As you may have gathered by now, one of my deepest interests around nonprofit governance/boards is the role of the board chair. Back a few years ago, I was a member of a team of practitioners who are members of the Alliance for Nonprofit Management Governance Affinity group (aka learning community) that conducted a national study on board chairs and I have been hooked on the subject ever sense. I believe we the board chair to be at the center of board leadership and an individual that can actually make or unmake and effective nonprofit board. You can view the findings from our team's learning here.
Meanwhile I was reminded of a 2010 study by Chris Cornforth, Yvonne Harrison and Vic Murray and I am sharing their learning here. I believe we can't know enough and need to keep on discovering how to do best.
What makes Chairs of Governing Bodies Effective?
A report prepared for the National Council for Voluntary Organisations and theCharity Trustee Network bynChris Cornforth, Open University Business School, UK.Yvonne Harrison, Seattle University, USA.Vic Murray, University of Victoria, Canada.
Email: c.j.cornforth@open.ac.uk January, 2010.
Executive Summary
Relatively little research has been carried out on the important leadership role of chairs of governing bodies. What research has been done across different sectors suggests that the impact of chairs is highly variable. It is important therefore to understand in more detail what distinguishes effective from less effective chairs. This report helps to fill that gap. It presents the results of an online survey of board chairs and the people they work with, including chief executives, board members and staff. The survey collected data on perceptions of the chair leadership role, including the quality of the chair’s relationships (with management, the board, and stakeholders), chair impact, and the influences on chair leadership.
Key Findings
Chairs that were seen as:
- fair, open to ideas, focused on building high quality relationships with others and encouraging team work and having a considerable impact on the effectiveness of the board, Chief Executive (CE), and organisation.
- The least effective Chairs were those that were not seen as team players and were unable to manage inadequate performance by the key actors with whom they interact. Various dimensions of a Chair’s emotional and spiritual intelligence were associated with his or her level of impact. In particular chairs with high impact were perceived as being socially aware, able to manage relationships and helping and service motivated.
- The Chairs’ contribution was seen primarily in terms of process(e.g. managing board meetings) and
- content (e.g. providing information) rather than as a source of inspiration to boost board morale and board member engagement.
- Chairs tended to rate their own performance and impact higher than other people they work with did. There is a potential danger that if this gap becomes too wide these relationships could become dysfunctional.
Practical implications
The research has a number of implications for the recruitment and development of chairs:1. The research suggests it is the softer inter-personal and
leadership skills that distinguish effective from ineffective chairs. Effective chairs were perceived as being socially aware, helping and service motivated
and good at managing relationships. It is important therefore when recruiting chairs that these softer leadership and inter-personal skills are given as much or possibly more weight than cognitive and analytical skills such as problem solving or strategic thinking.
Those chairs whose performance was seen as more satisfactory were seen as fair and impartial, open to new ideas, did not distract from the organisation’s goals, provided autonomy and independence for the board and CE, and engaged in board team building behaviours through valuing team members,
encouraging and acknowledging different contributions and creating a safe climate were issues can be discussed
Chairs tended to rate their impact more highly than CEs, board members and other key actors. It is important therefore that chairs receive
feedback on their performance. This can be done formally through an annual 360 degree appraisal, and informally by chairs seeking more regular feedback, particularly from other board members and theCE.4. The further someone is away from the Chair the lower they are likely to perceive his or her impact. The same is also likely to hold true of boards more generally. Boards should consider developing a communication strategy that keeps key stakeholders informed of the work of the board and the key issues it is addressing.5. Chairs and those people who wish to become chairs need opportunities for
training and development, both to keep up with important developments in their field and to enhance their chairing and leadership skills. In addition to formal training events, seminars and conferences this might include peer learning circles or mentoring by an experienced chair.