legal compliance but fundamentally it has surrendered its leadership function. 
• Commitment that is too narrow, whereby board membership becomes largely characterised by attendance and participation. Individual board members are, for example, utilised primarily for technical expertise (e.g. finance) rather than the full array of talents and leadership they could offer. 
• Strategic discussion becoming emaciated, limited in scope, or usurped by operational issues. As Social Housing’s Derek Joseph observes: “Too often, board meetings discuss mundane matters at [the] expense of economic strategy.” A consequence of this can be that the board becomes a group of important people doing relatively unimportant work.

“Developing the board is an ongoing commitment that is difficult to prioritise when money is tight. But risk, uncertainty and looming self-regulation are likely to reveal holes in even the most robust skills set.”
Arvinda Gohil, Consultant

Such situations  can really blunt the critical leadership work of boards. In contrast, good quality governance can infuse an organisation with the confidence, guidance, and accountability necessary for sustainable success. These key questions can help boards become a richer and more valued asset to executives, staff, customers, and the board members themselves.

What is the working capital of this board and how can it be better utilised?
By ‘capital’ we mean the breadth of board talents, skills, experience and expertise that can be invested into securing the success of the organisation. Unfortunately we find that only a portion of this capital is typically put to work. To rectify this it often helps to map out the known capital of the board under these four headings:

• Technical: A board member has professional expertise, such as legal or financial.
• Reputation: A board member is well known and their name adds kudos to the organisation in the external environment.
• Experience: A board member has considerable experience either from working in the sector or being a tenant.
• Talent: Unique aspects of personality that make one person stand out from the next. For example, we work with a board member who was appreciated primarily for his technical expertise. But, on consideration, it was clear that he had a natural way of establishing warm relationships with stakeholders. His role was adapted in recognition of this, allowing him to successfully focus on initiating relationships that relevant housing officers would then take on.

Once mapped out, actions can then be developed to make better use of the capital and, of course, the gaps are often as informative as the inclusions!
In our experience, board member talent is typically underused - even ignored – to the detriment of the associations they serve.

What is the board’s typical leadership conversation and how is it adding long-term value?
Monitoring discussions is an essential health-check for boards. To avoid straying into operational issues or even “mundane matters” we recommend that boards focus
 their conversation on the following points:

• Exercising strategic thought regarding challenges from the external environment.
• Verifying the Executive’s delivery on the purpose, values and vision of the organisation. 
• Challenging the prevailing point of view and ensuring a diversity of perspective. 
• Driving the customer agenda. In the words of Peter Drucker, “A business is defined by the want the customer satisfies when he or she buys a product or service. To satisfy the customer is the mission and purpose of every business.”

How are board members being helped to regularly recalibrate or reframe their leadership contribution?
As our colleague Arvinda Gohill says, “Developing the board is an ongoing commitment that is difficult to prioritise when money is tight. But risk, uncertainty and looming self-regulation are likely to reveal holes in even the most robust skills set.”

We recommend that board member development include raising the calibre of  board members’ questions; making best use of the working capital they offer; monitoring and addressing unhelpful behaviours (such as unnecessarily straying into operational issues); and nurturing commitment to contribution, rather than attendance and participation. It might therefore be helpful to regard the aim of board development as recalibrating or reframing the leadership contribution of members.

Download whole article as a pdf