I Want to Serve on a Board (But No Board Seems to Want Me)

I can recall a handful of times when I was directly approached by a person asking to serve on the boards of institutions where I was on staff. It always caught me off-guard. I guess it's because that somewhere along the line it was instilled in me (or maybe just implied) that one waited one's turn to be asked; that one's talents would be recognized and thus, sought. As a result, I'm always a bit wary of the person who openly declares their desire to serve on a particular board.

Some of my reticence comes from knowing that there may be many criteria in use by the nominating or board development committee -- criteria that an eager volunteer may or may not meet. The organization may be at a point where its current board needs to stabilize for a bit before adding new members or the current board might actually need to shrink in size. The organization may have decided to wait on adding board members until its strategic plan was completed, knowing that the plan would surface new or different leadership directions. And then there's the organizational culture with which board recruits need to mesh. These are all factors that may be well understood internally, but may not cross the mind of the wannabe.

So, what's the harm in making one's intentions known? Consider that there are a very few boards where seats are sought after; the vast majority of nonprofit boards suffer for lack of talent. Why wouldn't an organization want to cast a wide net?

Understanding that there is risk involved for both the seeker and the sought seems to me to be an important place to start. For the seeker, a board appointment is not unlike a job search. If one is serious, it seems logical that knowledge of an organization through hands-on voluntarism would be essential. Knowing where one's skills match the organization's needs, and being able to articulate that, is another key ingredient. Letting members of the nominating or board development committee know of your interest in serving can be helpful. But, understand that your name might enter a pool of candidates and that it could take some time to be considered for board service. Understand, also, that the call may never come.

For the organization, the process and the criteria by which board candidates are identified and selected ought to be as transparent as possible. Transparency affords the opportunity to cast the widest net. Process and criteria should be discussed openly in board and committee meetings, in membership communications, in any forum where the organization talks about voluntarism (newsletters, websites, etc.). Don't have a process? My advice is to develop one ASAP or continue to run the risk of electing anyone who may or may not be interested in board service. (I think it's been proven thousands of times that people hate to say "no" to a worthy nonprofit even when they should say "no, I'm not a good fit."

Photo: make your choice by orangejack

Back in the Saddle

MY LAST POST WAS NOVEMBER 2012, A LIGHT YEAR AWAY it seems, that marked the beginning of a long push toward completing a manuscript on history museum leadership with my co-author, Joan Baldwin. We finally submitted 350+ pages to our editor at Rowman & Littlefield this week. If all goes well, we expect the book to be available in early 2014. It's taken us two years to get to this point, so six more months or so of revision and production don't seem too long to wait until we can hold the final product in our hands (and you can, too!). The project put a lot of things on hold, including this blog. I'm glad to be back writing about intentional leadership -- leading by design -- for nonprofit boards and staffs. Certainly, my thoughts are now informed by the forthcoming book, in which Joan and I posit that nonprofits need to focus resources on leadership, not just management. Most cultural nonprofits are at a crossroad, as is the sector in general, where nothing is qu

Change for Your Board in 2010: A Polling Update

WE'RE A DAY INTO MY LAST POLL (SEE RIGHT) AND the responses are clustering in two areas: 1) removing dead wood from the board and 2) using better/different tools to make decisions/evaluate performance. There are still six days left for your colleagues to cast their vote! In the meantime, those of you who are in need of tools for decision-making might want to check my posts on taking stock here , here and here .

Three Most Important Nonprofit Executive Director Soft Skills

If you were asked to narrow down the list of executive director qualifications to the three most important, which ones would you identify? Would the list consist of soft skills, hard skills, or some combination? Would your list be based on the great ED you are or one you've worked for, or would it be your wish list for the ED you haven't been fortunate yet to work for? This was an assignment in my recent online class in leadership and administration for the American Association for State and Local History . I asked the class to review three-five advertisements for museum directors and analyze what these listings intimated about the organization’s past experience, current focus and goals, and future aspirations. Then, I asked the class to identify what they consider to be the three most important qualifications they would look for in a director. (Okay, so there's more than three if you dissect my three big groups.) Soft skills outnumbered hard skills, although

Leading by Design

Search This Blog