Podcasts about board governance

In this eye-opening episode, we unpack the quiet crisis in corporate governance: how boardrooms are often shaped by personal networks over real skills, leaving major ESG blind spots at the top. Guest Matt Moscardi, Co-founder of Free Float Analytics, joins us to explore signals that companies send by backtracking on their commitment and why treating investment stewardship as a cost center may be a costly mistake. We dive into the DEI backlash, flip-flopping climate commitments, and how surface-level sustainability reports (complete with curated optics) reveal more about a company's culture than they realize. Plus, what makes a great sustainability analyst? It's not just the data—it's the curiosity, context, and ability to challenge the narrative. Perfect for anyone building ESG skills, delivering corporate sustainability training, or decoding the signals behind the statements.

Segment 1:  Faron Daugs, CFP, Founder and CEO, Harrison Wallace Financial Group, joins John to talk about how the market has been performing this week, why he believes a market correction can be healthy, the latest on tariffs and the possible impact on the economy, Fed Chair Powell’s comments on interest rate cuts earlier this week, and when […]

Cornerstone's 2024 Volunteer of the Year Award Winner and Wellby Financial Board Chair Deborah Conder discusses what it means to be a credit union champion; shares about her long career with Johnson Space Center and Wellby; and shares advice for those seeking to serve on a board. 

Episode Summary In this episode of On Boards, Joe and Raza welcome Marc Schneider, an accomplished e-commerce and fintech executive with decades of experience building and scaling mission-driven companies. Marc shares his entrepreneurial journey, including his tenure as co-founder and CEO of Zebit, a transformative e-commerce and fintech platform, and his current role as an Operating Venture Partner at Ulu Ventures. The discussion dives into governance challenges in venture-backed startups, the evolution of boards from early-stage to IPO, and how founders can effectively leverage board expertise. Marc also discusses Ulu Ventures' commitment to supporting diverse entrepreneurs and shares insights into his innovative role as an “active” board observer and mentor to founders. Key Topics Discussed 1. Marc Schneider's Career Journey Background and Passion for Mission-Driven Companies: Marc's journey began with his personal experience of financial hardship, which inspired his work at Zebit to provide credit-impaired consumers with fair access to products without interest or penalties. Key Roles: From managing customer service operations at ProFlowers to leading Zulily and founding Zebit, Marc's career has been defined by innovation and scaling impactful businesses. 2. Zebit's Business Model and Mission Zebit's Unique Value Proposition: Providing underserved consumers with fair, interest-free payment options for e-commerce purchases. Challenges: Operating efficiently without typical revenue streams like interest or penalties, while predicting customer payment behavior with data-driven models. IPO Journey: Zebit went public on the Australian Stock Exchange (ASX) to access liquidity, even though the process posed significant challenges, including valuation issues and market unfamiliarity with its business model. 3. Board Governance in Startups Evolution of Boards: Marc discusses the progression of boards through funding stages, from limited investor involvement in early rounds to more structured and diverse boards in public companies. Lessons for Founders: Understand the dual role of investors as board members and stakeholders. Take an active role in shaping board dynamics and agendas. Prioritize chemistry and diverse perspectives in board composition. 4. Ulu Ventures and Supporting Diverse Entrepreneurs Ulu Ventures' Mission: Backing women, minority, and diverse entrepreneurial teams using decision analytics to assess investments. “Active” Board Observer: Marc's role involves mentoring founders, facilitating board discussions, and bridging gaps between management and governance. 5. Lessons Learned and Giving Back Persistence and Adaptability: Marc's reflections on navigating challenges, from startup struggles to delisting Zebit, emphasize resilience. Mentorship and Legacy: By supporting young entrepreneurs, Marc hopes to inspire a cycle of giving back within the startup ecosystem.

If you're considering bringing on a Chief of Staff or just need someone to explain the basics, this episode lays the groundwork and levels-set the foundation for future discussions on the role.A Chief of Staff works closely with the CEO, helping with company strategy, gap-filling key roles, and ensuring executive team cohesion. They can set up effective meeting structures, help onboard new executives, and even turn around toxic cultures. Key examples include managing strategic planning, coordinating board governance, and running critical projects during crises like COVID. Links Mentioned:Clarity Call with EmilyFree Resources:Strategic Planning Checklist Chief of Staff Skills Assessment ChecklistA Day in the Life of a Chief of StaffChief of Staff ToolkitGet in touch with Emily:Connect on LinkedInFollow on YouTubeLearn more about coaching Sign up for the newsletterClarity Call with EmilyWho Am I?If we haven't yet before - Hi

Episode Summary In this insightful episode of On Boards, hosts Joe Ayoub and Raza Shaikh welcome Pam Lenehan, a seasoned board member with over 22 years of experience on public company boards. Pam offers an in-depth look at the evolving responsibilities of boards and their members, including critical areas like cybersecurity, ESG, and CEO succession.   Drawing on her experience across seven public company boards, Pam discusses the increasing complexity of board roles, committee responsibilities, and the importance of a collaborative, learning-focused approach for today's directors. Key Topics Discussed: The Expanding Role of Boards in Risk Management Pam explains how boards are increasingly required to manage a broader spectrum of risks, from cybersecurity and AI to unexpected events like pandemics. She highlights the need for board committees (audit, compensation, technology) to coordinate their oversight on key issues and work with management to stay proactive.   Board Dynamics: Shifts in Meeting Structure and Time Commitments The increased reliance on digital platforms has, among other things, led to voluminous board materials, often reaching hundreds of pages. Pam shares how boards are restructuring their meetings to prioritize discussion over presentation, with a growing emphasis on pre-meeting preparation.   Pam notes how the frequency of both board and committee meetings has increased, with some public company boards now often holding eight or more meetings annually.   Maintaining Collegiality Amid Virtual and Shorter In-Person Meetings As more meetings shift online or the agenda is so packed it leaves little time for social interaction, the value of planned social opportunities, even brief breaks, to foster trust and rapport among board members. Pam's insights on “planned socialization” underscore its role in facilitating effective communication and decision-making. Evolving Expertise on Boards: Moving Beyond Generalists With a growing need for specialized knowledge in finance, industry, and technology, boards are increasingly composed of directors with specific expertise. Pam shares practical advice on balancing specialized skillsets and emphasizes that most board member should still possess a solid understanding of broader governance areas, even beyond their primary expertise.   The Role of the Board Chair and Lead Director Raza and Pam discuss the crucial role of the board chair in ensuring all voices are heard and the board remains aligned. With a diverse array of specialists now joining boards, the chair's leadership is increasingly important to synthesize perspectives and guide effective discussions.   The Influence of Shareholder Activism and Public Company Challenges Pam recounts her experiences with shareholder activists, noting how modern boards must be prepared to engage with sophisticated activist stakeholders. For directors, understanding activist perspectives and strategizing responses requires both diplomacy and transparency.   The Time Commitment of Board Service For anyone considering board service, Pam provides a candid look at the significant time and energy required. Acknowledging that board roles demand consistent weekend reading and adaptability for unscheduled meetings, she advises prospective directors to consider the full requirements of a board commitment before joining a board.   Continuous Learning and Networking for Directors Pam discusses the importance of ongoing education in governance, such as through the NACD, board excellence centers, and director forums. She advocates for cultivating networks with other directors to share experiences and insights, particularly on emerging or complex issues.   Supporting Diversity and Inclusion on Boards A proponent of diverse board representation, Pam shares her efforts to mentor women preparing for board roles. She encourages both current and aspiring board members to seek education and develop networks that enhance board diversity and effectiveness.

In this episode of CU On the Show, host Doug English is joined by board governance experts Jennie Boden, CEO of Quantum Governance, and Lynette Smith, chief engagement officer and former credit union CEO. Together, they dive into the crucial role of board governance in driving credit union success. From creating a Governance Action Plan to building a strategic, forward-thinking board, Jennie and Lynette share actionable insights on how credit unions can evolve their governance practices to support sustainable growth. Whether you're a board member, CEO, or credit union professional, this episode offers valuable takeaways on strengthening governance to meet the challenges of today and tomorrow. 

With five decades of higher ed administrative experience, John Derry, President Emeritus of Hope International University, has experienced many highs and lows in dealing with biblical higher ed board governance.Recently, ABHE has been blessed to have John as a coach in our board governance training program.Tune in to this episode to hear John break down some common warning signs of ineffective boards and how higher ed administrations can ensure buy-in from their trustees.Join us as we discuss:[4:46] Three critical board governance mistakes[14:24] What distinguishes higher ed boards from other industries[23:39] Practical tips for effective board governanceCheck out these resources we mentioned during the podcast:ABHE Board Governance TrainingExperiencing God Bible Study Book by Henry BlackabyM.J. Murdock Charitable TrustTo hear this interview and many more like it, subscribe on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or our website, or search for Biblical Higher Ed Talk in your favorite podcast player.Hosted by Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

In episode 106 of Mission: Impact, Carol Hamilton talks with Julia Patrick, a seasoned nonprofit leader and philanthropist. On the episode, Patrick shares her perspectives on the evolving challenges and opportunities in nonprofit board governance, emphasizing the importance of strategic board management, the integration of younger leaders, and the need for continuous training to foster board engagement and effectiveness.  The discussion also covers innovative solutions such as board liaisons and board portals to streamline operations and enhance transparency. Patrick advocates for intergenerational collaboration and the adoption of the 10-10-10 rule for decision-making, which helps leaders prioritize actions based on their impact over time.   Episode highlights: Challenges in Board Governance [00:05:45 The complexities of board service, the importance of mission achievement, and the uniquely American philanthropic spirit. Generational Shifts and Board Member Engagement [00:07:54]  The demographic shifts affecting board membership, including the "silver tsunami" and the rise of next-gen leaders. She describes how younger leaders, particularly Millennials and Gen Z, approach board service differently, emphasizing data-driven decision-making and digital proficiency. The Role of Board Liaisons and Technology in Governance [00:12:27]  The role of professional board liaisons and the use of board portals to manage documents and ensure transparency. She highlights the importance of these tools for efficient board operations, particularly for younger members.   Effective Board Management Practices [00:16:29]  The need for effective meeting management, and connecting board members to the organization's mission through ongoing training. Training and Development for Board Members [00:19:32]  The importance of training board members not only on governance but also on the specific mission and operations of the organization. She suggests shadowing staff members as a way for board members to gain deeper insights. Intergenerational Collaboration and Board Dynamics [00:24:20]  The conversation touches on the benefits of involving C-suite members in board meetings and the importance of intergenerational collaboration for the long-term health of nonprofit organizations. Recruiting and Retaining Younger Board Members [00:29:46 ]  Strategies for recruiting and retaining younger board members, including the buddy system, soft skills training, and institutional knowledge transfer. The 10-10-10 Rule for Decision-Making [00:34:10]  Patrick shares her "10-10-10" rule, a decision-making framework that considers the impact of actions over 10 weeks, 10 months, and 10 years, helping leaders prioritize and stay strategic. Guest Bio: Julia C. Patrick is the CEO of the American Nonprofit Academy and trains nonprofit leaders across the globe. At the onset of the global pandemic in 2020, Patrick launched The Nonprofit Show, the nation's only daily live broadcast. She and her team have produced more than 1,000 episodes and have been broadcasting now for 5 years!
 Important Links and Resources: Julia C. Patrick American Nonprofit Academy Building Board Champions: https://www.amazon.com/Building-Board-Champions-Activating-Impactful/dp/B0D58122XR   Related Episodes: Episode 61: Impactful boards Episode 81: Being a co-leader with your board Episode 99: Elevating nonprofit governance and leadership Episode 102: The Nonprofit board's duty of foresight   Be in Touch: ✉️ Subscribe to Carol's newsletter at Grace Social Sector Consulting

Dara Khosrowshahi runs one of the most complicated businesses in the world, Uber. Since taking over in 2017 Dara has led the company to profitability against all odds. In this episode, we touch on a number of things including Uber's position on the future of Autonomous Vehicles (AVs), the challenges that were overcome in making Uber profitable, and some of the operating principles that have stuck with Dara since his days at Expedia. (00:00) Intro(01:49) Uber's Economic Resilience and Consumer Trends(04:40) The Future of Autonomous Vehicles(14:27) Strategic Decisions and the Advanced Technologies Group(31:01) Uber's Expansion and Competitive Landscape(38:01) Living in the Suburbs: Practical Insights(39:23) Cultural Reset at Uber: A Necessity(42:39) Operational Efficiency: Lessons from Uber(46:56) Global Adaptations: Uber's Local Innovations(48:58) Leadership and Mentorship: Personal Reflections(51:32) Career Path: From Finance to CEO(01:00:14) The Importance of Constructive Conflict(01:04:47) Long-term Strategy and Board Governance(01:07:07) The Impact of Uber: A Global Perspective(01:08:54) Conclusion and Farewell Executive Producer: Rashad AssirProducer: Leah ClapperMixing and editing: Justin Hrabovsky Check out Unsupervised Learning, Redpoint's AI Podcast: https://www.youtube.com/@UCUl-s_Vp-Kkk_XVyDylNwLA

Former CEO of PepsiCo and New York Times bestselling author Indra Nooyi joins host Michael Marks for a wide-ranging conversation to share her insights on the growth of big tech companies, the impact of AI, CEO-board relationships, and much more. Indra currently serves on the boards of Amazon, Phillips, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, the National Gallery of Art, and is a Dean's Advisory Council Member at MIT School of Engineering. Her New York Times bestselling memoir My Life In Full offers insight and a call-to-action from one of the world's most-admired business leaders on how our society can blend work and family — and advance women — in the 21st century. She is widely considered to be one of the world's top CEOs for her leadership at global giant PepsiCo over 12 years. Chapters 00:00 Introduction and State of the Markets 02:47 The Disruption of Technology Companies and the Role of AI 12:55 The Importance of Board Governance and CEO Succession Planning 20:32 Supporting Working Families and Advancing Women in Business 30:26 Navigating Geopolitical Challenges in a Global Economy 36:17 India's Potential and the Need for Disciplined Democracy Links https://www.amazon.com/My-Life-Full-Family-Future/dp/0593421329 https://www.linkedin.com/in/indranooyi/

In this episode of "The Brand Called You," Don Springer, Chairman of The Colton Group Inc. and an esteemed independent board director and advisor shares his extensive experience in corporate governance, growth strategies, and business model innovation. They discuss common pitfalls in board governance, the importance of diversity, effective growth strategies during economic downturns, and the transformative role of technology, particularly AI, in modern business practices. Tune in to gain valuable insights from a seasoned leader in corporate America. 00:31- About Don Springer Don is the chairman of The Colton Group Incorporated. He is an independent board director and advisor focused on board governance, growth strategies, and business model innovation.  He's the director of Elm Analytics LLC, which is the leading provider of supply chain optimization through data and intelligence. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/tbcy/support

In this episode of The Church Planting Podcast, Greg Nettle, president of Stadia Church Planting, chats with Steve Porter, chair of the Stadia board. They delve into the essential qualities and functions of a good church board member, highlighting the challenges church leaders face in financial management due to their lack of training in this area. Steve shares his extensive experience on various boards, emphasizing the importance of financial literacy and transparency for nonprofit leaders. They also discuss the role of policy governance in maintaining an effective board by setting clear boundaries and responsibilities. [00:00:18] - Introduction of Steve Porter, background on his board experience. [00:01:03] - Steve joins the podcast, discusses his journey with Greg and involvement in church boards. [00:02:15] - Importance of financial education for pastors. [00:05:29] - Discussion on ensuring transparency and understanding financial controls. [00:06:44] - Shift to policy governance, its benefits and pitfalls. [00:12:00] - Characteristics of an effective board member: encouragement, wise counsel, accountability. [00:14:49] - Ideal composition of a church board and strategic member selection. [00:19:04] - The personal connection between board members and their support for the leader. [00:22:11] - The role of a board in supporting personal and spiritual goals of the leader. [00:24:52] - Wrapping up, the joys and challenges of serving on a nonprofit board. [00:26:37] - Conclusion and thanks to Steve Porter. Connect with Greg and Stadia at https://stadia.org

How to Best Utilize a Board of Directors for your ESOP Company Today's show featured a return of CFO, Andy Yetzer of YTS Companies and one of his Independent Board Members, Ken Saddler, who's also a Fractional CFO and former guest as well. We covered a topic on how best to use your Board in an ESOP. YTS Enterprises is the owner of three companies and is an ESOP. Andy said that deciding to add Independent Members (meaning advisors outside of the business with no relationship to it) has been a big game changer for YTS, and has credited the expertise of Ken and the other member Nick for being the kind of fit they were looking for in Board Members.  Ken said that it boils down to three criteria when choosing someone for your Board: Values, Background, Trust.   He also says that establishing good Board Governance is essential for a successful Board and therefore a successful ESOP.  Andy said that the trust level he has with Ken and Nick are the foundation for why it works for them so well. Their backgrounds, expertise and networks have also been integral to the company's growth and success. Andy knows that when Ken or Nick make a connection to someone in their network, they're going to have a highly qualified, like minded person to work with. If you have or are considering an ESOP form of business transition, you'll want to listen to this episode hereConnect with Ken Saddler here Connect with Andy Yetzer here Support the Show.Join the Twin Cities Chapter of EPI at the 2024 Owners Forum! Learn More and Register here

Todd Linden, experienced hospital CEO with Linden Consulting joins the Teledigm Pulse to talk about hospital boards and the importance of board governance strategies for rural hospitals. 

Obligations in the board governance and strategic planning of biblical higher ed institutions often get a bit murky. If a school ultimately fails to support leadership in reaching its goals, who's responsible?Scott Rodin, Chief Strategy Officer and Senior Consultant with The FOCUS Group, believes the school's board chair must instill a culture that embraces God's vision for its campus. Only then can leadership truly come together to carry out their college or university's mission.Scott shares key observations about the critical role board governance plays in today's Christian higher ed institutions and common mistakes to avoid.Join us as we discuss:[3:10] Three observations on the current state of biblical higher ed[12:12] Why a boardroom's culture can make or break a school[21:50] The need for agile strategic planning in a post-Covid worldCheck out these resources we mentioned during the podcast:The Greater Mission by Scott RodinTo hear this interview and many more like it, subscribe on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or our website, or search for Biblical Higher Ed Talk in your favorite podcast player.Hosted by Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

This month we are joined by Zach Christensen, Director of Communications and Digital Marketing at Mitchell Stankovic & Associates. MS&A is a strategic consulting firm which has served only credit unions for 30 years, focused primarily on Board Governance and CEO support. His passion for Credit Union's comes from the passion of those he works with but has stuck with Zach because of the opportunity he has to help CU's change lives. Beyond that, Zach serves in multiple volunteer roles including the Global Women's Leadership Network, World Young Professionals, and he founded CU Pride. Today he shares his thoughts about where DEI currently stands in the CU industry and how he believes DEI is naturally aligned with what credit unions are all about. He goes on to provide his opinions about the overwhelming challenges credit unions will face looking forward. Zach's insights are fresh and forward-thinking. Listen in to hear a new perspective on our industry! Interviewers: Nate Burns & Shonna Shearson Producers: Ryan Kane & Steve Schmidle Supporting Cast: Robert York, Original Ryan Olsen, Jeff Morris, and James Wileman

The Triumph Together Challenge⁠⁠ is in full force 

Jennifer Jukanovich, a seasoned nonprofit leader with nearly three decades of experience discusses her forthcoming book, The Culturally Conscious Board: Setting the Boardroom Table for Impact, which explores the importance of board culture in achieving organizational success. The conversation addresses a number of important aspects of board governance, including board culture and the critical role of trust and humility. We love our listeners! Drop us a line or give us guest suggestions here. Big Ideas/Thoughts/Quotes 1. The Culturally Conscious Board ·      Two important concepts which are emphasized: o   The significance of board culture and its impact on decision-making and governance, and the role of trust, humility, and hospitality in building an effective board culture. o   Jennifer's closing thoughts on the importance of strong board culture in the nonprofit sector. ·      Encouragement for boards to engage in deeper conversations and continuous improvement. ·      Introduction to the "board culture placemat" and its use in facilitating board discussion and b building a strong board culture. ·      Examples of successful practices for building and maintaining a healthy board culture. "Boards are assets to our society, and our hope is that our book, The Culturally Conscious Board, will contribute to that conversation."  Jennifer Jukanovich   Book Reviews “Sitting on a board is easy. But being a great board member is another matter entirely, especially if your organization needs change. Jukanovich and West show you how to do it with confidence and grace.” Arthur C. Brooks, Professor, Harvard Kennedy School and Harvard Business School, and #1 New York Times bestselling author   “‘Culture eats strategy for breakfast,' Drucker said, and most boards don't explore how their culture either detracts from or advances their mission. This work invites boards to move from habits and traditions that restrict their impact toward deeper examinations to make wise changes and meet the challenges of our day.”   Robert C. Andringa, Managing Partner, The Andringa Group, and coauthor of Nonprofit Board Answer Book   2. Challenges and Opportunities in Board Governance o   The importance of diverse representation and an inclusive board culture. o   Practical advice on improving board culture, including transparency, accountability, and feedback mechanisms. o   Addressing issues such as long-term leadership and the balance between large boards and effective decision-making. "Humility catalyzes greater trust, whether that is your family or that's a board."   "Good governance creates health. Good boundaries create healthy culture."  4. The Critical Partnership between the CEO and the board chair o   How the board chair can help ensure all voices are heard and foster a culture of openness and respect.

260: The Blueprint for Building Exceptional Nonprofit Teams (Will Sparks)SUMMARYHow can you harness the power of organizational culture to drive optimal performance in your nonprofit? In episode 260 of Your Path to Nonprofit Leadership, Dr. Will Sparks, an expert in leadership and organizational culture, delves deep into the dynamics of culture, leadership, and team performance. Drawing from his extensive research and experience, Will unpacks the nuances of leadership influence and the role of executive tenure in shaping organizational culture. He explores the challenges and opportunities for new leaders in transforming established cultures, emphasizing the importance of self-awareness, resilience, and candid communication. From navigating board dynamics to founding the Center for Human and Organizational Potential (CHOP), Will offers actionable strategies and valuable insights for nonprofit leaders seeking to cultivate a culture of excellence. ABOUT WILLWill Sparks is the Dennis Thompson Chair & Professor of Leadership at the McColl School of Business at Queens University of Charlotte, where he also serves as the Director of the Office of Leadership Initiatives. In 2008, he founded the McColl School's M.S. in Organization Development (MSOD) Program and served as Director until 2013. Will serves as the Managing Director for William L. Sparks & Associates, LLC, and as a Partner with Peter Browning Partners, LLC, a consulting firm providing board governance and executive coaching. His TedX Talk “The Power of Self Awareness” released in 2018. He is the author of “Actualized Leadership: Meeting Your Shadow & Maximizing Your Potential” and co-authored (with Peter Browning) “The Director's Manual: A Framework for Board Governance” (2016, Wiley). He completed his Ph.D. in Organizational Behavior and Development under the direction of Dr. Jerry B. Harvey from The George Washington University's School of Business and Public Management, where his research focused on group dynamics, organizational culture, and leadership.EPISODE TOPICS & RESOURCESActualized Teamwork: Unlocking the Culture Code for Optimal Performance by William L. SparksHear more from Will on Your Path to Nonprofit Leadership in episode 14.Have you read Patton's book Your Path to Nonprofit Leadership: Seven Keys to Advancing Your Career in the Philanthropic Sector Check out our new website, PMAnonprofit.com!

Where is your bullseye - the center of your heart, passion, and calling?In this episode, Jeff and Jake discuss: Lessons from a childhood around the firepit.  Business and opportunities in every stage of life.  Serving a God of abundance.Letting God's lamp light your next step.The importance of setting and holding boundaries with yourself.   Key Takeaways: Working with kids and teens is not a 1-week thing. It is 52 weeks out of the year. Giving does not have to be prescriptive. What breaks your heart? Use that. Fundraising isn't about the money, it's about the heart of the giving partner. It is spiritual before it is mechanical.Be disciplined without haste. Rhythms of rest are necessary. There is always going to be more work to be done, but never once does the Bible say “Jesus ran.”  "I don't know about you and your 20s, but for me, I wanted a beacon for the next 200 steps. I didn't want a lamp to my feet and a light to my path, right? But the beauty of that is He gives us that lamp and it's just enough light for the next step and the next step and the next step." —  Jake Bland Episode References: C12: https://www.joinc12.com/Halftime Institute: https://halftimeinstitute.org/Pursuing God's Will Together: A Discernment Practice for Leadership Groups by Ruth Haley BartonThe Council: A Biblical Perspective on Board Governance by Gary G. Hoag, Wesley K. Willmer, & Gregory J. Henson About Jake Bland: Jake is the 10th President and CEO of Youth For Christ USA, a pillar of missional youth ministry since 1944, when the Rev. Billy Graham served as YFC's first full-time staff member. Today, Youth For Christ reaches young people everywhere, including in over 100 nations and through 140 local chapters across America, with a special focus on engaging 11-19 year olds who do not know Christ. YFC intentionally pursues young people who often feel overlooked, building relationships, and uncovering God's story of hope at pivotal moments in their lives.Jake's journey with YFC began as a high school student, then as a volunteer and intern. Prior to joining the YFC staff, he taught in the Interactive Media Department at Bradley University and co-founded two media production companies. He holds a master's degree in Youth Ministry Leadership from Huntington University.Jake and his wife, Ali, live in the Denver area. As a volunteer, Jake serves as an elder in their church, and as the board chairman for Presence Point—a non-profit organization that helps leaders live into their calling. Jake and Ali have two children: Silas David (8) and Ivy Rehn (6). Their family loves traveling, music, hiking, spending time with friends, and enjoying God's creation in Colorado. Connect with Jake Bland:Website: https://yfc.net/LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jacob-bland-96553834/ Connect with Jeff Thomas: Website: https://www.arkosglobal.com/Podcast: https://www.generousbusinessowner.com/Book: https://www.arkosglobal.com/trading-upEmail: jeff.thomas@arkosglobal.comTwitter: https://twitter.com/ArkosGlobalAdv Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/arkosglobal/LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/arkosglobaladvisorsInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/arkosglobaladvisors/YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCLUYpPwkHH7JrP6PrbHeBxw

In this wide-ranging discussion Igneo's Head of Responsible Investment for Europe, Sophie Durham, speaks with Karina Litvack, Non-Executive Director on the energy transition, the role of exclusion, setting climate change targets, greenwashing and green hushing and demonstrating progress on the energy transition.**********************Important informationThis material is for general information purposes only. It does not constitute investment or financial advice and does not take into account any specific investment objectives, financial situation or needs. This is not an offer to provide asset management services, is not a recommendation or an offer or solicitation to buy, hold or sell any security or to execute any agreement for portfolio management or investment advisory services and this material has not been prepared in connection with any such offer. Before making any investment decision you should consider, with the assistance of a financial advisor, your individual investment needs, objectives and financial situation.We have taken reasonable care to ensure that this material is accurate, current, and complete and fit for its intended purpose and audience as at the date of publication. No assurance is given or liability accepted regarding the accuracy, validity or completeness of this material and we do not undertake to update it in future if circumstances change.To the extent this material contains any expression of opinion or forward-looking statements, such opinions and statements are based on assumptions, matters and sources believed to be true and reliable at the time of publication only. This material reflects the views of the individual writers only. Those views may change, may not prove to be valid and may not reflect the views of everyone at Igneo Infrastructure Partners or First Sentier Investors.About First Sentier InvestorsReferences to ‘we', ‘us' or ‘our' are references to Igneo Infrastructure Partners or First Sentier Investors (as applicable). First Sentier Investors is a global asset management business which is ultimately owned by Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group. Igneo Infrastructure Partners is an unlisted infrastructure asset management business and is part of the First Sentier Investors Group.We communicate and conduct business through different legal entities in different locations. This material is communicated in:[1]Australia and New Zealand by First Sentier Investors (Australia) RE Ltd, authorised and regulated in Australia by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (AFSL 240550; ABN 13 006 464 428) European Economic Area by First Sentier Investors (Ireland) Limited, authorised and regulated in Ireland by the Central Bank of Ireland (CBI reg no. C182306; reg office 70 Sir John Rogerson's Quay, Dublin 2, Ireland; reg company no. 629188)Hong Kong by First Sentier Investors (Hong Kong) Limited and has not been reviewed by the Securities & Futures Commission in Hong Kong. First Sentier Investors and Igneo Infrastructure Partners are business names of First Sentier Investors (Hong Kong) Limited. Singapore by First Sentier Investors (Singapore) (reg company no. 196900420D) and this advertisement or material has not been reviewed by the Monetary Authority of Singapore. First Sentier Investors (registration number 53236800B) and Igneo Infrastructure Partners (registration number 53447928J) are business divisions of First Sentier Investors (Singapore).Japan by First Sentier Investors (Japan) Limited, authorised and regulated by the Financial Service Agency (Director of Kanto Local Finance Bureau (Registered Financial Institutions) No.2611)United Kingdom by First Sentier Investors International IM Limited, authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (reg. no. SC079063, reg office 23 St Andrew Square, Edinburgh, Scotland, EH2 1BB)United States by First Sentier Investors (US) LLC, authorised and regulated by the Securities Exchange Commission (RIA 801-93167)other jurisdictions, where this document may lawfully be issued, by First Sentier Investors International IM Limited, authorised and regulated in the UK by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA ref no. 122512; Registered office: 23 St. Andrew Square, Edinburgh, EH2 1BB; Company no. SC079063).To the extent permitted by law, MUFG and its subsidiaries are not liable for any loss or damage as a result of reliance on any statement or information contained in this document. Neither MUFG nor any of its subsidiaries guarantee the performance of any investment products referred to in this document or the repayment of capital. Any investments referred to are not deposits or other liabilities of MUFG or its subsidiaries, and are subject to investment risk, including loss of income and capital invested.©    Igneo Infrastructure Partners

"..invest in relationships, the relationships of the board to the head with one another are incredibly important, especially that relationship between the board chair and the head of school, and it is the ceiling on schools." -

In this episode of Beyond the Donation, managing partner Ken Cerini of accounting firm Cerini and Associates discusses strategies for better fiscal management and the roles of board members in a strong nonprofit.Ken stresses the importance of implementing effective financial controls, maintaining open communication between board members and management, and conducting regular board meetings. He also emphasizes the significance of accurate budgeting based on monthly variations rather than a divided annual budget. Ken provides insights on potential minor tax exemptions and the risk of nonprofits losing their tax exemption status if not careful. He further explains the nuances and implications of the 501 (c)(3) tax exemption. Additionally, he shares advice to smaller organizations on attracting board members and adapting to changing technology trends for more effective accounting and record keeping.00:00 Introduction00:52 Ken Cerini Introduction01:38 The Importance of Creativity and Imagination in Accounting03:28 Breaking Down Nonprofit Taxes07:04 How to Keep your 501(c)(3) status09:50 The Role of Reporting in Nonprofits12:40 Understanding the Relationship Between Board Members and Budgeting“That budget is a super important tool, probably one of the most important control tools with respect to the fiscal operations of the organization.”15:55 The Importance of Using a Monthly Budget vs. an Annual Budget16:43 Building a Collaborative Relationship Between the Board and Management20:30 How to Attract Board Members22:31 The Impact of Technology on Nonprofit Accounting26:21 Conclusion and Contact InformationFree Resources:Board Guide https://online.flipbuilder.com/rmyw/wgtt/Trend Guide https://online.flipbuilder.com/rmyw/aoiw/index.html#p=1Fundraising Guide https://online.flipbuilder.com/rmyw/txie/To Connect with Ken Cerini:Website | KCerini@CeriniCPA.com | 631-582-1600 ex 203To Connect with Beyond the Donation Podcast:BTDPodcast | DonorDockLinkedIn | MattLinkedIn

This episode has something for everyone!  We talk Golf/Succession Comps (1:05) PLAYERS takeaways (10:15) Callaway spinoff (18:07) LA Muni Golf Drama (19:42) then take a deeper dive on Board Governance including the new TOUR structure (24:00) Enjoy, subscribe, send to a friend!#CRS #GolfBusiness #Golf #Business #podcast

Technology is advancing at a breakneck speed, presenting both new opportunities and challenges for organizations. Ismat Duckson Aziz, CHRO and Chief Administrative Officer at the Kemper Corporation, joins the Talent Angle to discuss how CHROs can shape the technology strategy of their organization. She explains how CHROs can overcome the anxiety that comes with diving into the rapidly changing environment of technology, and assert themselves as drivers of enterprise innovation. Ismat Duckson Aziz is the Chief Human Resources Officer (CHRO) and Chief Administrative Officer of Kemper. Aziz has over 25 years of HR experience, most recently serving at US Bank as Chief Advocacy Officer. Previous roles include CHRO for Sprint, CHRO for Sam's Club, and senior HR roles at Sears Canada, Inc. and MDS Pharmaceuticals. Ismat earned a Masters of Business Administration from the Richard Ivey School of Business – University of Western Ontario and completed her undergraduate work at the University of Toronto. Ismat holds certifications in Board Governance and HR internationally. Jessica Knight is a vice president of research in the Gartner HR practice. She leads research teams to identify best practices and new opportunities to address HR executives' most urgent challenges. Her areas of focus include employee experience, organizational culture, change management and the future of work.

Own or lead a family business? If so, you need to listen to this podcast. Tom Bakewell is an expert on board governance. He is a CPA, lawyer, and best-selling author of the book Claiming Your Place at the Boardroom Table.

[00:00:00] David Gyerston: What motivates her or him to want to be the Chair of the Board? Some Board Chairs are shadow presidents. They really want to run the institution. And other Board Chairs are too disconnected. They want the title but they don't want to have to deal with anything on an ongoing basis. Call me if the place is on fire, but other than that, let's not have a relationship. ++++++++++++++++++ [00:00:21] Tommy Thomas: Today, we're continuing the conversation we began last week with Dr. David Gyerston. In addition to his many other accomplishments, David has been the president of three different universities, Regent University, Asbury University, and Taylor University. Each of these schools were in a different stage of the institutional life cycle when David arrived. These three experiences have honed his senior leadership skills. Additionally, when one is president of three different universities, one gets a lot of Board Governance experience. That's where our focus will be today. You mentioned earlier, the board, the CEO-Board Chair relationship. I'm going to segue over into board service because you've probably had as much experience in board service in the nonprofit sector as most of the guests that I've interviewed. And let's just ask a basic question. What is the function or the role of the Board Chair? The Board Chair serves as the linkage between the President and the Board of Trustees [00:01:23] David Gyerston: The Board Chair really serves as the linkage between the President and the Board of Trustees. And that relationship is probably one of the most important in terms of successful executive leadership and board governance. And right now, I have several clients where I'm coaching both the new president and the board chair together. In helping them think through and work through their relationships. It used to be that boards of trustees met a couple of times a year, and they heard a bunch of reports, and if everything was going well, they had a wonderful reunion time, and ate well, and then went home. Now Boardsmanship is 24/7. And much more is expected of board members and the challenges facing our nonprofit faith-based boards have never been greater. As a result, then the understanding of how the board works with the CEO and the senior leadership team and particularly how that relationship supports that between the board chair and the CEO has never been more important. So in my three university presidencies to this day, my board chairs are still my best friends. Because we became even though technically he represented my boss, we essentially walked this together and became - he was my sounding board to say, I think given the executive parameters that the Board has given me, I have the authority to do such and such, but I just want to bounce that off of you. Is this something that you think maybe the board should be informed about? Before I actually take the action, or do you think I should seek counsel from the board or a committee of the board before I take this action? Or do you think this is an action that the board itself, even though it hasn't defined that I must report back to them before making this decision? A lot of times this is stuff that, you build this railroad laying the track in front of the oncoming locomotive. You don't always know if you've got the right track laid out there. And so, I think that relationship of partners together, collaborators together.  Too many CEOs see boards as something they have to overcome or manage and that's just the wrong attitude. Boards are there to collaborate with you as the CEO in achieving the mission and holding you accountable and empowering and supporting and enabling you for you to lead in the basic achievement of that mission. And so, I had weekly calls with my board chairs. I recommend that now that every board chair and president touch base at least for half an hour every week, just as an update.  And it's more than just operational. It's also spiritual. In terms of mutual support. [00:04:23] Tommy Thomas: Give me some words and phrases that would describe the ideal board chair. I know it can be situational, but there are probably four or five that you just need, period. [00:04:33] David Gyerston: As I said earlier, motivation and character are everything for me. And while there are lots of competencies and capacities you need in a board chair, and I'll mention some of those in a moment, so much of it has to do with, who is the Board Chair? What motivates her or him to want to be the Chair of the Board? And are they motivated for the correct reason? Some Board Chairs are shadow Presidents.  They really want to run the institution.  Others are too disconnected.  They want the title but none of the responsibilities. Some Board Chairs are shadow Presidents. They really want to run the institution. And other Board Chairs are too disconnected. They want the title, but they don't want to have to deal with anything on an ongoing basis. Call me if the place is on fire, but other than that, let's not have a relationship. So there's a relational component anchored to character and motivation that I think is so critical that I think the board chair needs to represent in character, in motivation, in spiritual commitment the highest ideals of the institution that the board basically is guiding and guarding so and then there are other competencies, of course, that are needed. I think effective communication skills. This person has got to be a transparent communicator and a clear communicator person who can manage conflict and crisis is really important. I'm seeing more and more faith-based boards in division now than they've ever been before. And it's often over social, cultural, and political issues more than missional or organizational issues. Masks, no masks, vaccine, no vaccines, Trump, no Trump. On and on the list goes. And good board chairs have to be very capable of managing the divisions and the increasing level of conflict that exists and even the best of faith-based boards. I think a person who can encourage the full involvement of every board member. Some Board members are overly involved, and a Board Chair must be able to reign them in with grace, but firmness. You have some board members that are overly involved, and a Board Chair needs to be able to reign them in with grace, but with firmness. There are other board members that are wallflowers. They're going to sit and say nothing. And you need the full council, the whole council of the whole counselors so that the board can effectively function. I think that the competency, particularly in institutional viability, I'm seeing more and more of the importance of board chairs knowing how to read a balance sheet and understand, but also in reading that balance sheet, understanding the core deliverables in higher education. Obviously, it's somebody who understands the very unique nature of colleges and universities. They're not corporations. One of the problems I find with successful corporate leaders who become Board Chairs is that they don't often see that the business of education is very different than the business of producing X number of widgets an hour at a specified cost. And so understanding the complexity of how higher education operates particularly and the industry, whether that's, a hospital board understanding the nature of hospitals, whether it's a nonprofit social service board, understanding the challenges that the clients are facing, those become competencies and then capacity is really critical. This is, I hinted at earlier, is not a few hours a year, and this is now multiple hours a month, and depending on the state of crisis, it could easily be 10 hours a week. And I'm working with a couple of boards right now whose executive committee is having to meet three to five hours on average a week because of the strategies and the tragedies that the institution is facing and the dangers the institution is facing. So those are just a checklist of things that, when I'm coaching a new board. As a matter of fact, one of the things I just went through, which was really interesting, is I was hired as a consultant to a board of trustees that wanted me to vet two or three of their board chair candidates and to look at the strengths and weaknesses of each and then help them select the best board member for this moment in the institution's history, because much like we said earlier about executive leadership, what are the big rocks that boy, this board has got to pay attention to right now or the rocks are going to fall on them if they don't move them. A good Board Chair must create an atmosphere where differing opinions can be heard. [00:09:08] Tommy Thomas: Respond to this quote, “You need a director on the board who will be a pleasant irritant. Someone who will force people to think a little differently. That's what a good board does.” [00:09:21] David Gyerston: Yeah, I think you always want to create, and this is the role of the Board Chair, a context where differing opinions can be respectfully heard. And that people can be encouraged to have differences of opinion. There are some personalities that enjoy thinking otherwise all the time. And they're always going to be the gadfly, and that's their sense of personal mission and on the boards where I have served and on, on the boards that have supervised me, there have been on occasion a board member or two who felt their primary mission was to stick a pin in every balloon, and so you've got to find a balance there. You want people with differing points of view, and that means that how you build a board in terms of its diversity - diversity in culture, diversity in racial identification, men and women, different professions, most good board practices now have board profiles, where they've identified the 20 most strategic skill sets in industry that they feel they need on the board to staff committees effectively, but also to bring those varying perspectives from their industries to what I think are important. I'm always hesitant to suggest that we recruit a board member whose primary mission is to be the gadfly. But I do think you create a context in which even if a board agrees 90% of the time and 95% of them agree 90% of the time the 5% feel free because again, they're there. I like Scott Rodin's idea that board members are stewards of the mission and they're there under divine appointment. And so if they've got a caution or a hesitation, I'll give you a quick illustration. I had a situation where one board member just felt that a decision was not correct, but he didn't want to be the gadfly. And so out of respect for the majority who thought it was, he did not share his opinion. Two years later, it turned out that the majority of opinion of the board cost that board over 20 million dollars of unnecessary expense, and the very thing that board member felt a twinge in his spirit about was the cause that resulted in that $20 million loss. And he is now kicking himself that he did not speak up sooner and raise the concern it wasn't that he felt he couldn't it was just he felt like he didn't want to be the bother, the guy throwing the wet blanket on what everybody else was so enthusiastic about and so creating a context where people genuinely are prayerfully trying to discern what's the right decision and then having a context where if they deeply feel and are motivated correctly for expressing what they deeply feel, not just to be heard because that's their role but really feel the prompting and the twinge of the spirit in our faith-based settings. The chair then and the president both are responsible for ensuring that all hearts are clear. I love that phrase. Are all hearts clear? And if they aren't, then let's stop before we make the decision and find out why your heart, Dave or Joan, isn't clear. And is it something that we need to delay decision on, something we need more information on, or is it just something that fundamentally it's a disagreement that doesn't really have at its heart the danger to the mission that we then move forward and say Dave, appreciate your position on this but as a majority, we think this is the right way to go and as a good board member in those situations, I would say all right, I support that because again, one of the basic principles is that you don't go out of a board meeting and not support the whole the decision of the board, even though you may have disagreed with it. And you always want to be able to have your heart clear that you've been heard. Even if you haven't been agreed with. [00:13:54] Tommy Thomas: You and I are old enough to remember Enron and for those that aren't, all they have to do is read the paper recently and see about the bank failures in Northern California. And although these organizations aren't nonprofits I'm sure there are lessons we can learn. One guy did some writing after Enron, and he said that the board was just guilty of not asking hard questions. Which they didn't. They didn't dig deep into the finances. How does a board ensure themselves that they've got people asking the questions, and people are comfortable asking the questions, which goes to your last few comments. [00:14:35] David Gyerston: Yeah I think, again, in terms of best practices, there are elements of information that every board should be looking at routinely. And so those get identified and then the administration is expected to provide those reports and that information honestly, fully, and transparently. I think that's really critical. The Board needs to know what information it needs in order to ensure that they're fulfilling their legal fiduciary and moral obligations to the people the organization serves. And so, the Board needs to know and figure out what information does it need in order to ensure that they're fulfilling their legal fiduciary. And moral obligations to the people the organization serves and then, the boards tend to ask how to questions more than why to questions, often there were looking at how are we doing? Is it efficient? The effective side of it often is not as much focused on in terms of probing and questioning, and it's back to, when an organization puts out a mission statement, that's a promise. And by the way, there's been a lot of litigation now by beneficiaries of the institution feeling that the promise was not delivered on. And again, as we said earlier, with faith-based and non-profits, it's hard to actually measure the effectiveness of the delivery of promises. But I think the board should be always asking with every decision, why are we doing this? And how are we sure that this is basically delivering on the promises we've made to our donors, our students, our clients our constituencies that are out there? And so, a lot of times it takes a great deal of energy. And the good news is that there are a lot of great organizations doing this very well. And the danger I find with a lot of nonprofits is they're very siloed. They think, nobody else is like us. The reality is 90% of other organizations are just like you and there's something you can learn from them in terms of getting out with best practices. And so again, one of the things I do in coaching new presidents and new board chairs is to connect them to some other presidents and board chairs that they could be a part of in terms of a list, sharing together from time to time, identify about 10 organizations similar to you get to know their CEO and their board chair and bounce ideas off of each other and see who else has wrestled with this and how they've wrestled with it. A lot of times you'll find out what you should not do, but I think, again, getting accurate information and knowing what information to ask for becomes one of the biggest challenges of being an effective board in these settings. ++++++++++++++++= [00:17:30] Tommy Thomas: One of your colleagues, Dr. Sandra Gray, whom I interviewed very early in my podcast, we were talking about risk management, and one of her thoughts was that probably nonprofit boards didn't pay enough attention to risk management.  Any thoughts that you have there? [00:17:46] David Gyerston: Yeah I think that we sometimes, because of the spiritual nature of what we do we know God is in control and God historically has bailed us out in the past that we've not paid as much attention to what are the emerging threats and risks that the institution is facing in this day and age. And so much of the emerging risks right now have to do with personnel-related issues. And government delineations of personnel and the LGBTQ agendas, the Title IX agendas a lot of things like that are finding more and more, I think students and parents in higher education are more likely to litigate over disciplinary issues over other things that they view as a threat. Typically, most of us, most of our organizations are insured and good insurance companies will come in and do a risk mitigation assessment before they actually issue you a policy. Because if you've got a lot of broken sidewalks and railings that are ready to fall off of buildings obviously they're going to want those fixed. So we're used to risk management in those areas. But right now, it's missional risk management. What are the things that are likely going to cause us to not be able to continue to deliver on our mission? I'm working with one university that took a position a few years ago as it related to the broadening of Title IX to include sexual orientation as a protected category in that state, who said, if that is what is required of us, we'll close the institution and move to a different state. And I think risk mitigation has to move to that missional centric. What are the things that, if something changes, would make it very difficult and perhaps impossible for us to maintain integrity with our mission, to be Christ-centered, and biblically anchored in all that we do, and if we're required by the government, local, state, national, to compromise on those, at what point do we compromise? And we've got a lot of our Christian colleges and universities right now, Tommy, as you know well, that are right in the middle of that kind of decision-making. And they didn't in advance anticipate that they would ever get to the point where they could lose their 501c3 status. Because they didn't let people, faculty members switch gender or something like that. And I think risk management has to be more concentrated on missional risk as opposed to operational risk, which is where we've been in the past. [00:20:41] Tommy Thomas: I recently heard a nonprofit CEO say when they want you to stay is the best time to leave. When should a board or a CEO begin to address succession planning? The day the new CEO is hired is the time you put a succession plan in place. Because if you decide to do something two or three years into the CEO's tenure, that can be a real threat. [00:20:54] David Gyerston: I think the day the new CEO is hired is the time you put a succession plan in place. Because if you decide to do something two or three years into the CEO's tenure, that can be a real threat. What's the board trying to tell me? One of the areas that I work on is board policy manual reviews and assessments. And one of the things that I look at right up front has to do with whether there is a succession plan. And so that's done independent of the current leadership. And how is succession going to occur? In these kinds of situations, you have a planned succession, or you've got somebody who's going to retire in two years, or somebody who has decided they want to leave the CEO role and step into a different vocational calling at that point. There's a specific way you go about doing that, and other times there are unplanned succession realities where the CEO is incapacitated and they haven't had a plan in place to say, should our CEO be unable to serve? How do we manage and handle that? And then there are the most difficult, which are the ones when a CEO has to be immediately dismissed for incompetency or immorality or some other egregious situation. And succession planning basically falls into three big categories in terms of how you do that particular planning, for a CEO, when is it time for a CEO to start thinking about maybe it's time to move on? And, I've done that probably more than I should have in my career. Some of it was for legitimate reasons, some less than legitimate. Because of my own personal struggles and issues, but I think that when you wake up in the morning and you're no longer excited by the challenge, the mission doesn't burn in your bones anymore. And if that feeling persists over several weeks, then it may be time as we say in Charismatic and Pentecostal settings, maybe the anointing has lifted, and it's time to think seriously about moving on to something else. Boards essentially, if they're doing a regular annual evaluation should be identifying those areas of the CEO's function that are effective and successful and those where improvement is needed. And that helps a board then know, when, because the reality is that institutions at different points in their history need different leadership. I've been a part of the Coast Guard Auxiliary for several years, and one of the things that I learned in working with the Coast Guard, same with the Navy, is that there are captains for different purposes at different times in a ship's history. There are mission captains when you're at war, there are captains who are skilled at maintaining the fleet. There are other captains whose specialty is to bring the boat into dry dock and to sound the hulls and refit the thing so it can be ready for mission. And I think a lot of times it's very hard to find a new CEO in this day and age. I know in the searches that you do. Like the ones I've been involved in. There is no shortage of people who think they can do the job. And so you get a hundred applicants and maybe there are five out of them that maybe have the skill sets that are needed at this moment in the institution's history and need. And so, a board needs to discern, we've had Dave as our president for the last 15 years and it's been wonderful. But the institution has changed. And the needs of the institution have changed. And the opportunities for the institution have changed and bless your heart, your little heart, Dave, as we say here in the South, bless your little heart you're not changing as quickly as or even should you change who you are in order to accomplish the next season. And I think that dialogue when it's healthy happens between a board and a president have been a part of a few in the last decade where the board and the president came to a mutual understanding that, yeah, that the institution needed different leadership at this point, so let's plan a transition process and move forward. [00:25:18] Tommy Thomas: My experience has been that's hard for boards. Most of the searches we do, CEO searches, the board says, find us somebody to be here 15 to 20 years. And I'm saying, I think in our, and I remember, and you knew him well, Dr. Clyde Cook at Biola. Clyde was a 25-year president. I tell people there probably won't be many more 25-year presidents. There may not be many more 15, nor should they be. I think you have to look at it situationally, and law boards don't want to do that.  [00:25:51] David Gyerston: The most recent statistic, which you may have seen, says that the average university president across all sectors serves 5 - 9 years. So that's the reality. [00:26:03] Tommy Thomas: Yeah, if they're lucky. [00:26:04] David Gyerston: Yeah, if they survive the first year. The reality is that institutional succession planning needs to be driven by the emerging needs of the institution. As best as can be defined, because so much of it is unpredictable and undefinable now that you're probably looking at a president for a five-year to 10-year term in faith-based settings would be realistic for most presidents, assuming they have the, and this is one of the keys I know you look for as well, is, can they adapt? Are they able to change? Do they, can they innovate? Can they manage change? Can they manage the conflict of change? And then you can see somebody lasting a little longer. Barry Corey has been at Biola for 15 years now. Tim Tennant's been at Asbury Theological Seminary for 15, going on 16 years. And each of them has demonstrated the ability to adapt to the changing realities of their institutions. And those are rare birds. As you've suggested, I doubt we're going to see that happening much in the future. [00:27:14] Tommy Thomas: Let me close with this question, because we see it all the time, and I'm sure you do. The experience of the outgoing CEO sticking around in some sort of an advisory capacity. Can you argue both sides of that? [00:27:28] David Gyerston: Again, it's institutionally specific. I think one of the things I have found and I don't know what your experience has been at the search process, is that it's hard to get really good candidates when they know the previous CEO is going to be around in some capacity, as a chancellor, often why I see this title being thrown around as a chancellor, he's there basically with the mission to help the new president on board. Often there's the board is worried about, major donors leaving, etc. And so maybe if they keep the former president around, they can maybe preserve, also they're hedging their bets. Because often if the new president isn't somebody that's already known to them, isn't an internal promotion, then they don't know fully who they're getting. And so sometimes keeping, assuming they want them around, I had that experience at Taylor where they board had decided to keep Dr. Kessler in a Chancellor's role and they were two years trying to find a new president and were unsuccessful because who wanted to follow Jay Kessler. And Jay and I had been friends for years. They came back to me three different times over about an 18-month period and said, Dave, we just would really like you to consider this. And Nancy and I felt like our work at Asbury was wrapping up and we did give it consideration. But what the board had done is they were very wise, and they said basically the Chancellor serves at the pleasure of the President. And if you want to use him, go ahead and use him any way you want to. If you don't want to, then he can stay home and we'll pay his Chancellor's stipend to him for the period that we've agreed to. And so Jay and I were able to work it out, in terms of, Jay is an externally focused person. He loves the roar of the crowd, and the smell of the grease paint, and presidents get invited to, a hundred different things a month. And Jay was my ambassador on my behalf, and he presented himself that way. I'm here on behalf of President Gyerston. One of the dangers is that when the new president has to start making changes, and I did at Taylor, the old president can feel somewhat threatened by that. And Jay managed those threats extremely well. And particularly when people would do an end run around me, and would go to Jay and say, you know what that Gyerston guy is doing? And it may be something that he maybe wouldn't have agreed with. He always shut them down and sent them. He said, no, Dave's the President. Very few former Presidents can remain connected to the institution and serve a positive and constructive role. You go back and talk to him. Jay Kessler is a rare bird. Very few former presidents are able to remain connected to the institution and serve a positive, constructive role. So I normally say that to boards that want to honor the title of President Emeritus, and offerto buy him a home 500 miles away from campus. And what has happened with me, which I've appreciated, is that I have said to the new president coming in, because it was said to me by the outgoing presidents, if you need counsel, I'm available to you. And so Taylor's had three presidents since I left. Each of them have picked up the phone and called me on occasion, basically to get a historical perspective, not to get my opinion about what they should do, but to get the context of what exists and why it exists so they know better what to propose as a plan to deal with whatever now had emerged. And so I normally discourage keeping the former CEO around in any official capacity, definitely not have him on the board, definitely not have him reporting to the board. I've seen that happen and that's a disaster because the new president doesn't last more than a couple of years. Because the new president will have to make changes, the old president, now as a board member, or someone reporting directly to the board doesn't agree with and the undermining occurs very quickly. +++++++++++++++ [00:31:35] Tommy Thomas: Thank you for joining us today. If you are a first-time listener, I hope you will subscribe and become a regular. You can find links to all the episodes on our website: www.jobfitmatters.com/podcast.  If there are topics you'd like for me to explore my email address is tthomas@jobfitmatters.com.   Word of mouth has been identified as the most valuable form of marketing. Surveys tell us that consumers believe recommendations from friends and family over all other forms of advertising. If you've heard something today that's worth passing on, please share it with others. You're already helping me make something special for the next generation of nonprofit leaders. I'll be back next week with a new episode. Until then, stay the course on our journey to help make the nonprofit sector more effective and sustainable.   Links & Resources JobfitMatters Website Next Gen Nonprofit Leadership with Tommy Thomas The Perfect Search – What every board needs to know about hiring their next CEO   Connect tthomas@jobfitmatters.com Follow Tommy on LinkedIn

[00:00:00] David Gyerston: So much of this begins with the reality that these presidential roles are too big for any single person to manage. We're always looking for the next Moses or David. And the reality is, there is no Moses or David anymore that can possibly handle everything that needs to be done. So I've stopped thinking about finding presidents and started thinking about teams that can make up the office of the president, which is a different perspective. +++++++++++++++++++ [00:00:28] Tommy Thomas (2): Our guest today is Dr. David Gyerston. David completed bachelor's level studies in theology at Lauren Park College in Ontario, Canada. Took his BA in Philosophy and Religion and Psychology from Spring Arbor University. He has Masters level studies in College Student Personnel and Sociology from Michigan State.  Masters level studies in Comparative Higher Education from the University of Toronto and a Ph.D. in Higher Education Administration and Management from Michigan State University. All of these degrees were completed by a man who never graduated high school. At least not the way most of us did. In fact, one of his high school guidance counselors told him that he wasn't smart enough to graduate and he should drop out and get a job in the gold mines or the lumberyards. From this inauspicious beginning, David went on to be the President of three different universities. He and I have been friends for at least 20 years, and it's an honor to have him as our guest today. [00:01:33] Tommy Thomas:  Before we take it too deep of a dive into your professional career, take us back to your childhood. What two or three experiences do you remember as having shaped you best? [00:01:47] David Gyerston: Tommy, I am Canadian. I was born in Toronto, but I was raised in Timmins, which is about a hundred miles south of Hudson's Bay in a gold mining and lumbering community right on the Quebec border. And childhood was difficult. My dad was an alcoholic, and my mom had some really severe emotional and mental and physical problems. So, I ran away from home when I was 13. And a Free Methodist minister and his wife, who were pastoring a little congregation up there in the Great White North took me in off the streets. I lived with them for the next five years and had come to faith through their witness and ministry when I was about 14. But still had a lot of trouble. I never graduated high school, and don't have a high school diploma to this day. And one of the most profound experiences I had, other than my conversion experience, under Jim and Marion Tutelage, was my high school guidance counselor calling me in when I was 15 years old and telling me that, these were his words, David, you're just too stupid to be in school. You need to drop out and get a job in the gold mines or in the lumber yards, which were the two main industries in northern Canada at that time. And so I talked to Jim and Marion about it and they said, no, persist. The guidance counselor was correct. I flunked out in the 12th grade, never finished. But Jim and Marion felt strongly that God had a plan for my life. I didn't know what it would be, but the Free Methodist denomination had a Bible school and residential high school near Toronto, and Jim and Marion talked them into letting me in for one semester. So, I had to take some high school courses, and then started on the Bachelor of Theology degree, the three-year program, to begin preparing for pastoral ministry. And that's when I really came alive, not just spiritually, but also intellectually and academically. I really fell in love with the study of scripture and the disciplines of learning. And so those would have been a couple of major turning points for me that shaped me in my childhood.  I had the privilege of leading my dad to the Lord at the Salvation Army drop-in center in Toronto. He was out on the streets. I'd been pastoring in the city for a couple of years and went down to help the Salvation Army at their Harbor Light Mission. One night when I was preaching, my dad came in off the street, and I didn't know he was there, he didn't know I was there, and when they had the altar service at the end, he came forward. And the captain and I led him to the Lord and the Salvation Army took him in. He was a cook, and so he cooked for their officer's training college there when I was in Toronto. And with the problem with alcohol, it's a recidivism situation. And he fell off the wagon two or three times, but I believe he made a genuine commitment to the Lord. And then later I also saw my mom come to faith as well. So I was able to be reconciled to both my parents even though they never reconciled together. I trust that they're reconciled now with Jesus in heaven. Those are a couple of major anchor points for me. [00:05:14] Tommy Thomas: With that kind of backdrop, walk us through your pilgrimage to the PhD. [00:05:20] David Gyerston: I went to Lorne Park College, which was the Free Methodist School. Completed two years of the Bachelor of Theology degree when the school went bankrupt and closed. Those of us in that program had the option of either transferring to Roberts Wesleyan College or Spring Arbor College, and I ended up going to Spring Arbor, with about a dozen others from Lorne Park, and while I was there, I came under the tutelage of Dr. David McKenna. He took an interest in me and began to suggest that perhaps my calling, because I wasn't sure about pastoral ministry, was Christian higher education. And then when he left and went to be president at Seattle Pacific University Dr. Elwood Voller came from Roberts, interestingly enough, as president, and he picked up that mantle, and so he got me into a master's degree program at Michigan State, where he had previously been Dean of Student Affairs there, earlier in his career, and I finished up. I did a Master's in Sociology, Social Work, and Counseling. Then felt I needed to go back to Canada because I owed some service and went back to pastor a church in Toronto and did a second Master's Degree in Comparative Higher Education at the University of Toronto.  And so I was specializing in comparative higher education, comparing and contrasting the U. S. system of higher education with the Australian system of higher education. And again, not to get in the weeds, but the Australians were the first to really pioneer distance education. And so, they were doing a lot of education over ham radio in the Outback. It was really interesting to see how they began that distance-distributed education model that was later picked up in the U. S. systems. Then came back to Spring Arbor, working and teaching at the university, and pursued a Ph.D. at Michigan State, which was in administration and management, particularly focused on college and university administration and management. And then did a special cognate in the field of organizational communication theory and innovation theory. And then graduated with a Ph.D. in that area. [00:07:43] Tommy Thomas: So, I know you taught along the way, but think back to your first management job when you actually had people reporting to you. What do you remember about that? [00:07:52] David Gyerston: Woody Voller felt that I needed to get a lot of experience across the various administrative operations. And so, I was in student development, I was in admissions recruitment, and enrollment management. I was in fundraising in the area of writing grants and raising money, alumni relations, and church relations. In most of those, I only had a secretary reporting to me so my first really significant time of leadership came when I was invited to go to Virginia Beach to help start what was originally CBN University. I was one of the founding team members of Regent University and that grew then and we ended up with a significant number of faculty and staff. Later I was President and had those responsibilities and was invited then after that to become President at Asbury University and went there and led the institution for seven years and then was invited to Taylor University as President and led that institution for five years. And so that was the senior leadership journey went into semi-retirement, went back into teaching in the PhD programs and Doctor of Ministry or Doctor of Strategic Leadership Programs at Regent was in an endowed faculty chair. Then began my consulting and coaching work with the emerging Christian leaders during that time. I went out to California for a couple of years but one of my clients was struggling with an accreditation issue. So I took over the leadership of that institution to help them through that. And then we decided to retire back here in Kentucky. At Asbury, and with that known, the president at the seminary asked me to come back and be the founding dean of the Beeson School of Practical Theology. When I was here previously with David McKenna, I'd served with him as his vice president and was on the faculty at the seminary earlier on in my career before I went back to Virginia Beach, and that's too long a story to tell. But, essentially, we had gotten a $60 million grant from the Beeson family to start the Beeson Center and when Dr. Tennant at the seminary heard I was coming back, he wanted me to come back and revisit that and restructure it. So I was Associate Provost and Dean of the Beeson Center. And then the school, until just recently, when I finally, I never was going to fully retire, but I finally retired again from getting a paycheck and now I'm working, in the coaching and consulting and doing some teaching on the side. ++++++++++++++++++++ [00:10:36] Tommy Thomas:  You've been a part of two maybe two quasi-startups. So I guess the Beeson Center was a startup, and CBN was pretty much a startup. When you think of a startup, in this case, a university or college, what are some things that are different than when you went to Ashbury and Taylor, where you had something that had been around a long time? [00:10:59] David Gyerston: Yeah, I sequentially, the startup was moving from Spring Arbor to Virginia Beach. Throughout my career, I've either been involved in start-ups, fix-ups, or ramp-ups and usually, it's three to five years in those various settings. And in my career path, essentially, I've either been involved in startups, fix-ups, or ramp-ups, have been essentially, and usually it's three to five years in those various settings. And in going to Regent, of course, it was ground zero and starting everything from scratch. There were three of us on the initial team, an academic leader, a librarian, and myself, for everything else. And of course, it's navigating all of the various governmental and accreditation hoops in order to even start a university, which took us a year, and then trying to decide where we would focus in terms of our curriculum. Initially, we felt we could have the greatest impact by focusing on graduate-level education at the master's level. Intentionally Christ-centered, we were looking for students who had a call in their life and needed a place to enhance their call. And so, we established what we thought were the six or seven major arenas where if we could find talented, deeply committed Christian men and women and train them well and put them into positions of influence, we perhaps could impact culture the quickest and the fastest. And so communications, and then education, and then business, and then counseling, then law. All became part of the original plan and within five years, we had all of those programs up and operating with a student body of around seven or eight hundred. Today, Regent has a student body of over ten thousand. It's 11,500 this past year both with an undergraduate and graduate program up through the Ph.D. [00:12:49] Tommy Thomas: So you've hired a lot of people and you've fired one or two probably. But when you're hiring at the cabinet level, what are you looking for? [00:12:57] David Gyerston: So much of this begins with the reality that these presidential roles are too big for any single person to manage. I've been doing a lot of work the last decade or more helping universities in transition, and particularly working with them as they try to figure out who they're going to need to lead them next. And particularly the last three to five years, the complexities have been so intense that it's become clear that there's no single person who can possibly do all that a president's office is responsible for. So I've stopped thinking about finding presidents and thinking about teams that can make up the office of the president, which is a different perspective. And so you begin with, obviously, the institutional needs. And there are some generalized needs that all institutions have, but there are some immediately pressing needs. When I am working with a Board on the on-boarding of a new president, one of the questions I am asking is “What are the essential big rocks that the President needs to move in the first 90-120 days on the job?” That are distinctive and unique to that institution. And so the president needs to be equipped to address those. Often when I'm onboarding new presidents, one of the things I'm working with the Board of Trustees on and the search committee on, are what are the essential big rocks the president needs to move in the first 90 to 120 days. Or there isn't going to be any institution left. And you've got to deal with the crises at hand. And that then determines, the nature of the president's ability to handle those. And in building a team now, in terms of the office of the president, the C-Suite that will support the President, you begin with what are the institutional needs, the most pressing needs at this moment, what are the skill sets needed to address those pressing needs. Do they exist in the president, or does the president need to bring around her or him, the team members that can bring the multiple different skill sets needed to address and resolve the Immediate crises and then the long-term needs of the institution? One of the things that we're finding, Tommy, is that the old model, which was the command and control, top-down, the person that went to the mountain and got the direction and came back and said, here's where we're going, that model isn't working anymore. In most institutions, let alone higher education institutions. And so in the faith-based community, of course, we're always looking for, the next Moses or David. And the reality is, there is no Moses or David anymore that can possibly handle everything that needs to be done. And so, one of the most important skill sets in a new executive leader is can that person understand their strengths and weaknesses, and do they have an orientation toward collaborative decision making and are they able to identify build and support a team then that can bring the various pieces to bear and that means a person that's not threatened by people smarter than them, and more equipped and talented than them. Usually in the C suite when I've been asked to help presidents identify direct reports, that's the strategy I follow. What are your needs? What are your skill sets, Mr. President, Mrs. President, meeting those needs? And what kind of team members do you need in order to complement and supplement yourself? And that collaborative model with a person who's very, and this is another dimension, very secure in their sense of calling to the position becomes really important, particularly for faith-based institutions. [00:16:32] Tommy Thomas: So, let's flip that over then, I know every now and then you've had to release somebody. How is that best done? [00:16:40] David Gyerston: I don't think there's any off-the-rack suit, and plan to do this. I think, obviously, it begins with a very honest, open and thorough assessment of where the individual is not performing effectively. Not everybody would agree with me on this. I tend to view a subordinate's dysfunction as my dysfunction. And it's my problem. What is it that I haven't done to ensure that this person is equipped, is empowered, enabled, and is supported to get the job done?  It's the old biblical idea. Let's look at the spec - beam in my own eye here before I start looking at the spec in somebody else's. And then it's a process of being sure that we've thoroughly communicated to the employee, the dysfunctioning employee, what the expectations are a lot of times people are surprised when they're fired because they had no idea what the supervisor was expecting of them because the supervisor had not communicated effectively, and there is now a lot of legal realities around due process and paper trails. And that's helped us, I think, as leaders, to be more thorough in communicating and documenting areas that need improvement and usually, I like to start with here's where some dysfunctions need to be corrected. Let's work together to figure out how to correct them. Here are the objectives and the performance measurements we're going to use and then give three to five to six months if that's possible. Sometimes you've got to let somebody go very quickly. If it's a moral failure or a complete incompetence failure, you may have to act more quickly. But I want to be sure before I fired anyone, that I had thoroughly communicated my expectations, and had laid out a thorough plan for them to be successful. And then after feedback over several weeks, a couple of months, three months, if that still wasn't making them successful, then to work with them to find a respectable and honorable departure and wherever that was possible and we had the financial resources, we always wanted to give people, a landing pad so that they could be assisted in finding their next place of employment. If a person is just completely incompetent, so much of this is attitude, I think, in bringing up children, often it isn't the behavior that we want to discipline, it's the attitude behind the behavior that we want to focus on and so for me, I'm always looking for is, does this person have a teachable spirit? Is there a sense of humility? The other thing to take into account is, and I've failed here a couple of times badly, where I left a person in a position too long in terms of hoping that they would course correct and I did damage to their team and their team members were hurt, frustrated several of them in a couple of situations end up just quitting because they felt like nothing was going to change. And I realized then that I've got to find a balance between giving time for people to perform effectively and recognizing when it's time. I think if there's any mistake I've made in my career, it's that I've not fired fast enough. Because so much grace was given to me, I think I tend to allow that to color my approach to people. And sometimes there's too much grace when more deliberate immediate action is going to be needed. ++++++++++++++++++++= [00:20:33] Tommy Thomas: I'll move over to team leadership for a minute. I want you to think of maybe your best team and then tell me about the most ambitious project you've ever undertaken and how you got the team to come behind you. [00:20:48] David Gyerston: Again, various opportunities present themselves at various times, some of those are unique opportunities that are positive in nature. We have the opportunity to receive a 50 million grant and we need to figure out how we're going to use that effectively. There are times when essentially, we're in crisis. And we've got to figure out collaboratively and in unity how we're going to deal with those crises. The one for me, which was most significant, is when I became the president of an institution, I won't name specifically, and walked into a very large building project that had failed miserably and they'd been trying to raise money for two or three years, it was a $25 or $30 million project, which in that institution's case was the largest they'd ever taken on, and they had only raised a couple of million. And so, we had to pull a team together to figure out why wasn't the money coming in? Because I tend to operate on the principle that if God ordered it, then God's going to provide for it. And if God isn't providing for it, then possibly he didn't order it. And so we went right back to square one on this particular facility. And again, without getting too far in the weeds, went back to a complete reassessment of the actual needs and what the facilities were going to be used for, pulled a massive team together of end users, as well as key people, including prospective donors alumni in that institution. And then relaunched we had to eat about a million dollars of costs on the old plan. But we launched it and within three years or less than three years, we had raised all of the money necessary to build the building debt-free. And so much of that was again, basically getting the right people, involved in the opportunity at the right time and place. And then giving them the freedom to bring their creativity and inviting them to make it happen. And that institution tended to look to its CEO for all of the decision-making. So, we had a culture change that needed to be made. And initially, people were uncomfortable being invited into a collaborative process. They were used to being good soldiers. The general issued the orders. And we marched on the hill and took it or didn't take it. This idea of participating in the design and decision-making and process was something that from a cultural vantage point had to be addressed before we could actually be successful. So I don't know if that gets at what you're thinking about Tommy, but that's just a process I've used. [00:23:39] Tommy Thomas: Going over to maybe back to general leadership, and we see I guess probably if you've been around as long as you and I have, you've probably seen a lot of leaders fail. What do you think is the most dangerous behavior or trait that contributes to a leader's derailing her or his career? [00:24:01] David Gyerston:   There are lots of ways to describe this, but I think basically a core sense of humility and understanding what your limitations are. I think most of the triage work I've done with leaders in crisis really comes back to their own understanding of their, or lack of understanding of their weaknesses and limitations. And so often the failure is the direct result of a blindness to those aspects of their leadership style, their decision-making that essentially, they weren't aware of. And some of this we define broadly in psychological terms as EQ, the ability to read the room accurately, to discern how we're coming across. A lot of times one of the manifestations of a lack of EQ is a talker rather than the listener kind of orientation, somebody asks a question and answers it for themself. I see that a lot, particularly in Western leadership. I've taught in Singapore, I've taught in South Africa, and there's a very different modality of leadership in those settings. We in the Western world have this great man, great woman approach. So, the leader of the belief that they have to have the answer for everything and they can never admit that they're not capable of bringing the answer or that they need help in finding the answer. And so that all boils down to a lack of self-awareness which often is manifested in a lack of humility to admit where a leader needs assistance and help. Sometimes that gets shown particularly in a relationship between a CEO and their board, where the CEO is not completely forthcoming, particularly with difficult news or bad news. And we say in college university administration that the boards of trustees only have one employee, that's the president, right? And they rely then on the president to provide them with all of the accurate and transparent information they need to make good decisions, and I would say about 75% of the time when I'm invited to help with a leadership crisis, it's been a breakdown in communication between the CEO and the board, and I have a situation where I helped with a senior executive level search where the top three senior executives were fired, and they were shocked they were fired, and the board of trustees was shocked they were shocked. Because they thought they were communicating effectively to the leadership team and vice versa, and they were just missing each other, so one of the first things we had to do before even beginning the search process for new leadership was to figure out how to help the board become more effective in communicating, but also in asking for the strategic information that was essential to the viability and fidelity of the institution's mission. A lot of presidents in higher education, basically their reports to the board are designed to prove to the board they've hired the right guy as president. And in reality, the board needs to see some of the difficulties and be presented with reporting that is actionable, that allows them to make their fiduciary decisions with wisdom, etc. [00:27:36] Tommy Thomas: Yes, it's been said that we learn most from our failures If that's the case, why are most of us so afraid to fail? [00:27:44] David Gyerston: Again, I think it's a cultural expectation, particularly for leaders, that they have to be seen as competent and capable and successful. And I remember when I was pastoring in Toronto, pastoring one of our larger congregations in my denomination, and I was a young buck and a little bit too much full of myself. And I realized that, and one Sunday ended up having to apologize to the congregation for a couple of things that I had said and done. And they weren't moral failures or ethical failures, they were just, unwise things. As I stood at the door and shook hands with the folk as they were leaving, one of my more faithful members said to me, looked at me and she said, Pastor Gyerston, don't you ever do that again. And I said, what do you mean? And she says, don't you ever get up in front and tell us that you failed. She said, I don't want a pastor who is a failure. And so you've got this incredible sense of pressure that's on leaders that I think so often mitigates against us being transparent enough to admit that we are in need of help. You think of Moses, but he had to have Aaron stand on either side of him to hold up his hands. Aaron was the spiritual support. We think he was more of the operational administrative support person. And so, Moses could not have been successful in praying in that successful battle, had it not been for the fact that he admitted he couldn't hold his hands up until the sun went down. Unless a leader is willing to admit that he can't do everything and needs help, the tyranny of failure will be a part of that leader's administrative style. And then he needed people on either side of him to be holding up his hands. And so unless a leader is willing to admit they're in need then there's going to be this how is this tyranny of the fear of failure that's going to be a part of that leader's administrative style. ++++++++++++++++++++++++ As David shared, he has been the President of three different universities. You can only imagine the lessons on board governance, both best practices and some not-so-good that he has observed in working with different board chairs and reporting to different boards. Join us next week as we continue this conversation with David Gyerston.  Our focus will be Board Governance. [00:30:13] Tommy Thomas: Thank you for joining us today. If you are a first-time listener, I hope you will subscribe and become a regular. You can find links to all the episodes on our website: www.jobfitmatters.com/podcast. If there are topics you'd like for me to explore, my email address is tthomas@jobfitmatters.com.   Word of mouth has been identified as the most valuable form of marketing. Surveys tell us that consumers believe recommendations from friends and family over all other forms of advertising. If you've heard something today that's worth passing on, please share it with others. You're already helping me make something special for the next generation of nonprofit leaders. I'll be back next week with a new episode. Until then, stay the course on our journey to help make the nonprofit sector more effective and sustainable.   Links & Resources JobfitMatters Website Next Gen Nonprofit Leadership with Tommy Thomas The Perfect Search – What every board needs to know about hiring their next CEO   Connect tthomas@jobfitmatters.com Follow Tommy on LinkedIn  

 Hear from Former Executive Director of the Jacksonville Rescue Mission, Penny Kievet, as she shares insights on board governance and staffing responsibilities in this episode of the FitFundraising Podcast.   

It is quite the leap to go from in-house counsel to the board of directors. The transferable skills are definitely there, but there are governance essentials you have to practically learn on the job. We talk about this fascinating topic with today's guest. Lisa Hatton Harrington has been Corporate Secretary and Chief Legal Officer to global, publicly traded companies, privately held companies and is on the board of directors of public companies, private companies and several non-profits. In this episode, she shares governance essentials for The Legal Department and also offers tips for landing your first board seat. Tune in!

It's YOUR time to #EdUp! In this episode, recorded LIVE & in person from the ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE)⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ 2023 Annual Conference, in Philadelphia, PA... YOUR guests are Dr. Heather Perfetti, President at MSCHE, and Dr. Davie Gilmour, MSCHE Commission Chair. Drs. Perfetti and Gilmour joined EdUp to talk about the success of the MSCHE conference. They talked about the importance of attendance for MSCHE member schools, why institutional relationships with accreditors help to shape the future of higher education, and why finances should be at the top of the list for any college President. Leadership and Board Governance are a major focus for all! YOUR Guest Co-Host is Deborah Solmor, host of EdUp Legal. YOUR Host is ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Dr. Joe Sallustio⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Listen in to #EdUp! Visit MSCHE ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠here⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. And visit our sponsor LeadSquared ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠here⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Thank YOU so much for tuning in. Join us on the next episode for YOUR time to EdUp! Connect with YOUR EdUp Team - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Elvin Freytes⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ & ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Dr. Joe Sallustio⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ● Join YOUR EdUp community at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠The EdUp Experience⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠! We make education YOUR business! --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/edup/message

Everyone's talking about what went down at OpenAI - but what does it mean for ethical and responsible AI, and what are the lessons for entrepreneurs on startup board governance? With the abrupt dismissal of CEO Sam Altman, questions loom over the stability and direction of one of AI's most influential entities. Let's uncover the twists and turns in this high-stakes boardroom drama.Why was Sam Altman abruptly dismissed - only to be brought back again? What role did board member Helen Toner and the responsible AI community play in the firings? Who is on deck next as the newest members of the board - and who else should OpenAI consider bringing? What choices face Sam Altman - and key partner at Microsoft Satya Nadella - and what should these leaders do next? Finally, what can the AI and startup communities learn from how it all went down?Tom Chavez and Vivek Vaidya give us their timely takes on what happened at OpenAI. With incisive commentary and expert insights, they explore the events leading to Altman's sacking and the broader implications for AI governance. Note this episode was recorded on November 27th, 2023, and published on December 1st, 2023 so it may not reflect the most current developments at OpenAI.Read Tom Chavez's op-ed in Tech Crunch on the need for an interdisciplinary approach to AI alignment: https://www.superset.com/feed/tom-chavez-in-tech-crunch-answering-ais-biggest-questions-requires-an-interdisciplinary-approachListen to more episodes at www.theclosedsession.com

In this episode, Madrona Managing Director S. Somasegar and General Counsel Joanna Black discuss the fundamental role of a board in a startup's growth and development. They touch upon the importance of aligning strategic views with board members, managing disagreements, and effective governance to ensure that the organization is run efficiently. The duo offers numerous insights into the intricacies of board structure at different stages of a startup lifecycle, drawing parallels from recent events at OpenAI. The conversation covers the need for transparency, both in sharing good and bad news, and the necessity for a functional board reflecting a functional culture.    (00:00) Introduction (02:12) Differences between Nonprofit and For-profit Boards (03:03 Defining Governance and its Importance (04:20) The Role of a Board in Early-Stage Companies (06:33) Board Evolution with Company Growth (09:09) Choosing the Right Board Members (10:38) Navigating Disagreements and Conflicts within the Board (13:00) The Importance of Transparency and Communication in Board Governance (15:08) Conclusion and Final Thoughts

There was a time when college and university presidents used to boast lengthy terms of service. But today, most leave the position after five to seven years. Higher ed leaders are burning out.  A major contributor to this systemic problem is often a lapse in effective board governance. After faithfully serving in several leadership roles, including as president of three major Christian universities, Dave Gyertson coaches many presidents who question their calling to lead Christian institutions. Dave talks about why boards need to be good stewards of their presidents and monitor their health as well as their performance. Join us as we discuss: - The need for boards to set parameters and guide their presidents (10:45) - The scope of new challenges college presidents face today (14:57) - Why boards need to monitor the president's health (19:07) Check out these resources we mentioned during the podcast: - ABHE Board Governance Training  To hear this interview and many more like it, subscribe on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or our website or search for Biblical Higher Ed Talk in your favorite podcast player. Hosted by Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

Who's looking out for your best interesting?For businesses, it's the board of directors. They are a group of people chosen to look after a company and make sure it is being run well.But what happens when a board goes beyond its authority?Find out in the next episode of the Audit Bites podcast.Audit Bites is a podcast that provides valuable insights for internal audit professionals.Mark your calendars and join us live on LinkedIn or YouTube. And hey, don't forget to subscribe on your favorite podcasting platform.Looking forward to having you on board (pun intended) for the next episode!#internalaudit #auditors #thatauditguy

[00:00:00] John Sommerville: I was talking to somebody recently who was saying that you should never surround yourself with people who are just yes people. And I said to him, you don't want to surround yourself with people who are no people either. What we need is people who really love us and care for us and will do both. They will tell us and give us positive affirmation when we need it, and they will tell us the truth when we need to hear it, even if it's uncomfortable. +++++++++++++++++ [00:00:27] Tommy Thomas: Today, we're continuing the conversation we began last week with John Somerville. John is the Vice President for Finance and Operations and the Chief Financial Officer at The University of Northwestern St. Paul. John has served as the Board Chair at InterVarsity Christian Fellowship and currently serves on the Board of Trustees of Christianity Today. Some things you probably won't learn about John from the internet include he's an avid reader, reading on average 50 plus books a year. He's an avid runner. He's completed six marathons, including the 2019 Boston Marathon, and more than 20 half marathons. And he's the author of Making Room for Christmas, a Collection of 10 Original Christmas stories. John has served in senior leadership with four different organizations and has done a lot of hiring. On the flip side, he has had to release people along the way. I'm always curious about any magic bullets that leaders might have around successful hiring and necessary firing. Let's pick up the conversation there. [00:01:39] Tommy Thomas: Have you got a favorite or a go-to interview question? [00:01:43] John Sommerville: I don't have a question. I have a category of questions. I like to ask behavioral questions. In other words, what did you do? I like to hear what people have done. Now, I don't actually ask many questions like, tell me about yourself, what do you like or what are your qualities. Because I think people can develop answers to those that are not grounded in what they actually are. They're aspirational. They may say, I'm innovative or I'm a strong leader. I like to ask questions about things they've done and hear through that what I think they may do again in the future. [00:02:20] Tommy Thomas: You know I found in my business, it's easier said than done to get a hiring committee to do that. One of my favorite ways of going at that is I tell them to circle the action verbs on somebody's resume and then peel back the layers of the onion. What did that look like? But I never cease to be amazed that people don't want to do that. It's interesting that you develop that early in your career. [00:02:47] John Sommerville: Tommy, one of the things that I've appreciated about you and your organization is these motivated abilities, the kinds of surveys that you do. I think that's really wise because measuring qualities, whether it's introversion and extroversion, whether it's, whatever the test you have, if it just measures things that qualities about a person, you're still not getting at what are they going to do if I give them a job? [00:03:14] Tommy Thomas: So, you've given somebody a job, and for some reason, it didn't work out. What goes into your decision to terminate somebody and maybe what have you found to be the best way to do it? Hire slow, Fire fast! [00:03:26] John Sommerville: I think you hire slow, fire fast. I have to confess that I have found performance improvement plans virtually worthless. In other words, we do them because sometimes maybe we believe we need to do them legally, or in some other way we need to be fair. Maybe we've delayed too long in giving feedback we should have given earlier. I think if I've made any mistake in leadership and managing people over time, it's sometimes I'm too patient. I sometimes assume that this person's going to catch hold, but once we determine as leaders that someone is the wrong fit or doesn't have the abilities I think we need to call it quits. The other thing that I try to discern is their willingness and ability. What is it that is getting in the way? And if it's ability or skills, I'm more willing to be patient and let the person try to give the person the coaching they need. I once worked with someone who was struggling with our boss. And he and I were runners, and we were on a run together and he was complaining to me about our mutual boss and why he didn't get along. And halfway through the run, I said to him, you know what? I said the issue here isn't your ability to do what he wants you to do. It's your willingness. You don't want to do this. You don't like the direction he wants to take your role in the organization. And by the end of the run, he said, you're right. And he began to make a transition out of the organization. Discerning those things is really important. [00:05:00] Tommy Thomas: Let's go back to hiring for a minute. In this litigious world that we live in, what credence or stock do you place in reference checking? [00:05:10] John Sommerville: Some, but people choose who they give you. I try to ask questions that I think can get beyond the surface. In other words, I try actually not to ask as many open-ended questions as you might imagine. And I try to ask questions that get at, have they had conflict with someone? How did they resolve it? Have you watched them fail? And what did you learn from them in that instance? I try to ask questions that are as behavioral as possible and I may ask what are their greatest accomplishments, but also what things didn't they get done for you or what do you think they need to improve on? And sometimes they can't answer because they don't really know. The other thing that I do is if I know anybody who's in any way connected to them. If it's not on the resume, it's not a ref on their reference. I may call them anyway.  I may say hey I'm talking to so and I think you know them. I noticed on LinkedIn you're connected to them. Can you tell me anything about them? I'll go beyond the list of references to find out what I can about people. [00:06:18] Tommy Thomas: Where were you in your career when you felt like you were comfortable in your leadership skin, when you were comfortable that you were a leader? [00:06:28] John Sommerville: I think that I would say that in some ways, I don't know that we should ever get too comfortable. I think I have learned over the years things that I do well and things that I don't do well, and that's become clear over time. And so I would say that I got more comfortable maybe particularly early in the years that I was leading the church that we planted. And I would say during my time at General Mills, I was around a lot of great leaders, and I was young. And so, I probably felt more unsettled, or I was still learning and feeling and learning what I do well. But I've always found that every year I have a new insight, a different way of understanding what it is I do best. Try to do those things as much as I can and things I don't do as well. Try to either work to remediate or try to find somebody else who can complement me in that area. ++++++++++++++++++++ [00:07:22] Tommy Thomas: I'd like to get you to respond to a few quotes and then I want to go over into board work because board work is at the crux of the nonprofit sector. So, here's a quote from Dr. Martin Luther King. The ultimate measure of a person is not where they stand in moments of convenience, but where they stand in moments of challenge, moments of great crisis and controversy. I think that it is easy to lead when things are going well and much more difficult when things are not going well, and I think that we need to learn to be able to lead when we have less than full information, when things are murky. [00:07:47] John Sommerville: I think that it is easy to lead when things are going well and much more difficult when things are not going well, and I think that we need to learn to be able to lead when we have less than full information, when things are murky and sometimes that means pausing and waiting, not making a decision impulsively, and sometimes it means, like I mentioned with the elevator and our president, our division president, you just need to do something. So sometimes leaders have to give direction. You mentioned authenticity earlier. There are times when being too authentic can be unsettling for people. I felt like that at the beginning of COVID. And yet I knew I needed to lead with clarity and direction on what we were going to do as a church. And I'm sure many leaders felt unsettled. The future was not certain. So sometimes it's beginning to move in a direction and then improvise as you go. [00:08:44] Tommy Thomas: Here's one from C. S. Lewis. Pain insists upon being attended to. God whispers to us in our pleasures, speaks in our consciences, but shouts in our pains.  It's his megaphone to rouse a deaf world. [00:09:02] John Sommerville: One of the things that I've become more grateful for, and this will sound like an oxymoron, but I've become grateful for times of hurt and pain in the sense that they lead us toward growth. And also times when I feel inadequate. One of the things I told my wife a couple of years ago was that I'd gone through a season where I felt I had to live in daily dependence just because of what was going on around me. And I left that season and moved into a time where things felt a lot better. And I told her the one thing I did miss from that difficult time was that sense of dependence, daily dependence I had upon God. And I think that pain focuses us on things that we might need to change. Difficulty drives us to depend upon God. And I think whenever we begin to feel like we're adequate we're putting ourselves in a dangerous place because we're beginning to reassert our own control on living outside of the dependence that we need to have upon God. [00:10:09] Tommy Thomas: Here's one from Rob Hoskins.  He's the CEO of One Hope.  Surround yourself with people who know you better than you know yourself and will tell you the truth out of love. This is how we grow. I was talking to somebody recently who was saying that you should never surround yourself with people who are just yes people.  And I said to him, you don't want to surround yourself with people who are no people either. What we need is, and some of it has to do with people who really love us and care for us and will do both. [00:10:24] John Sommerville: I was talking to somebody recently who was saying that you should never surround yourself with people who are just yes people. And I said to him, you don't want to surround yourself with people who are no people either. What we need is, and some of it has to do with people who really love us and care for us and will do both. They will tell us and give us positive affirmation when we need it, and they will tell us the truth when we need to hear it, even if it's uncomfortable. And we all need people who have permission, and we give permission to speak that way into our lives. We will not grow. We will not have the perspective we need to have if we don't have people like that in our lives. And sometimes our spouses play that role, sometimes another leader, sometimes a friend. And I've had that and try to maintain that in my life all the time. Somebody just that I work with, a peer here, about three weeks ago said, by the way, John, and he then listed something he had observed, and he said, I think you need to do less of that. Absolutely right. And really helpful. [00:11:28] Tommy Thomas: Never tell people how to do things. Tell them what to do and they'll surprise you with their ingenuity. General George Patton. [00:11:38] John Sommerville: It's interesting that would come from Patton. My perception of him was he was a pretty directive leader. But I do think that what we need to tell people is what's the outcome we're looking for. There are a lot of different ways to accomplish things. And most of the time if we prescribe it, we may find that we're either thwarting an innovation that we might not have thought of, or we're asking somebody to do something and be a clone. So be very clear about the deliverable, and the outcome that you're looking for, and then let the process unfold. Now, the exception to that is somebody who's brand new. Sometimes what you need to do is do it with them. Watch them do it and then release them to do it. And that may take a little time. [00:12:19] Tommy Thomas: Sticking with our military theme and preparing for battle, I've always found that plans are useless, but planning is indispensable.  President Dwight David Eisenhower. [00:12:31] John Sommerville: Once I had heard someone say that what we ought to develop is not plans, but fuzzy plans. And I think that the principle is what Eisenhower is getting at. And that is that what a plan provides is a general direction, but if you prescribe it as a step one, two, three, like a YouTube video telling you how to replace a lock or something what you'll find is that if you run into a challenge, something's broken or something's not right, then you're stuck. What we need to do is provide general guidance but let that plan unfold and improvise as we go. The best leaders do that in a way where they can lead even in the midst of uncertainty. [00:13:13] Tommy Thomas: When you're sitting around the table with your leadership team, you never want to be the smartest person at the table. [00:13:19] John Sommerville: You know the genius with a thousand helpers, or five helpers eventually will find the limits of their abilities. They'll find the limits of their wisdom but if you create a culture where there is collaboration, even if the leader is the smartest person in the room they are never going to be smart enough to see everything. So there always needs to be an openness to ideas. If you continually squash the ideas of others, you'll not be as effective. I think collaboration, developing diverse teams, and listening before acting is extremely important. [00:13:58] Tommy Thomas: Peter Drucker, the most important thing in communication is to hear what isn't being said. [00:14:06] John Sommerville: I think that's true. I think that this is one of the problems in this soundbite era. When we develop talking points, as we listen to what leaders, organizations and others say they're trying to shape a message. It's important to listen for what's not being said, and this is one of the problems we have, I think, with the lack of sustained reflection that this digital age has led us to, where you can summarize everything in a couple hundred characters, we miss a lot of nuances.  It's important to ask questions that maybe go beyond what's being said. [00:14:41] Tommy Thomas: Problems cannot be solved at the same level of thinking at which they were created. Albert Einstein. [00:14:49] John Sommerville: I've not heard that one before. I don't know what Einstein meant, but I can think of two ways that is true. One is that sometimes the problem is created at a level where there needs to be more detail and more understanding of what really is going on. A quote that I've used a lot and I found to be true is that there is simplicity on the near side of complexity that is overly simplistic. And then there's simplicity on the far side of complexity that takes in account all the complexity and finds a way to work beyond it. It may be that what Einstein's talking about is the idea that sometimes you need to dive deep into the details. And other times you need to lift yourself above the details to be able to see the big picture. And both need to be incorporated into good decision-making. But it's easy to get lost in the trees. And it's sometimes easy also at the same time to maybe lift yourself too high so you don't see. Some of the nuance and the details that are there. +++++++++++++++++ [00:15:49] Tommy Thomas: Let's switch over to board governance and board service. I know you've served on, I won't say countless, but certainly many boards. And I would imagine you've probably chaired two or three of them. When you think of a Board of Directors or Board of Trustees, what's their purpose? The purpose of the Board is to nurture and shepherd the mission of the institution. [00:16:02] John Sommerville: Their purpose is to nurture and shepherd the mission of the institution. And the people who are running the organization need to be managing and leading and all of that. But the board needs to do what it can to make certain that the mission is continuing. There's not mission drift that the organization continues to fulfill its purposes. When they see either a leader leading the organization away from its mission or being ineffective at accomplishing its mission they need to intervene. But they need to be leading at a governance level, making certain that the systems and structures are in place. So, the organization is equipped to accomplish what it needs to accomplish. [00:16:46] Tommy Thomas: When you think of the best board chair you've ever observed or served under, give me some words and phrases that describe that person. [00:16:53] John Sommerville: The people I've seen lead well are very clear about the difference between management and governance. They're very clear about keeping the conversation at the level of mission, vision, and values. They are very good at keeping the organization accountable. Particularly the senior executive. That's the linking pin between the board and the administration. And they are I think relentless about making certain that the board functions really well and doesn't start inserting itself. I've been on a couple of occasions around a board that was really a group of friends who liked hanging out together and they were they weren't paying attention, and then I've been in other boards, and this is probably more common, where they were trying to reach down into management and meddle, and that's ineffective and inappropriate. [00:17:52] Tommy Thomas: Maybe this goes back to your earlier comment you may know Dr. Rebecca Basinger she says, Governing Boards are charged with safeguarding an institution's ability to fulfill its mission with economic vitality. To this I add, responsibility for tending to the soul of the institution. [00:18:12] John Sommerville: I think that I would put it slightly differently. I think that there needs to be a heart in all that we do. This is not original with me, but the idea of orthodoxy. Ortho in Greek is the word for straight, and so orthodoxy is straight doctrine or, right doctrine. And then you often hear people talk about orthopraxy, that there also needs to be these actions that are consistent with your doctrinal position. But the third, which is a neologism, is orthopathy. Path, pathos is the word for passions or even the heart. All three need to be there in an organization. So there needs to be right, if you think about a Christian, we need right doctrine, we need right behavior. And we also need the right heart. And I have been around boards or been around, say, a church board or so, where people had all the right doctrine, they were focused on the right kinds of behavior, but they didn't really have a passion for the church or the ministry that they're leading. All three need to be there and the best boards that I've been around really believe in the mission of the organization, they're clear about the kinds of behaviors they want to see, and they also love it. They just love that organization or that church. And they want to see it achieve what it's meant to achieve. [00:19:37] Tommy Thomas: The Chair and the CEO must learn to dance together, and neither can stray very far from each other's gaze or proceed independently. The Chair and the CEO need to be able to find a balance between the accountability that the chair provides and the nurture and support and really encouragement and having that CEO or that board the organization's president's back. [00:19:49] John Sommerville: I have seen CEOs and Board Chairs have a relationship that is just incredible. And I think that the Chair and the CEO need to be able to find a balance between the accountability that the chair provides and the nurture and support and really encouragement and having that CEO or that board the organization's president's back. Leadership can be lonely, and a board chair can make a significant difference. Now, if the CEO gets out of line, the board chair is going to need to bring that kind of discipline and structure to it, but too many chairs either go to the extreme of not holding the organization leader accountable, but more often what they do is they forget that they need to be that cheerleader, encourager and support to help protect that leader. And I've seen board chairs do that in really effective ways.  [00:20:48] Tommy Thomas: Let's go to board size. This guy, Ernest Happel, said the fewer board members, the better. If it's 18, I'm just not interested. [00:20:56] John Sommerville: I think it depends on the organization, but I do think that there is a critical mass. You can get too small. Four or five, or six is probably too small for most boards in part, because if it has any geographic scope, if it's a national board, you're going to have a few that don't show up each time. But once you get beyond eight or ten, what happens is you think you're increasing participation, but you're actually decreasing participation. Because some people are either quiet or feel ill at ease speaking up when there are twelve or fifteen on a board. So your participation will go down. If you can, eight to 10 is I think the ideal size. Beyond that, I think it's a problem, but there are boards that do that are larger, if the philanthropic needs of the organization if you have people who are significantly investing financially in the organization and want to be active in a positive way. I think boards that are larger, particularly educational institutions tend to have larger boards for that reason. So I would say generally that's true, but not always. +++++++++++++++ [00:22:04] Tommy Thomas: Let's go to succession planning. That's something in my experience that not enough organizations do enough of in a timely way. I recently heard a nonprofit CEO say, “When they want you to stay is the best time to leave”. [00:22:20] John Sommerville: I think that there needs to be constant conversation with the CEO about the future. And sometimes they couch it as if you're hit by a bus, who would you recommend? That's the rudimentary way to approach that. That's really a transitional leader that you identify. But I think once a leader has been in an organization for four or five years there needs to be a beginning conversation about how's your energy. How are you feeling about this? The leader owes the organization enough time and it depends on the size and the mission of the institution, but sometimes that's a year or two years to say, I'm starting to sense from the Spirit that it's time for me to move on. And I'm not sure exactly when that will be. And then you have a conversation that begins to lead toward a transition. An orderly transition is invaluable in an organization when someone abruptly quits and there isn't that time and it's the responsibility of both the chief executive and the board itself to initiate that conversation. It can be hard because sometimes a leader is offended believing that question is coming because the board wants them to move on so it needs to be very carefully broached or vice versa the board believes that this person has lost interest in the job, and there needs to be some dialogue, but that transparency and honesty is both owed to each other.  [00:23:50] Tommy Thomas: Once the decision's been made, from your observation, how much time should go between the announcement and the new person being hired or promoted? [00:24:00] John Sommerville: I think it's different in different organizations. Churches sometimes need a gap, an intentional gap between the previous leader, especially if that person's been there for a long time, whether it's a founding pastor or a long-time successful pastor, there may need to be a gap and an intentional interim can be helpful. That's not always the way it is in para-church organizations and nonprofit organizations. There will need to be a time when you actually start the search. If the leader can stay through a transition, that can be really helpful. But generally, I think it takes about a year to do that process from the time that it's being announced. How long it takes to develop a new position profile and understand what the organization needs of its next leader may be a little different than the current leader. To be able to generate that, to be able to sort through possible candidates and make that it's generally, I would think, a year that's been my observation. [00:24:57] Tommy Thomas: Let's talk about the pros and cons of grooming and promoting from within versus hiring from the outside. See if you can debate both sides of that coin. [00:25:09] John Sommerville: I think the fork in the road has to do with what does the organization need? I do believe that many of the best transitions are internal candidates. They know the organization. If they are ready to take the step of moving up into that senior leader role, they already have trust. They already have experience. They understand things. And that can be, I would often lean in that direction. I think that's often the best way to go. But you can't compromise on what you need out of that next leader. And if that person doesn't exist in the organization, then an external candidate can be important. I think the other thing is if things are going well we definitely would lean toward an internal candidate, but if things have somehow gone off the rails for one reason or another, there's a significant challenge, then sometimes an external leader can be necessary. I will say that my observation is that insiders have a tendency to be slightly more successful than outsiders. There's just something about knowing the organization, both for the leader and for the organization. There's something about that knowledge of who you are and who the organization is that can be more. [00:26:28] Tommy Thomas: What about this idea that the CEO stays around as an emeritus or in some role? [00:26:34] John Sommerville: I'm not a fan of that. I think that that can feel like a cloud over a leader. I have seen cases emeritus. And what they do. I've heard of organizations where the Parachurch organization once I heard about where the previous president came to board meetings and expressed his opinion and the new leader took several years to be able to really assert his leadership. That was not healthy. Generally, I think in a church it's good for a pastor who's leaving to separate and allow the new leader to begin to take the organization in a direction that might be a new direction. And parachurch organizations, I think the same thing. I'm not a fan of that. [00:27:23] Tommy Thomas: Before COVID, I spoke several times to non-profits about succession planning, and one of the areas we talked about was the departing leader. One of my observations is that there's probably a lot more of the departing leader's identity tied up CEO than he or she might realize. Your observations. [00:27:42] John Sommerville: I think that is often true. I think that's a discipleship issue where I think all leaders need to be aware of how much their identity can get wrapped up in what they do, what they achieve, and what they accomplish. And our identity needs to be in Christ. I heard a leader one time say after leaving the organization that he was responsible for, he said, I no longer feel relevant. And I was disappointed to hear that. Now, I'm not judging him. I'm sure that's a process that I'll go through as I move into the next chapter of my life. But I think we need to teach people that they are more than what they do. And I think it's unfortunate if that happens, but I can see as a human we do get identified with what we do.  But it's not healthy most likely. [00:28:37] Tommy Thomas: So, if you get a call this week from somebody in the Twin Cities and they've been encouraged to join a board of a XYZ nonprofit they're coming to you for counsel. What questions are you asking them or what questions do you want to make sure they get answered? [00:28:55] John Sommerville: I would ask them first, is this an organization that you're passionate about? Do you support them financially already? Is this an organization where you respect the leadership? Do you feel like you have something to offer? Is this an organization that you're willing to give a few years to, because sometimes people say, I might do it for a year, just a year, just to figure out the basics of the organization.  I once was asked to join a board and the person who was assigned to be my mentor, I asked him, I said what's required on this board? He said it's really an easy board. He said I get on an airplane, and I read the board book on the way to the meeting. And then you go sit in committee meetings. It's really easy. It's the board I have to invest the least in. And I thought I'm not interested in this. And I found out when I got there that he was an ineffective board member and the best board members were really investing time. Don't go on a board unless you're willing to do some work, unless you're willing to spend the time to give it what it needs. +++++++++++++++++++++++++ [00:30:04] Tommy Thomas: Thank you for joining us today. If you are a first-time listener, I hope you will subscribe and become a regular. You can find links to all the episodes at our website. www.JobfitMatters.com/podcast. If there are topics that you'd like for me to explore my email address is tthomas@jobfitmatters.com.   Word of mouth has been identified as the most valuable form of marketing. Surveys tell us that consumers believe recommendations from friends and family over all other forms of advertising. If you've heard something today that's worth passing on, please share it with others. You're already helping me make something special for the next generation of nonprofit leaders. I'll be back next week with a new episode. Until then stay the course on our journey to help make the nonprofit sector more effective and sustainable.   Links & Resources JobfitMatters Website Next Gen Nonprofit Leadership with Tommy Thomas   Connect tthomas@jobfitmatters.com Follow Tommy on LinkedIn

In this episode you will learn:00:00 - Introduction: The Essence of Startup Board Roles00:34 - Board Governance vs. Decision-Making: An In-depth Exploration00:37 - Understanding the Board of Directors and Their Vital Duties10:25 - The Optimal Timing for Establishing a Business Board16:50 - Defining 'Board Chairperson,' 'Board Observer,' and 'Non-Executive Board Member'22:50 - Founder or Investor as Chair: A Crucial Decision and Its Rationale23:55 - Finding the Right Board Size for Early-Stage Startups and Its Significance27:00 - Strategies for Assembling Your Startup's Dream Board31:40 - Red Flags to Watch Out for When Building Your Board33:30 - Ideal Dynamics Among Board Members: A Guide for Startups36:10 - Effective vs. Ineffective Communication Practices Between Founders and Investors39:55 - Smooth Sailing Through Board Meetings: Best Practices 47:40 - The Mystery of Board Packs and Their PurposeAboutJoe is a coach to CEOs. He works with CEOs at start-ups, high growth to IPO to public companies to the big exit; helping define what it means to be a leader, how to create impact, how to grow alongside the business and how to change the world all while enjoying every part of that journey. Joe is a recovering neuroscientist, then a spell as an elementary school teacher as well as 15 years in tech, $20b in revenue, experience with 30+ startups & FTSE / Fortune 100 giants.

Another year, another survey of board directors. Does this one show us anything new? Earlier this year, the Global Network of Director Institutes released their “The Future of Board Governance” report. The GNDI is a collection of 24 national governance institutes from North and South America, Asia Pacific, Europe, Africa and the Middle East, with combined memberships of 150,000. In this episode, Paul briefly covers the main findings of the report and the implications for boards and companies. 

This podcast covers the following subjects: - How can small business owners maximize profits? - Small business owners maximize profits - Maximize small business profits Mostly all small businesses have faced cash flow issues or are continually facing cash flow issues. However, most of them are leaving much-needed cash on the table unnecessarily. Whether it shortchanging yourself on the revenue side or letting money fall through the cracks on the expense side the result is the same, less cash available to run your business and lost personal income. I'll be talking with Phillip D. Woolfolk about strategies for how small business owners can Stop Leaving so much Money on the Table.Prior to transitioning to Chief Operations Officer of the African American Chamber of Commerce of New Jersey, (AACCNJ) Phillip D. Woolfolk served as Managing Principal and Sr. Profitability Advisor for Main Street Advisory, LLC. The services of Main Street Advisory continue through strategic partners. Phillip acquired years of expertise in the private and public finance sectors including Commercial Lending, Small Business & Residential Mortgage Lending, Sales and Operations Management, Strategic Planning, Board Governance, Real Estate Finance, and Public & Private School Fiscal Management and Budgeting. His acquired expertise will be focused on increasing the capacity of the chamber in small business lending, pre-loan and post-loan technical assistance to Black Business Enterprises (BBEs) https://www.linkedin.com/in/pwoolfolk/

[00:00:00] Tommy Thomas: A strong board of directors is essential to the success of any non-profit organization. The board of directors plays a critical role in providing guidance, oversight, and support for the organization's mission and operations.   There is no cookie-cutter or one-size-fits-all when it comes to Nonprofit Board Governance and Board Service.  However, there is a lot we can learn from people who are active on the Boards of high impact and highly effective nonprofit organizations.   Over the past 104 issues, we have devoted a lot of time to this topic.  From time to time, we will highlight excerpts from some of these conversations.   Today is the 3rd time we are compiling these excerpts.  I will have links to the previous two episodes in the Episode Notes.   Christin McClave has over 20 years of corporate leadership, beginning her career with Johnson & Johnson and serving in senior leadership in her family's large automotive aftermarket business – Cardone Industries.  Christin has served on and continues to serve on several nonprofit and corporate Boards. I've been in this business a long time and I've worked with probably 300 or 400 boards, over the last 30 years. And if I look at them, I would say a lot of the time they're males. They might be closer to my age than your age. And now things are changing. So, what are you seeing, or maybe what are you doing to lower the mean age on a board and to maybe bring more gender and ethnic diversity?  [00:01:43] Christin McClave:  So, I think we see a lot of changes in the general demographics, right?  As our society and culture are changing. The positive thing is there's so much more diversity coming up through the leadership ranks. And I think the traditional way that we've, I'll say we, because I've done it myself as well, when we've needed a new board member on a board, I instantly think about who have I worked with before? Who's like me, who thinks like me, who would be easy to plug and play into this board that I'm on? And so that's been our traditional way of pipelining onto boards. Let's find people who we know and who we know could be very quickly successful and contribute value to this board. I think what we've learned over the last couple years is that doesn't necessarily bring diversity to these boards that we are trying to diversify. And we've seen the pressure coming from the public sector the SEC, not quite regulations, but suggestions that we need a certain percentage of diversity on the public boards. And there's a lot of pressure in the market for that. And then that has trickled down its way to nonprofits and to the private sector. So, everyone is looking to diversify their boards at this point. And I think, a key piece of the job requirements that we have in the past always assumed on larger boards, I'll say. And most boards in general, everybody's wanted, okay you need to have a CEO or CFO or a C level executive. But preferably a CEO or CFO who's been in the chair before. And I've had people say that to me as well, that's what they're looking for. And I think we know just from sheer data that a lot of women and diverse candidates in general haven't had those opportunities. We are definitely developing that pipeline now and being very much more intentional. But I think like through the past few years and now looking at the talent market being as hot as it is and the demand for diverse talent we have, we are at the place we need to take a look at those very narrow criteria that we've said, oh, you have to be a C-level executive to be on a board and to be able to contribute value. And I think, now I've seen a lot more being written, a lot more being talked about, diversity coming onto boards where I'm reading someone's background and I'm like, wow, that is so cool. Maybe 10 years ago that person wouldn't have been chosen for that very significant board seat. So, I think we've opened up our criteria and have opened up our thought process and how we see people's experiences. We're looking at people's resumes really differently these days. From an HR perspective in internal, when we're screening candidates we took the requirement of having a college degree off of our requirements, probably, about 10 years ago, which was a little bit ahead of our time, but it just opened up our talent pool and we realized there are a lot of people out there that may not have a bachelor's degree but are way more experienced with their life and work experience that we were not being able to tap into because we had that very strict requirement. So, I think we're seeing that across the board at all levels, including at the board level. +++++++++++++++++++++++ [00:05:34] Tommy Thomas: Alvin Sanders, President & CEO of World Impact, a nonprofit that focuses on redemptive poverty and cultural proficiency in the urban community.  Alvin and his Board are huge proponents of the Policy Governance Model - an integrated board leadership paradigm created by Dr. John Carver.   I'm asking people these days about bringing younger people onto boards. And philosophically, do you have a position on that? And then I'll ask a follow up.  [00:06:10] Alvin Sanders: Yes, we try to hold it at nine, because we think a smaller board is better for getting things done. And I think in terms of thirds, a third of our board, we want gender diversity, a third of our board, we want age diversity, a third of our board, we want racial diversity. And then we want half and half, what I would say, marketplace people. These are business folk, and then the other half ministry people. Because if you have all marketplace people, the ministry gets lost. It's been my experience. And if you have all ministry people, the business of running the organization gets lost and it loses knowledge and expertise. So that's my philosophy of how you have you bring a board together. But you definitely need people, especially since I just read the other day that millennials now are the most dominant generation numbers wise. It's no longer Baby Boomers. It's never been my generation, Gen X. We're the forgotten generation, I think. Nobody gives a rip about Gen X, but Millennials now are it and you're just being silly if you don't have Millennials on your board. ++++++++++++++++++ [00:07:23] Tommy Thomas: Caryn Ryan, Managing Director at MissionWell, an organization that provides financial and strategic counsel to nonprofit organizations. Caryn is the former CFO for BP/Amoco and World Vision International.  She currently serves on corporate and nonprofit Boards.   I want to ask you one question then I'll close. So, my next to the last question has to do with succession planning and the board. At what point should that begin to occur? And how does the board address that without the CEO thinking “I'm a short-timer”? [00:08:04] Caryn Ryan: Okay. Yeah, that's great.  I'm dealing with that right now at one of the boards that I sit on. And I've just dealt with that last year as well. And it works both ways if it works all, all different ways. So let me just talk about one where the CEO does get the feeling. If you have this conversation that they're a short timer. I want to just say first of all, that can sometimes go back to the trust issue again, right? When there's a lack of trust between the board and the CEO then, and you bring up the succession of the question of succession planning, the first thing that goes of course into the CEO's mind is, oh, I'm getting fired.  I'm a short termer here.  So that has to again, be addressed, the trust issue, before you can have productive conversations around succession planning. But even longer term issues are going to take some time to get resolved. There's something you can always do on the succession plan that's very short term and that every single board must have in place. And that is you need a succession plan in case of an emergency. If your CEO becomes ill is hit by a bus, or whatever, you need an emergency succession plan that is an interim structure or very well thought through way that you'll manage in the absence of the CEO.  And usually, it's not going to bring out the same negative feeling for the CEO.  On the part of the CEO because they understand that, oh yeah, if I'm not there, we need to have some interim structure. And so, they'll begin helping the Board and thinking through, look, okay, if something happens to me, let's make this person on our staff the interim, or let's pull this Board Member out and see if they'll be the interim. Or they'll start to engage in the ideas for how that could work in interim a structure. And as long as you can get that interim structure put in place and everybody's in agreement that it's workable, that then gives a chance during the interim structure for the Board to go out and begin doing a search to find a replacement candidate. Regarding succession planning for a Founder – S/he just might not be willing to step aside. They might have created a whole lack of number twos in the organization who can step in, even in an emergency. It just may not be anybody. So that's a different situation where the board needs to probably, in addition to working on trust, which can be very difficult with the founder. You might be off the board if you start having those kind of conversations. But what you can do as a board is do your research. How would you do a search? You can get your research done on executive search firms who could step in and help you. You can just keep in mind, and Tommy, you're the one who should be telling your podcast listeners this, but it's a long process to do a search. You've got to set up a search committee. You got to figure out how you're going to recruit the person. You've got to have an approach. You have to execute it, you have to review the candidates. It's just really time consuming. You at least have to think through all of these, how that's a minimum thing, even if it's a founder situation. I'd say two things. Number one, for sure, have an interim emergency succession plan, no questions asked. That's an absolute minimum mandate for every board. And number two, if you're on a founder board, you have to do some special extra work along the side with networking, quiet networking, just to figure out the process and figure out how you would do, how would you do that if something did happen to your founder, if your founder's not willing to participate or help with that.  Does that make sense?  ++++++++++++++ [00:11:33] Tommy Thomas: Rich Stearns, President Emeritus at World Vision US.  Prior to joining World Vision, Rich was CEO for multiple organizations in the private sector, thus reporting to their Boards.  He cut his teeth on nonprofit Board Governance as President of World Vision US.   When I interviewed you back in 2017 you mentioned that from your perspective, the best thing that the World Vision Board did for you when you came on was you recalled an offsite retreat where y'all got introduced to each other. Could you share a little bit about that with us? I think we probably have a lot of up and coming CEOs listening and that might be an interesting discussion. [00:12:14] Rich Stearns: Yeah, I don't know how much that costs. Probably not much, but it was the best money World Vision ever spent. When I came into World Vision the Board and the CEO had what I'd call a turbulent relationship. He wasn't thrilled about his board and the way they behaved, and the Board wasn't thrilled about him in certain ways. And so, I was coming into kind of a troubled marriage, right? You could say there'd been a divorce, and I'm the new husband coming in. And so, the Board had enough wisdom to say, you know what, we should start off on the right foot here. Why don't we hire a board consultant to come in and do a two-day retreat with a new CEO to teach the Board and the new CEO, how best they should interact and communicate with one another. So, a friend of yours and mine named Bob Andringa, he's retired now, but he was in the Board consulting business. He's written at least one book, if not several. He came in and he conducted a Board Governance 101, 102 course for all of us. And gave us tools to use and dealt with different scenarios of here are the dos and don'ts for Board Members. Here are the dos and don'ts for the staff and the CEO. Here is the best way to understand your responsibility as Board Members. This is what your responsibility is, and this is what your responsibility is not. This is the role you play. This is the role you don't play. And same with a CEO, Rich, your role is this the board's role is to establish policy. I guess the best way to say it is it laid down the ground rules for a healthy relationship. And I don't think it's an exaggeration to say I had a 20-year honeymoon with my board. Not that there weren't an occasional, marital argument over the years. But it was like a 20-year honeymoon with the board. And I respected them, they respected me. My staff, when I first started, after a year, they said, boy, you've had a one-year honeymoon with this board. It's amazing. Because they'd seen some of the dysfunction in the prior years. And 20 years later, they were still saying you're still on your honeymoon. And I in terms of my response, what I attribute it to, is what I talked about earlier, Tommy, that the board knew they could trust me. I would never tell them a lie. I would never hide anything. I was completely transparent. Anything they wanted to talk about at a board meeting, we could talk about. Any numbers they wanted to see, we'd show them. If I had some bad numbers, I'd bring them to the board and say, look, this is not good, and here's what we're going to do.  They never felt I was hiding anything. And so that created trust as well. [00:15:03] Tommy Thomas: One of the guys that you've influenced over the years is Joe Mettimano at Central Union Mission. And when I interviewed Joe there, he talked about a lesson he learned from you about the president's report to the board. He would attribute part of his success to what he learned from you there. Tell us about that. [00:15:22] Rich Stearns: I started every board meeting with a president's report. So, the Board is gathered, in the case of World Vision they've flown in from all over the country, and here they are at the World Vision board meeting and remember, they're all volunteers, some are pastors, some are business people.  They're from all walks of life and so I tried to use the President's Report to basically bring them up to speed on what was going on at World Vision. What were the important issues? What were we doing about the important issues? How are the finances doing? I tried to answer as many questions as they might have in advance. Because the rest of the board meeting, the finance committee was going to meet and other committees were going to meet. And I tried to use the President's Report to cast a bit of a vision for where we were as an organization, where we're headed, what my outlook was for the coming year or the coming quarter. And I try to use the Board Meeting to really cast a vision to remind them of the mission of World Vision. Often, I would start with a trip report. I've just gotten back from the Syrian refugee crisis, and I want to tell you what I saw. I would remind them, we're sitting here in a nice boardroom, but people are dying all over the world. And our job is to intercede for them to help them to rescue those who are perishing as the book of Proverbs says. And so, trying to remind them why they were here, why World Vision was here and then look under the hood at, the financials, the numbers, the revenues, the overhead, and you had to deal with issues like real estate transactions and mundane stuff like that. I wanted to always to put it in the context of the bigger mission, vision and values of the organization. My President's Report would sometimes go 90 minutes to two hours which is a lot. But usually, the board would say that was the highlight of the meeting because that really brought them up to date on everything. +++++++++++++++= [00:17:16] Tommy Thomas: Paul Maurer, President at Montreat College.  Paul is a student of Board Governance and identifies as a “governance nerd”.  Paul is on his second college presidency and has learned a lot – some through the school of hard knocks about effective Board Governance.   And a lot of people that I talk with, there's a move toward lowering the mean age of the board and increasing diversity. What kind of experience have y'all had at Montreat around those issues? [00:17:45] Paul Maurer: We're intentionally trying to increase diversity. We've not found that to be an easy pathway, but we are we are committed to it. And on age I would just gently push back on the median age lowering. I'm very much of the Aristotelian camp that young people have less wisdom. And part of what you want for board members is wisdom. Wisdom comes with experience, and experience comes with age and the hard knocks of life and just the journey of life with gray hair and getting beat up occasionally. And I want younger people on the board, but that's less common. They're actually very hard to get on the board because they're less qualified candidates in my view, and they're uber busy with career and family. So, the young members, the 30 somethings, I have on my board, I have two of them. They're like up to their eyeballs, four or five kids each, they're CEOs or leaders in their own rights and rising in the ranks. And these people have large portfolios and enormous demands on their time. Then my 70- and 80-year-olds, and I even have a 91-year-old board member who I recruited at the age of 87. And he said to me, he said, Paul, what if I die? And I said, Bill what if I die? We're all going to die. You've got a lot of gas left in your tank. You've got enormous amount of wisdom. And you may have others who think that you're too old to be a board member. I don't think that at all. And if a day should come when your health has slipped, your metro capacities have slipped, we'll have that conversation and we'll have it openly and honestly. Honestly the seventies, eighties, and 90-year-old trustees I have are easily among my best trustees. They're phenomenal. [00:20:04] Tommy Thomas: Let's change over a little bit to the board aspect of being a president. What was the biggest adjustment that you had to make between, say, reporting to the CEO as a cabinet member and then as the President reporting to the Board? [00:20:20] Paul Maurer: Yeah, it's a great question. I'm a bit of a governance nerd. I really think about and study governance. I did that in my doctoral work. I do it as a college president in nonprofit governance. And so, the president needs clarity. What is the role of the board? What is the role of the president? What's the role of the relationship and what's the role of everyone else on campus in relationship to the board? And so, in the world of board governance, there are working boards and there are policy boards. Startups tend to have working boards, like true startups, like really small organizations. More established organizations. If they haven't transitioned to a policy board, they probably ought to consider doing so. Because you don't really want a board involved in the operations of an organization. And so, I'm deeply grateful that my board gave me the lead role in board development, meaning recruitment of new board members, training of board, the board policy manual. And we have a great board today, and they really understand that the board should not be involved in operations. That's the CEO's job but should be sure that they're being fiduciaries, that they're making sure there's a strategic plan that's being carried out their success along the way and that they manage or evaluate. They don't manage, they evaluate the presidents. They hire and fire the president, the CEO. I do think that my argument would be that it's more important for a President to be a CEO than a President. The President is, as I think of a bit of an old model for college leadership, it's rooted in what I think is not a very useful model of shared governance. I think the CEO is a better model, but you also need a CEO who's sensitive to campus dynamics and the idea that consensus really matters. And a consensus building CEO I think is the best model, but I think that the CEO also needs to be the CUO - the Chief Urgency Officer. Because things are changing so fast.    Links & Resources JobfitMatters Website Next Gen Nonprofit Leadership with Tommy Thomas Two Previous Best of Board Governance Episodes:  2023 – Best of Board Service Part 1 2023 – Best of Board Service Part 2 Episodes Featuring These Excerpts Christin McClave – Insights into Board Governance Rich Stearns – President Emeritus World Vision US – An Inauspicious Leadership Journey – Part 2 Alvin Sanders – Board Governance Caryn Ryan – Board Governance Paul Maurer – Board Governance   Connect tthomas@jobfitmatters.com Follow Tommy on LinkedIn

[00:00:00] Rich Stearns: I learned early on, just the importance of, I've said this earlier, being truthful and being a person of integrity in the workplace, you never get caught in a lie if you don't lie. And so, some of my early bosses drill that into my head. Bad news delivered late is terrible. Bad news delivered early is the best thing. If you have bad news, deliver it early. And don't try to hide things when they're going south. Tell the boss or the management that you've got a problem early on. +++++++++++++++++++++ [00:00:28] Tommy Thomas: Thank you for joining us today. We're continuing the conversation we began last week with Rich Stearns President Emeritus of World Vision US.  Today we will continue with Rich's leadership journey. We'll also be discussing the all-important topic of board governance. I'm so grateful to Rich for taking time from his schedule to talk with me. As we mentioned last week, the search that JobfitMatters conducted that brought Rich to World Vision literally set our practice on a trajectory that helped make the firm into what it is today.  Let's pick up on the conversation we started last week. If you were creating a dashboard for a nonprofit to get at their health, what might the dials look like? How do you tell if a nonprofit is healthy? [00:01:19] Rich Stearns: This is one of my pet peeves. You've got these services like Charity Navigator and almost all of these services focus on financial metrics. What's the overhead? What's the balance sheet look like? What's the recent growth been over the last two or three years? Basically, those things have very little to do with whether a charity is a good charity, a well-performing charity, or a poorly performing charity. So, the only thing that really matters is the kind of impact that the nonprofit is having. It's about impact. So, let's say it's a homeless ministry, right? What matters in a homeless ministry is how many of their clients actually get out of homelessness and go on to lead independent lives. That's really the outcome that you're looking for in a homeless ministry. And sometimes homeless ministries talk about how many beds they have and how many nights off the street they give their clients. But just giving somebody a safe bed for the night doesn't solve their problem, right? So, you can say we put 300 men to bed every night, in this homeless shelter, and the next day they're on the street again and then the following day they come back to the shelter and there's nothing wrong with providing some safety for a little bit, but ultimately, you're looking for the cure, right? How do we help these men, if they're men, get out of homelessness and get into more productive lives? But none of these charity evaluation websites talk about impact because it's so hard to measure. And it could be that the charity with the greatest impact also has high overheads. So, they get a negative rating from Charity Navigator, even though they were having a tremendous impact on the people that they're serving. You always try to get inside the charity and say, what kind of work are you doing? And are you making an impact? Now, after that, you start to look at finances. So, at World Vision, we got into the clean water business a number of years ago. So then there's a measure called impact per dollar spent. The cost to bring clean water to one person for life through World Vision is $50. So, you tell a donor that for $50, I don't know what your water bill is, but mine's higher than $50 a month. But for $50 I can bring clean water to a person for life in Rwanda. And then I say, how many people do you want to bring clean water to? How big a donation can you make? So that's impact per dollar, right? Impact per dollar spent. And that's the other thing I tend to look at. [00:03:50] Tommy Thomas: Kind of a similar question. I've been asking this the last month or so and I've gotten some fascinating responses. If you were a judge on a nonprofit version of the shark tank and nonprofit startups are coming to you for early-stage funding, what questions have you got to have solid answers for before you open your checkbook? [00:04:10] Rich Stearns: The very first question that a shark tank guy would ask if you come with a new product is how is this product different from every other product that's already out in the market? In other words, nobody needs another cola drink, Coca-Cola, Pepsi Cola, RC Cola. There are plenty of cola drinks out there. So, if your big idea is I'm going to do my own cola drink, the first question is why? So, with a nonprofit, for example, I've seen young people that want to start up a new World Vision, right? I want to help the poor in Africa. And so, I'm going to start my own non-profit organization to help them. And my question is why would you do that? Because World Vision is a $3.2B organization helping the poor around the world. Compassion is $1.5B helping the poor around the world. Samaritan's Purse is a billion-dollar organization. So, what are you doing that they're not doing? Why would I give my money to you instead of an established, successful nonprofit that's doing that work? And, a good example of a positive answer to that would be the International Justice Mission. My friend, Gary Haugen started it about 27 years ago. He looked around and he said, there are a lot of organizations that are feeding the hungry and bringing clean water to the poor and doing microfinance. I don't see any organizations that are helping the poor with their legal problems protecting them from corrupt police departments and representing them in court when they're falsely accused of something or getting them out of bonded labor in India by using the court system. So, Gary started International Justice Mission to focus on justice and legal issues. He could have called it “Lawyers Without Borders” if he wanted to, because essentially, he hires a lot of attorneys that go around the world, and they work through the legal systems to help people who are being oppressed in various ways. So, the first question to ask is, why would I give to your charity? What is unique about it? And why wouldn't you just partner up with somebody that's already doing this work? If nonprofits are doing it, the next thing you look at is the leader's vision and motivation, right? If there's a powerful leader with a powerful vision and capabilities you believe, just like you'd look at a startup CEO. Do they have the right vision? That's the other thing. Because it takes a lot of elbow grease to start up a nonprofit. [00:06:40] Tommy Thomas: Frederick Wilcox said progress always involves risk.  You can't steal second base with your foot on first. What's the biggest risk you've ever taken and how did it come out? [00:06:51] Rich Stearns: Let me mention the Parker Brothers thing again. So, getting Parker Brothers into video games was a huge risk. We had to take our foot off first base because we had to hire 180 people.  We had to create almost another whole company and another whole capability within the company to enter this new marketplace. Cost a lot of money, and a lot of investment upfront, and I would say the outcome was both good and bad. So initially for a couple of years, we doubled the size of the company. We had huge growth, huge profit. But then about two years in, the whole video game market collapsed. It had been a bubble and it collapsed. And when it collapsed, we had seven of the top ten selling video game cartridges in America. From our startup position, we had been very successful. But once the market collapsed, you couldn't give those products away. They were selling video game cartridges, three for $10 in a barrel at Toys R Us because the market was glutted with people trying to get into that market. It was a little bit like the Dot Com bubble in 2000. So anyways, all that profit we made. We had to give it all back over the next few years. That's one of the reasons I got fired from Parker Brothers. But I tried to persuade Parker Brothers to stay in there, hang in there, right? Because video games are going to come back. But they decided that it was too risky. They wouldn't stay in. And of course, we now know that the video game market is bigger than all of Hollywood combined in terms of revenues. And it's bigger than most professional sports. And so had we stayed in video games, we would have probably had huge opportunities in the future, but that was a huge risk to take. And when you take a risk, you bet big, and you lose big, or you win big. I think the other risk was the AIDS campaign that I did with World Vision, because there was a possibility that HIV and AIDS would turn the American church against us. People say, why are you doing this? Why are you helping people that were affected by this, disease that's sexually transmitted? I thought you were about helping children. And so, we had to get our messaging right with AIDS. We took a bit of a risk to go there, but in the end, it really paid off because what people learned about World Vision is that we would tackle the most difficult issues in the most difficult places. And that earned us a lot of respect from pastors and donors. Because nobody else was doing it at the time, nobody else was willing to take that risk. And we did, and ultimately a lot of organizations followed us a few years later. But that was another pretty risky venture. [00:09:39] Tommy Thomas: What's the best piece of advice anybody's ever given you? The best piece of advice that I have received is to be truthful and be a person of integrity in the workplace. You never get caught in a lie if you don't lie. [00:09:41] Rich Stearns: The best piece of advice that I would say, first of all, I learned early on, just the importance of, I've said this earlier, being truthful and being a person of integrity in the workplace. You never get caught in a lie if you don't lie. And so, some of my early bosses drill that into my head. Bad news delivered late is terrible. Bad news delivered early is the best thing. If you have bad news, deliver it early. And don't try to hide things when they're going south. Tell the boss or the management that you've got a problem early on. One piece of advice I got during a difficult time, I can't remember where I was, probably at Parker Brothers. It was a difficult year and one of my coworkers said, what you have to understand, because most of us, we're afraid we're going to lose our job or we're afraid something's going to happen to us. And he used to say, remember this company needs you more than you need them, right? Because if you're a good worker and you're productive and you've got good ideas, the place you work for needs you more than you need them. And I learned that later as a CEO looking for good people. When I had good people working for me, all I want to know is how do I keep them? How do I motivate them? I need them more than they need me because they can find another job, but it's going to be hard for me to find another person of that caliber. So, the importance of retaining really good people struck me. +++++++++++++++++ [00:11:09] Tommy Thomas:  You've been out of office for a couple of years now, but let's go back three or four years.  If you had invited me to one of your staff meetings and then we had dismissed you, and I asked the team what's the most difficult thing about working for Rich?  What might I have heard? [00:11:27] Rich Stearns: I don't know. I want to say you have to ask them that question. You've interviewed some of the people that worked for me in the past. But I would probably say I tended to be an idea machine, that in a particular meeting, I would throw out 20 new ideas. What about this? Or what about that? What if we did this? And what I learned is that when you're the CEO people are frantically taking notes on everything that comes out of your mouth. Let's say you throw out 20 ideas. They're likely to leave that meeting and spend the next month pursuing all 20 of those ideas. And I realized that I had to tell people, look, I'm going to throw out a bunch of ideas in this meeting. I want you to throw out ideas too. Not all my ideas are good.  Number one:  Don't be afraid to challenge me just because I'm the president.  In this room let's think of ourselves all as equals. Everybody in this room has got good ideas and we need to challenge ideas. Some are good, some are bad, some are worth keeping, and some are not. They're like panning for gold, right? I realized that I needed to give people permission to challenge me as a leader and to challenge me in front of other people. I used to say, if you don't challenge my ideas, you're not very useful to me because I need other people to help me evaluate which of these ideas have merit and which ones really don't. And if you can't contribute to that, why are you at the meeting? You realize that they probably say Rich threw out too many ideas at the meeting. And I left wondering which ones do I really focus on? So I think that could have been frustrating sometimes for people. [00:13:04] Tommy Thomas: What do you think they would have said was the most rewarding part? [00:13:09] Rich Stearns: I don't know. I like to feel that people enjoyed working for me. I tried to create a sense of camaraderie among my teams.  I tried not to lead like the imperial CEO that I'm the boss and you're not. Or I'm here on the organization chart, you're down here. So I tried to be more of a collaborative leader.  Hey, we're all a team and every member of the team is important. All these people that work for me are made in the image of God and they have incredible talents, ideas, backgrounds, uniqueness, unique gifts, and talents. Everyone's gifts are different. And you've all got great ideas. And I tried to, especially in the latter half of my career, I started to see that all these people that work for me are made in the image of God and they have incredible talents, ideas, backgrounds, uniqueness, unique gifts, and talents. Everyone's gifts are different. Everyone's abilities are different. And when you start seeing that kind of symphony of talent in front of you, you're like an orchestra conductor and you say, how can I bring the beautiful music out of these talented musicians that I have working for me? I might have a CEO who was brilliant. In fact, you knew one or two of my CEOs who would have been terrible at marketing, right? But he was a brilliant CFO. And so, I recognized that and made sure that I relied on him and leaned into him for his giftedness. Then over somewhere else, I've got a really talented person in product development coming up with new products. And so, you bring that talent out. Ultimately, a leader is like that orchestra conductor. How do you get all these really gifted musicians, each gifted in a different way to play together so that what comes out is a beautiful symphony instead of, discordant, loud sounds that are unpleasant. I like to think that I could create a positive work environment, positive culture for the team. And what I learned about success in the workplace is that teams of people that work well together and feel valued and are in a healthy culture, they're much more productive than people in a negative difficult culture. Culture matters a lot and leaders tend to create culture. [00:15:20] Tommy Thomas:  Here's a quote I'd like you to respond to: “When you're sitting around the table with your leadership team, you never want to be the smartest person at the table”. [00:15:29] Rich Stearns: I love that quote. And actually, one of my first, I'll go back to Parker Brothers, the President of Parker Brothers, Randolph Parker Barton, when I joined was the family vestige or holdover from the old company that had been acquired by General Mills. Mr. Barton was, how do I say it? Not the most capable leader. He didn't have a Wharton MBA. He didn't come up through other consumer products companies. He inherited his job because he was a family member. He knew a lot about toys and games, but he wanted to hire the smartest, most gifted, talented people he could find and let them do what they were capable of doing. And he developed a reputation from within General Mills, the parent company, for having some of the brightest up-and-coming leaders in the whole General Mills organization, which was much bigger than Parker Brothers. And he basically did it by hiring well and then delegating a lot of authority and influence to the smart people that he hired. He never felt threatened by them because he realized that as long as he kept hiring the best people, he would get the best performance for his division. And General Mills would reward him as the president with bonuses and compensation, increase and all of that. I learned from him to hire really the best people you can, to try to find people smarter than you or smarter than you in their field. Hire the best people you can. Try to find people smarter than you or smarter than you in their field. So again, a CFO who is much better at finance than I am, or hiring a head of human resources that's much more gifted than I am in human resources. A General Manager or a President is really a generalist, right? The orchestra conductor can't play all those instruments, so they need people that are really good at the violin, really good at percussion, really good at clarinet and woodwinds. And when you get the very best musicians working for you, that's when the beautiful music starts to happen. +++++++++++++++ [00:17:34] Tommy Thomas: Let's just switch over to board service. I think board service is hard at any level. Talk to me about the board chair. What's the primary function of the chairman of the board? [00:17:49] Rich Stearns: I think the primary function of the Board Chair is to manage the board.   We used to have 18 board members at World Vision. It was a pretty large board. And you got 18 people in a room that are all pretty smart. They're all from different walks of life and they've got ideas and suggestions and things of that nature. The Board Chair's main job is to manage the Board.  That Board Chair reminds the Board that their job is governance, a policy role. And the Board Chair has a very important role in focusing the board on the job at hand. You're not necessarily here for everybody to throw in their ideas. We have a professional staff to run the company or run the organization. The board chair reminds them that their role is a governance role, a policy role. Certainly, their ideas can be offered, but it's really the role of the CEO and the staff to determine whether those ideas are effective or usable. I think the board chair really must control the work of the board and direct it in the right ways. And he's basically herding, 10, 12, 15 other board members, to focus on the job at hand. The other role of the Chair is to be close to the CEO so that the CEO and the board chair are on the same page. The Board Chair can deliver some difficult information to the CEO if let's say the performance is poor or other board members have a problem with the way the CEO is conducting the meetings or leading the organization. The Board Chair is often the messenger that brings that information to the CEO, hopefully in a way that's redemptive instead of crushing, that, how can I help this CEO be more successful by giving feedback to him from the board?  The board chair is really a pretty critical pivotal role. [00:19:37] Tommy Thomas: I know your past Board Chair for the last few years of your time at World Vision. What was the key to you and Joan working together so well? The key to a CEO / Board working relationship comes down to mutual respect. [00:19:45] Rich Stearns: I think it comes down to mutual respect. I think Joan had a lot of respect for me. I was a long-serving CEO of World Vision by the time she was Board Chair. She had a lot of respect for me, my capabilities, and what I'd accomplished at World Vision over those years. But I also had respect for her and her position.  I always respected the Board Chair's position because in my worldview, the board chair and my board in a Christian organization, that was God's way of holding me in the organization accountable. These people were accountable before God for this ministry that was entrusted to their care and their governance care as board members. And I never saw the board as an adversary, I always saw them as really a gift that they were there to keep us on the right track, to keep us out of trouble, to ask the tough questions that needed to be answered to make sure we were financially solvent, to make sure we stayed on mission. And by respecting their role they could see that I respected them, which caused them to respect and trust me more. A board relationship is very much about trust. If if the board trusts the leader who's leading the organization and that leader's team that's a critical ingredient. And the leader has to trust the board not to do inappropriate things or get involved in inappropriate ways and not to be disruptive and if you have mutual trust, which the chair often negotiates that, or referees that, or tries to ensure that you're off to a good start with a board CEO relationship. [00:21:24] Tommy Thomas: When I interviewed you back in 2017 you mentioned that from your perspective, the best thing that the World Vision Board did for you when you came on was you recalled an offsite retreat where y'all got introduced to each other. Could you share a little bit about that with us? We probably have a lot of up-and-coming CEOs listening and that might be an interesting discussion. [00:21:45] Rich Stearns: I don't know how much that costs. Probably not much, but it was the best money World Vision ever spent. When I came into World Vision the Board and the CEO had what I'd call a turbulent relationship. He wasn't thrilled about his board and the way they behaved, and the Board wasn't thrilled about him in certain ways. And so, I was coming into kind of a troubled marriage, right? You could say there'd been a divorce, and I'm the new husband coming in. And so, the Board had enough wisdom to say, you know what, we should start off on the right foot here. Why don't we hire a board consultant to come in and do a two-day retreat with a new CEO to teach the Board and the new CEO how best they should interact and communicate with one another? So, a friend of yours and mine named Bob Andringa, he's retired now, but he was in the Board consulting business. He's written at least one book if not several. He came in and he conducted a Board Governance 101, 102 course for all of us and gave us tools to use and dealt with different scenarios of the dos and don'ts for Board Members and the dos and don'ts for the staff and the CEO. Here is the best way to understand your responsibility as Board Members. This is what your responsibility is, and this is what your responsibility is not. This is the role you play. This is the role you don't play. And the same with a CEO. Rich, your role is this. The board's role is to establish policy. I guess the best way to say it is it laid down the ground rules for a healthy relationship. And I don't think it's an exaggeration to say I had a 20-year honeymoon with my board. Not that there wasn't an occasional marital argument over the years. But it was like a 20-year honeymoon with the board. And I respected them, they respected me. My staff, when I first started, after a year, they said, boy, you've had a one-year honeymoon with this board. It's amazing. Because they'd seen some of the dysfunction in the prior years. And 20 years later, they were still saying you're still on your honeymoon. And in terms of my response, what I attribute it to, is what I talked about earlier, Tommy, that the board knew they could trust me. I would never tell them a lie. I would never hide anything. I was completely transparent. Anything they wanted to talk about at a board meeting, we could talk about. Any numbers they wanted to see; we'd show them. If I had some bad numbers, I'd bring them to the board and say, look, this is not good, and here's what we're going to do.  They never felt I was hiding anything. And so that created trust as well. The board knew they could trust me.  I would never tell them a lie. I would never hide anything. I was completely transparent. Anything they wanted to talk about at a board meeting, we could talk about. +++++++++++++++++++++ [00:24:34] Tommy Thomas: One of the guys that you've influenced over the years is Joseph J. Mettimano, the President at Central Union Mission in Washington, DC. And when I interviewed Joe he talked about a lesson he learned from you about the President's Report to the Board. He would attribute part of his success to what he learned from you there.  Tell us about that. [00:24:53] Rich Stearns: I started every board meeting with a President's Report. So, the Board is gathered, in the case of World Vision they've flown in from all over the country and here they are at the World Vision board meeting, and remember, they're all volunteers, some are pastors, some are business people.  They're from all walks of life and so I tried to use the President's Report to basically bring them up to speed on what was going on at World Vision. What were the important issues? What were we doing about the important issues? How are the finances doing? I tried to answer as many questions as they might have in advance. I started every board meeting with a President's Report. I tried to use the President's Report to basically bring them up to speed on what was going on at World Vision. What were the important issues? What were we doing about the important issues? How are the finances doing? Because the rest of the board meeting, the finance committee was going to meet and other committees were going to meet. And I tried to use the President's Report to cast a bit of a vision for where we were as an organization, where we're headed, what my outlook was for the coming year or the coming quarter. And I try to use the Board Meeting to really cast a vision to remind them of the mission of World Vision. Often, I would start with a trip report. I've just gotten back from the Syrian refugee crisis, and I want to tell you what I saw. I would remind them, we're sitting here in a nice boardroom, but people are dying all over the world. And our job is to intercede for them to help them to rescue those who are perishing, as the book of Proverbs says. And so, trying to remind them why they were here, why World Vision was here, and then look under the hood at the financials, the numbers, the revenues, the overhead, and you had to deal with issues like real estate transactions and mundane stuff like that. I wanted to always put it in the context of the bigger mission, vision, and values of the organization. My President's Report would sometimes go 90 minutes to two hours, which is a lot. But usually, the board would say that was the highlight of the meeting because that really brought them up to date on everything. My President's Report would sometimes go 90 minutes to two hours, which is a lot. But usually, the board would say that was the highlight of the meeting because that really brought them up to date on everything. [00:26:46] Tommy Thomas:  I've done a little bit of speaking here over the past three or four years, most of it pre-pandemic on succession planning and one of the things that we talk about in that is how much of the outgoing president's identity is tied up in his or her current job. You've been away now for almost two years, any reflections on that? Did you have any trouble walking away? [00:27:11] Rich Stearns: No, I didn't actually. I talk about this a lot. We had a very orderly succession process when I left World Vision. In 2015, I hired a Chief Operating Officer, and he worked under me for three years, learning the ropes. He then became a candidate to succeed me, although the board did a nationwide search. They ultimately selected him. But about two years before I retired in an executive session of the board, I said, look I'm planning to retire.  I had a contract that expired in two years, and we renewed my contract every five years for 20 years. And I said, at the end of this contract, I'm planning to retire and I'm giving you a gift right now. The gift is number one, I'm leaving without any drama, it's like you're not having to talk at the bathroom breaks about when is the old guy going to retire, when is he going to leave, I'm retiring, I want to retire at the top of my game, not at the bottom of my game. And that's a gift to you because now as a board, you can focus totally on how can we have the best transition process. How can we use this time to find the very best candidate to replace Rich? And you don't have to worry about any of the drama or that I'm going to be clinging to power and so long story short, Tommy, they did a very good job. They did a pretty thorough search. They took a lot of advice from me because I said a lot of nonprofits do this very poorly. And some of the nonprofits that I shared with them during my 20 years at World Vision, some of these nonprofits that were peer organizations had 10 CEOs come and go. And I said that's very unhealthy for an organization to have 10 years. And the reason they had 10 CEOs is because their nonprofit volunteer board continued to make bad decisions about who to hire, so I wanted to help them make a good decision about who to hire with all the facts on the table and knowledge. So then I retired, and I had a nice retirement party. We had a passing of the torch to my successor, Edgar Sandoval, who was the COO under me for the last three years. Then I walked away, and I know a lot of people really have a struggle in retirement and they feel like they've lost their identity. I felt like I gave everything I had for 20 years. I gave World Vision everything I had to offer. It's somebody else's turn. I sensed it was time for fresh leadership. I was 67 years old I had a family, a growing family, grandsons, a wife that I had been away from for a lot of months during my time at World Vision, traveling internationally and I was ready, and I looked at retirement as this is my sabbath rest after a 45-year career. [00:30:01] Tommy Thomas:  Bringing this thing to a close. What's something that you would have liked to have told a younger version of yourself? [00:30:09] Rich Stearns: You know a couple of things come to mind. One is comical - a career is a very long time. In your 20s or 30s, you're in a particular job in a particular industry or sector and your career seems you're focused on this year, right? You're right now, this job, maybe you're thinking about what would my next job be, but in a 40-some-year career, you can do a lot of different things, and if you feel like I used to, I tell young people, if your current job is not your dream job, and it probably isn't, think of it as a stepping stone toward your dream job. Because every job you have gives you more information, more experience. I'm good at this. I'm not good at that. I like this kind of environment. I don't like this kind of environment. You're learning more about yourself and hopefully, the next job you have, the next company, or whatever organization you work for becomes a better and better fit, and more and more like your dream job, the dream situation that you'd like to be in. So don't get too impatient. A career is a very long time. Look at me. I started out selling shaving cream for Gillette. I ran a toy company. I was there for nine years. I spent 11 years at Lennox China selling fine china, crystal gifts, and things like that. Then I spent 20 years at World Vision. I've had three or four different careers during my 40-some years, and then developed a fifth career as an author. I've written four books now. You can do a lot of things in 40 years. Even if you don't like your current job, take heart. There's hope your next job may be the one that you really love and really fits you well. One other thing I'd say, this is a little piece of managerial advice, the most powerful tool in a leader's vocabulary is encouragement. You motivate people a lot more with encouragement. Hey, that was a great idea you had at the meeting today. Wow, I loved your contribution to that discussion. The most powerful tool in a leader's vocabulary is encouragement. You motivate people a lot more with encouragement. That report you gave was fantastic. With that kind of affirmation, people just thrive and they bloom when they get a compliment from the boss. The problem is, as bosses, we often like to lead with criticism. Yeah, I didn't like the way you ended that presentation. Or, 90% of the presentation could have been fabulous, but you didn't like their last two slides. And you think, oh, so what do they hear? I failed. The boss didn't like it. And that diminishes people. It crushes their spirits. You attract a lot more bees with honey than you do with vinegar. There's a time for correction. And even correction is more easily digested when it's preceded by praise and encouragement. I think it's a superpower that a leader who really encourages people, we've all raised kids, and your kid will bring home some crazy drawing from first grade. And what do you do? You praise it and say, I love the way you drew that pumpkin for Halloween, I love the way you drew that house. We praise them. We encourage them. We need to find ways to praise and encourage our staff, and our teams. And then again, correction, when needed, obviously in the right circumstances, but encouragement is powerful. Tommy Thomas:  Thank you for joining us today and thanks to Rich Stearns for sharing his leadership journey with us. I've put links to all of Rich's books in the episode notes, along with some that he and his wife Reneé wrote together. Several months ago, we began to put a transcript of the podcast in the episode notes. Many of you have commented on how helpful this is to you.   Links and Resources JobfitMatters Website Next Gen Nonprofit Leadership with Tommy Thomas World Vision Books by Rich Stearns: Lead Like It Matters to God: Values-Driven Leadership in a Success-Drive World by Richard Stearns The Hole in Our Gospel 10th Anniversary Edition: What Does God Expect of Us? The Answer That Changed My Life and Might Just Change the World by Richard Stearns Books by Rich and Reneé Stearns: God's Love For You Bible Storybook by Richard Stearns & Reneé Stearns He Walks Among Us: Encounters with Chris in a Broken World by Richard Stearns & Reneé Stearns   Connect Tommy Thomas - tthomas@jobfitmatters.com Tommy's LinkedIn Profile

[00:00:00] Tommy Thomas: Today, we're continuing the conversation that we began in episode 95, with Dr. Alvin Sanders, the CEO of World Impact. One thing from that episode that stood out to me was Alvin's description of how he and his senior staff use the idea of a Circle of Voices and making major decisions. If you didn't hear that episode, just that idea alone is probably worth the time you'll spend listening to it. In today's episode, Alvin will be sharing his experience and spreading of board governance.  Let's pick up that conversation. [00:00:38] Tommy Thomas: Let's go over to the board relationship. I just think that's so critical in the life of a nonprofit. And we could start in a number of places, but let's start with the board chair. When you think of the best board chair you've ever served under or observed, give me some words and phrases that describe that person.  [00:00:55] Alvin Sanders: I'm happy to report that it's my present board chair, Carl LaBarbara. He is someone who's very committed to the ministry with his time, talent, and treasure in a deep way, in a deep sense. And he's also committed to me and my personal well-being. So, I think those are the things that you look for in a board chair.  [00:01:17] Tommy Thomas: I had the privilege of meeting Carl probably, I don't know, 10 or maybe 15 years ago. And I remember the afternoon in his home, he talked a lot about board governance. As I remember, he was a big fan of the Carver model. Are y'all a 10 on the Carver model, or have you operated an eight or nine? [00:01:32] Alvin Sanders:   We're a 12 and a half. We are off the scale because of Carl's training.  And I am a dyed-in-the-wool Carver policy governance Kool-Aid drinker.  [00:01:45] Tommy Thomas: Did you have knowledge of the Carver Model before you came into the CEO role?  [00:01:49] Alvin Sanders: I knew of it at Evangelical Free Church because we used it. But, to me, that was the one-on-one level. And working with Carl and World Impact, I feel like I'm a grad student in it now. [00:02:02] Tommy Thomas:  Take me into your and Carl's relationship. How often do y'all get together or meet or talk and what does that look like? [00:02:12] Alvin Sanders: We have a standing phone call, at 1 p.m. Eastern, 10 a.m. Pacific, every Monday. And, we don't necessarily do it every time, but it's there. And then if we need it, we talk to each other. If not, then we move forward. But usually, we talk anywhere from one to four times a month. And we just check in and see how each other is doing personally. I give him updates on relevant things that he needs to know about from the organization's perspective, and then he gives insights and contributions to what he feels we need to be considering as an organization as well. But I think the most critical relationship in the organization is between the CEO and the board chair.  [00:03:02] Tommy Thomas: So how close of a friend can the CEO be to the board chair? Where's that balance?  [00:03:09] Alvin Sanders: You at least need to like each other. And that sounds silly, but I've known some CEOs and board chairs that don't like each other. You don't have to be best friends. Like I wouldn't say Carl and I are best friends by any means but  Carl and I enjoy each other's company. And if I wasn't CEO and if he wasn't board chair, we would still be two people who would get together and hang out with one another. You know what I mean? Yeah. So, you have to have a strong relationship at least to the point where you like each other to the extent that you enjoy each other's company.  [00:03:44] Tommy Thomas: Take me into your agenda for your board meetings. Do you set those, or do you and Carl collaborate?  [00:03:52] Alvin Sanders: Yes, me and Carl collaborate. [00:03:55] Tommy Thomas:   Do you have term limits for your members, and do you have term limits for your board chair?  [00:04:07] Alvin Sanders: No, we're contrarian that we have an annual signup every year. So if you're asked to be a board member, a river of life, I'm not there anymore at World Impact. We asked you to serve for one year. And then if everything went well, we asked you to serve for another year. And the result has been, Carl's probably been a board member for 25 years. And then there are other people who were board members for only a year because things didn't work out well. So we like that because it gives you the flexibility to keep on strong board members for as long as you need to. Because to me, it never made sense. You've been a great board member. Oh, it's been three years. You got to rotate off. Why? If it works for their life and it works for the life of the organization, there's no reason to rotate people off. And then there have been people who've served for a couple of years and then they said, Alvin, I got to take this year off, and then they come back. So that's been our philosophy.  [00:05:10] Tommy Thomas:  How do y'all identify new board members?  [00:05:15] Alvin Sanders: It's mainly me asking, first working the networks that the board has, some other people that they may know that may want to be a part of World Impact. It's me working the networks of those I know and my colleagues. It's really just working networks of folk looking for the types of people that may be interested in serving on the World Impact Board.  [00:05:41] Tommy Thomas:  What kind of advice are you giving somebody that calls you next week and says they've been asked to join a board of XYZ nonprofit?  What questions are you telling them they need to get answered?  [00:05:53] Alvin Sanders: They need to ask the board chair and the CEO, first, I would never talk to either one of them. I would talk to both of them at the same time. And the first question I would ask them is, what's your philosophy? Because 90% of boards don't have a clue what their philosophy is on board leadership. So what's your philosophy on board leadership? What's my expected contribution of time, talent, and treasure to the board? So those would be the two major things that I would ask. [00:06:33] Tommy Thomas: I'm asking people these days about bringing younger people onto boards. And philosophically, do you have a position on that? And then I'll ask a follow-up.  [00:06:46] Alvin Sanders: Yes, we try to, our board, we try to hold it at nine, because we think a smaller board is better for getting things done. And I think in terms of thirds a third of our board, we want gender diversity, a third of our board, we want age diversity, a third of our board, we want racial diversity. And then we want half and half, what I would say, marketplace people. These are business folk, and then the other half ministry people. Because if you have all marketplace people, the ministry gets lost. It's been my experience. And if you have all ministry people, the business of running the organization gets lost and it loses knowledge and expertise. So that's my philosophy of how you have you bring a board together. But you definitely need people especially since I just read the other day that millennials now are the most dominant generation numbers-wise. It's no longer Baby Boomers. It's never been my generation, Gen X. We're the forgotten generation, I think. Nobody gives a rip about Gen X, but Millennials now are it and you're just being silly if you don't have Millennials on your board  [00:07:58] Tommy Thomas:   How do y'all onboard at World Impact, new board members? [00:08:05] Alvin Sanders:  Usually if somebody is passed along to me or to Carl or whoever, Carl and I do an informal vetting of that person and check what their interest level is. Then Carl by himself takes them through a formal board vetting. Then if they pass that test, we bring them in to do a preview. Before they make a commitment, Hey, won't you just come in and sit in on a board meeting and see what you think, then after the preview, Carl and I sit down with them and field any questions, concerns, or comments they may have. And then if they're wanting to be part of the board, then the next board meeting that they come in we'll vote on them. ++++++++++++++++ [00:08:56] Tommy Thomas:  You've probably got a small enough board that you don't need executive committees. Do y'all ever have a use for an executive committee?  [00:09:04] Alvin Sanders: Carver policy frowns against subcommittees, so we don't form them unless we absolutely positively have to. [00:09:15] Tommy Thomas: And what about executive session? Does your staff join you for part and then y'all dismiss the staff for more sensitive matters? What's y'all's take on that? [00:09:25] Alvin Sanders: If there's an executive session, I'm not in there. In our philosophy, it's board only. Only the board calls executive session and that means no staff in the room. [00:09:35] Tommy Thomas:   What about the board meeting? Do you bring your cabinet to the meeting? Do they present or what does that look like?  [00:09:46] Alvin Sanders: The person who usually makes an appearance either by video or in person at some point is my chief operating officer. When we talk about the financial portion. Other than that, the executive team only comes in as needed. [00:09:59] Tommy Thomas:  How do you or Carl draw a quiet quiet board member into the conversation?  [00:10:11] Alvin Sanders: I don't know if I have any. I'm trying to think. We have great dialogue and discussion and everybody seems to contribute. Yeah, I'm trying to think. I don't think anybody sits on the sidelines because of the understood expectation of Carver. Like when you go through the screening process and we talk to people, we've let people know this is not you know a sit-back board. There are monitoring reports you have to read. We want you to contribute. We want you to express yourself. And so we built a culture of collaboration and contribution that we don't really have any quiet board members.  [00:10:51] Tommy Thomas: What about strategic planning? Is your board involved in that under the Carver Model? [00:10:56] Alvin Sanders:  No. My team and I lead the staff and the organization in the strategic planning process.  [00:11:05] Tommy Thomas:   What did that look like last time around?  [00:11:09] Alvin Sanders: We are big into the objectives and key results system. Where you set which, it started with Peter Drucker and management by objectives. And then there have been several sort of offshoots of that, but that's the foundation. We utilize the offshoot that was started in the tech sector. Where you listen, you list organizational-wide objectives and organizational annual objectives, and then each team then quarterly writes an objective for their team and the key results from that objective, which is connected to the larger overarching organizational objective. [00:11:54] Tommy Thomas: How does a CEO evaluation work under y'all's system?  [00:11:59] Alvin Sanders: They have an executive session. They have an annual objective section, but every quarter I have to submit what's called a monitoring report, which is based on the executive limitations, which are found in our handbook which are policies in which the board has said, Alvin, these are the policies. And then you need to report on several of these at each meeting. In fact, today, because our board meeting is coming up next week, the big lion's share of my day today is working on our monitoring reports which I will submit to them so then they can read through them. And then next week we can have any discussions of whether they think I'm in compliance or out of compliance. [00:12:52] Tommy Thomas: Okay, so that happens quarterly then? [00:12:54] Alvin Sanders: It does.  [00:12:57] Tommy Thomas: How have y'all handled financial accountability? A lot of boards are a little hesitant to ask hard questions sometimes. What does that look like at World Impact?  [00:13:08] Alvin Sanders: Every quarter, one of my monitoring reports is called EL 4. For financial condition and activities where every quarter I report on our financial condition. It's three, four pages of things that I need to report on concerning our finances, and then the board members look over it and then if they have any questions, we discuss and analyze them.  [00:13:32] Tommy Thomas: Under your model, how does the board get involved in either risk management or risk mitigation or do they? [00:13:40] Alvin Sanders:   That's a policy that I have to report on. Basically, they have questions about the policies around risk management and mitigation. And I report on them, and then they have a chance to read and respond. And they tell me whether I'm in compliance or not compliance with their expectation of me. [00:13:59] Tommy Thomas: How do you and your senior team look at risk management or risk mitigation? Is that something that y'all discuss on an annual basis or a quarterly basis?  [00:14:09] Alvin Sanders: It depends on how you define risk management and mitigation, but we would like to think that we're trying to be on top of those things and ahead of those things before they become major hassles or issues. +++++++++++++++++++++ [00:14:20] Tommy Thomas: And you mentioned early on your board member time, talent, and treasure. So you have the fundraising question with a prospective board member adequately before they join? [00:14:31] Alvin Sanders: Yes, we ask all our board members to contribute something. We don't put a number on it, but we want to say that all of our board members give to our organization. We believe that's a big deal. And we let the board member decide how much they want to contribute.  [00:14:48] Tommy Thomas: What does fundraising look like for you? Do you leverage your board for fundraising, or is that kind of, once they give, do they? [00:15:01] Alvin Sanders: No, we ask our board members to be actively involved in connecting us with people who may vibe with the mission of the organization and be willing to contribute revenue towards us being a success. We definitely involve our boards. [00:15:17] Tommy Thomas: Let's maybe close out a little bit with succession planning.  At what point should a board and a CEO begin to think about succession planning?  [00:15:27] Alvin Sanders: All the time, from day one. One of the things that I've tried to instill, and since being President of World Impact since 2017, is to build a leadership pipeline. In every one of our major areas, I call it who's your bus person. If the bus comes by and hits you, it kills you in your dying breath, who are you going to say, such and such to take my place. Ideally, we'd like to see there be at least two to three internal candidates who could take the place of the person who's leading that particular area. And in my case, I would like to think that, anyone on my executive team could have the ability to step into being a CEO if at the very least for an interim time until the board could find someone else to be my replacement. So my bus people, if you're on my team, you're a bus person for me.  [00:16:31] Tommy Thomas: And this may be hypothetical for you or you've probably seen it in other organizations, but when the CEO decides it's time to retire or move on, what kind of time should there be between that announcement and the actual end date? [00:16:48] Alvin Sanders: For me, I think ideally, whoever the CEO is, has identified someone who they want to follow them. And you announce it like a year before it happens. You say, hey, I'm riding off into the sunset. We've identified such and such to be my replacement. And then you have a quarterly phase-out. That's how I'd like to go out. I think I have a lot more years left than me, Tommy, but when it's time to go, that's the way I'd like to do it.  [00:17:27] Tommy Thomas: What about the outgoing person sticking around as an advisor or an emeritus president? What's been your experience or observation there?  [00:17:36] Alvin Sanders: That's exactly the setup I have at the old church that I planted. I haven't been Pastor at Riverside Church since 2007, but my wife and I still go there, and my family still goes there, and I'm Pastor Emeritus, and it works marvelously. If the pastor who follows you or the leader who follows you wants you there. That's a huge if. And then you all have a great relationship where boundaries are set. And I know when to stick my nose into things and when not to stick my nose into things. And I see myself as a reference book, when you need to use me, pull me off the shelf and use me. When you need to seek advice, it's all driven by the present leader. I stay in my lane. So as the emeritus person, you have to stay in your lane in order for this to work. And the leader who succeeds you, they have to be confident enough in their own skin. That they're not threatened by you being there and they're comfortable in bringing you into the leadership situations to speak into it. ++++++++++++++++++++++ [00:18:52] Tommy Thomas: Occasionally I get to speak to boards about succession planning and I often talk about the departing leader. And I guess one of my observations is that generally, the departing leader has probably more of his or her identity tied up in the CEO role than they would like to admit. How do you help a man or woman in that case? [00:19:15] Alvin Sanders:   I don't know if you can to be quite honest. It took me probably three years to remove pastor as an identity marker from me when I moved from the River of Life Church to the EFCA. And really, it's a journey of spiritual maturity. At least it was for me. To say my identity is in Christ and then Christ sends me on different assignments, but it's all His church. It's all His organization. It's not mine. It's His. And that's the lesson that took me three years to learn. So that when I transitioned from the EFCA to World Impact, it was a much easier transition because I saw it more as my identity is in Christ, and I feel like God's changing my assignment, so I'm okay. [00:20:07] Tommy Thomas: Did Bill or anybody at your national office, did they come alongside you, or was there any help offered to you during that three years of rough water or were you on your own? [00:20:18] Alvin Sanders:  They didn't know it. Oh, okay. I didn't tell them. I didn't tell them. It was just a personal struggle of my own. But I'm sure they would have if I would have let them know.  [00:20:35] Tommy Thomas: What haven't I asked you about board service and CEO relationships that you think my listeners need to hear? [00:20:43] Alvin Sanders: I don't know. You've been pretty thorough, man. You should have given me some pre-interview questions.  [00:20:51] Tommy Thomas: You don't need any pre-interview questions. [00:20:52] Alvin Sanders: You made my brain do it out my ear. You've asked some pretty thorough things. I think we've covered the gamut of it, really.  [00:21:00] Tommy Thomas: Okay, let me close with one then and here again, this goes back to the board chair, somebody calls you and they've been asked to, as they usually do move up to the chair role, they've probably been in line for a while. What are you telling them that whatever you do, be sure you… [00:21:21] Alvin Sanders: You won't rise to the occasion. You will sink to the level of your preparedness. So we need to make sure that you're prepared for the chair seat in order for you to be a success. Because a lot of people want the title of board chair, but they don't want to do the role of board chair, if because that requires a different type of commitment and leadership contribution. So we want to prepare that person as best we possibly can for that leveling up that they'll have to do. +++++++++++++++++++++ In case you're counting, this was Episode 98. And we're getting closer to that milestone of 100 episodes. As I said last week, we have a very special guest for that episode. Someone who inadvertently had a major impact on my career. I'll give you a hint at this person's identity. She or he took their undergraduate degree from Cornell University.  But before we get to episode 100, we have Episode 99. Our guest next week is Dr. Barry Corey, the President of Biola University.  [00:22:37] Barry Corey: My father was a Pentecostal preacher in a hardscrabble town outside of Boston, Massachusetts. My parents did an unorthodox thing and allowed me to go to an all-boys Catholic preparatory school called St. John's in Shrewsbury, Massachusetts. Had a great education there. The great contributions that Catholics have made to education and virtues and morals and the values that needed to be embedded in education.   Links and Resources JobfitMatters Website Next Gen Nonprofit Leadership with Tommy Thomas Alvin Sanders - World Impact Uncommon Church: Community Transformation for the Common Good by Alvin Sanders Redemptive Poverty Work by Alvin Sanders Bridging the Diversity Gap: Leading Toward God's Multi-Ethnic Kingdom by Alvin Sanders   Connect Tommy Thomas - tthomas@jobfitmatters.com Tommy's LinkedIn Profile Alvin's LinkedIn Profile  

[00:00:00] Caryn Ryan: The Chairman walks up to a fence.  They're tough, but they're relational, right? They're goal driven, but they're people driven. They stick to a vision of what they have for the organization and for the Board. They tend to be performance oriented. If you have Board Chairs who don't understand the value that the board is supposed to bring it's hard for them to be performance oriented. But the best Board Chairs really understand deeply what the value this board is bringing to this organization. And therefore, because they understand that they're able to act in that way. ​++++++++++++++++ [00:00:39] Tommy Thomas: In this episode, we're going to conclude the conversation that was started with Caryn Ryan, back in Episode 84. In that conversation, Caryn shared her leadership journey from BP/Amoco to the CFO for World Vision International to her current role as Founder and Managing Member of Missionwell.  In this episode, Caryn will be sharing lessons on nonprofit board governance that she's learned over the years.  [00:01:15] Tommy Thomas: Let's change over to board service and board governance for a few minutes. Your friend John Reynolds, who himself is a pretty steeped in this area, he said, if I ever got a chance to talk to you, that we for sure needed to talk about the work you've done and the  Balanced Scorecard for Boards. Take us into that. I really hadn't thought about that from a board perspective.  [00:01:36] Caryn Ryan: Yeah. That's great. I appreciated John's support in that area at the time. And then also Maggie Bailey, who you may know who was at Point Loma.  [00:01:44] Tommy Thomas: I do know Dr. Bailey.  [00:01:46] Caryn Ryan: She's been another good friend. And somebody who really helped form some of my thoughts on governance. We served on the Board of Open Doors together. So, in 2021 I read Dean Spitzer's book on Transformative Performance Metrics. And it made me start thinking about all the problems of metrics and how might it be possible to have more positive outcomes or avoiding the downsides that he was discussing. And I started thinking some of those downsides that he mentioned over and over through the book might be surmounted if we applied biblical principles and tried to attach metrics to our faith and that leaders that led from faith might therefore be able to get better outcomes. Let me give you a couple examples. When you're using metrics in an organization usually tangible and financial results are really at the top, and that doesn't motivate people a lot of the time. And so I began to think maybe if we had some people and relationships at the top, in other words, that sort of from this biblical base of loving people that might be more but motivating and it would certainly be better connected to our faith. And then getting overconfident in the measures that the measures become the goal. Humility, this is a really important faith-based value and way of life, and perseverance in the face of issues. Those kinds of biblical and ways of living faithfully might help surmount that. And the fact that a measurement isn't trusted. I was thinking of let your yes be a yes, this idea that people get very defensive regarding failures, I thought in a faithful community, confession is at the core of reconciliation. So, I started thinking about how all these shortcomings had a biblical answer to them. And I started thinking how could we start to put together an approach that was more biblical and then allowed people's faith to be at the heart of their metrics? And as time went on I started then thinking about, okay let's take the issue of goals. That's taking a step back from the problems of metrics, but metrics are meant to - in a sense, say how we're doing on the journey of goals. So, we have, for instance, a vision. You have a vision to get to the vision, you set big goals, and then when you set the big goals, you have metrics. There're BHAGs sometimes, or there are other types of goals. And I started just then thinking about goals. Smart Goals Specific, Measurable, Actionable, Relevant to the mission and vision of the organization and Timebound And I know you've talked with John Pearson, and hearing good friends, you probably have heard him talk a lot about smart goals. Specific, Measurable, Actionable, Relevant to the mission and vision and Timebound. John uses smart goals a lot and that has impacted so many non-profits and Christian organizations for the good. It's added a lot of clarity and focus. I began to think about another lens, which is clear goals. Clear goals have come out in the last few years as another way of thinking about goals. And the CLEAR stands for Collaborative, Limited, Emotional, Appreciable and Refinable. CLEAR Goals Collaborative, Limited, Emotional, Appreciable and Refinable If you look in more detail at what those mean, they all come down to how is it that people are motivated and how is it that within a system of organization we set goals that are people sized and yet think about who they are, and it thinks about the people who the basic people are connected to as well. So I began to think about those clear goals and how people get motivated and start thinking more and more that there might be, again, that role for faith because that approach of the clear goals seemed like it tied a little bit better with the love of people. So let me give you a quick example here. Let's just see my vision. This is my vision. I'm going to use you a personal example, and this isn't true by the way, but it's just an example. My vision is to travel the world and have lots of adventures, and then I go to the doctor and the doctor says, I need to lose 50 pounds to get to a goal weight. That doctor's saying that you need to get to a goal weight, that's not motivating by itself to a lot of people. In fact, it might discourage some people or, and some people might take it to extremes, and it might compromise their muscle building and their bone density, etc, and so on. So it can have some unintended consequences. And it might be hard on my family if I stop cooking because I need to lose 50 pounds. But if my goal is to be physically fit enough to take a hike in the Swiss Alps in two years, that's motivating to me. And it might produce long-term change and it might engage my family too. So the system around me, it might have positive benefits for the system around me and it might create better health outcomes for my family too. So I started thinking that's the goal, it's to get the right motivations for people directly responsible for the goal. It's to attach the goal to something that's motivational for them. And then it's to ensure that the surrounding people and processes don't suffer any material negative consequences, that goal and in fact maybe even benefit from it. So then, that was some goal thinking that solved, finding good. And then I started thinking about balanced scorecards because balanced scorecards, really what those are is a way of expressing how you're accomplishing the sum of your goals. I began to think then about this idea of a KPI, key performance indicator that is saying that's a measure at a strategic level. So it's not a key success outcome, which is maybe something a little bit more tactical, but it's at the strategic level. And I started thinking about KPIs in particular and balanced scorecards. And how then could you take these processes, this or this idea of love for people and get that translated into some better performance metrics or better KPIs. I was working at the time with a Christian homeless organization. And I started talking with them about this as part of their strategy process, and I just noticed it resonated with their mindset. And we continued working on it with this organization. And it resulted in a scorecard initially for that organization,  which then turned out to be relatively easy to translate, concept wise, into a scorecard for a board. A KPI has both a measure and a target. Let me just give you a few examples. A KPI has both a measure and a target, and it's based on a balance set of perspectives. And so one example might be a board that wants to measure giving and getting, you've probably seen that as an issue, Tommy, and some of the boards that you work with, their concern is that the giving and getting the donations direct and indirect are not sufficient or not what the development department wants.  Some boards the chairman in collaboration with the CEO might say, this is a minimum gift. It's $10,000. If you want to be on our board, you're going to give $10,000. It's a minimum gift. Or another board might take the approach of saying, we want you to be in the top three of charities or causes that you give to now. One of those ways is more focused on people and aligning motivations and commitments than the other. And that's the difference at a board level and at an organization level that we're trying to capture. How do you make these things more motivational?  Another area for a board might be in the continuous improvement boards that have a really high percentage of directors talking about how much they love their board and are likely to be doing a good job. It could be that when it comes to your board self-assessment, if your measure is going to be based on your board self-assessment, maybe within that board self-assessment, you want to have a measure and pull that up to the KPI level about what is your board of director's net promoter score? In other words, how many people on your board are going out and talking about that board positively and inviting them to come into the board? Maybe 80% of the board, at least, should be going out and doing that. And if they are, then that's a great metric for a board self-assessment. It's a very results-oriented self-assessment. You've got a great board if everybody's out there talking about what a wonderful board you have. And it's also doing great things, by the way, for your recruitment metric as well.  [00:10:27] Tommy Thomas: That question I hadn't heard.  This is fascinating.  [00:10:33] Caryn Ryan: So, whether it's for boards or leaders, a nonprofit who wants to do this for a ministry has to tweak the methodologies that are used in the for-profit sector. But I think if they do it, they're going to get this a board or the leaders of organizations, they're going to just get a huge payback. They're just going to find that it's transformational in terms of the quality of time that they spend working on their metrics, making sure their personal motivations don't have unintended consequences and that they demonstrate the love for people. So, this is not something that I think a lot of people are thinking about, Tommy, and I can see working on this more as my role. So, mission will become less operational, but there's something in here that there's a word here that needs to be spread a little bit and different ways of thinking that we as Christians can offer to the rest of the world. ++++++++++++++++   [00:11:26] Tommy Thomas: A lot of people, most of us, would say that we've learned a lot in life through failure. In fact, maybe a lot of our stuff is learned through mistakes. If that's the truth, why are most of us so afraid to make a mistake?    [00:11:40] Caryn Ryan: I really think that it goes back to those two root causes that I was talking about before for leadership. Self-esteem and a desire for power or money or greed.  And if you have really low self-esteem, then I think you don't want to be judged. And because you don't want to be judged, then you don't take risks. And if you don't take risks, there's no reward. And then because there's no rewards, that goes and reinforces your low self-esteem. So it's this whole negative cycle of activities that just result in you not taking risks. But I would say too that if it's somebody who's power hungry, what you're going to see there is maybe not mistakes. It's more sins or heirs, of omission and commission really, that are just more, they're selfish, right? And so they're mistakes. They're either mistakes, in this life or in the next life. If you want to improve people's risk taking, you need to permit mistakes. And we need to also work on the root causes there.  We need to have systems and processes that make it safe, that don't trigger negative self-esteem, that make it okay for people to engage in risk taking, that set up rewards for risk taking. It's a kind of a whole system that we have to address if you want to fix this. But I think from a board perspective, and I know you're coming from that some of the time, there's also an issue of just needing to screen people who are willing to step past any kind of inner hesitations that they might have about, looking silly in front of their peers, for instance and who will just come out and say, it looks this way to me. And from a board perspective that seldom is going to be a mistake is going to generate a great conversation and improve outcomes for a board.  [00:13:43] Tommy Thomas: I want to go to financial accountability for a minute.  Because you live three or 400 miles south of the largest bank failure in recent days, the Silicon Valley Bank. And then you and I are both old enough to remember the Enron scandal. And in both of those situations, I think most people say the board is culpable. I guess the jury's still out on the bank but my hunch is that they'll find some culpability there. Take it. And they're not nonprofit organizations, but boards have responsibilities. How do you counsel your clients to have more candid conversations about financial accountability? [00:14:21] Caryn Ryan: That's such a great question, Tommy. I will say too, just for starters, that it's quite rare, I think for board members to have whatever it takes to come out and ask these top questions. The best of boards do, but the middle of the pack and the worst really don't. Now you start thinking then about what is in the best of boards that makes them allow conflict and allow tough questions to come out. And I think there's a variety of answers. But first, let me just say this. I want to point out an interesting statistic here because if you look at candidate or GuideStar, this is a rating entity for nonprofits. And that includes Christian nonprofits. They provide some statistics that could be of interest here to try to think through - who are the best of the best. It's not completely pertinent, but in their world, which is thousands and thousands of charities that they rank, only 5% get a ranking of gold, silver, or platinum status. And of those, it's a very limited percentage, maybe 15%, that get the platinum. So when you multiply that backwards, then it says that only about 1.5% of all the charities that get ranked get a platinum candid certification. Now, this is mainly just looking at financial results and transparencies, but I think it does show that being the top nonprofit, it's pretty rarefied world. It's that up in the stratosphere there is a top nonprofit or a top ministry. So then we code your question then about I think having a board that can ask the tough questions is a precursor to that, to being a top performing nonprofit. And so having a really great board. It is a risky proposition when a nonprofit CEO recruits only his/her friends or allies to the Board. There are barriers that we can see. I'm sure you've seen these often too, but it's not unusual for a CEO to recruit his or her friends or allies to the board. And that's never a good idea because it discourages a lot of times that friend from having an honest conversation about the nonprofit or something that's really important to their friend. And also on boards, it's not unusual to have a whole bunch of conflicts of interest. It just isn't dealt with or even surfaced by the board members. So when you have that, then you have the sometimes people aren't going to ask tough questions because they have a conflict of interest.  Another factor is that there's capability gaps. There are people who aren't able to read basic financial statements or financial reports. And I think financials, I'm coming at this from a financial perspective perhaps, but financials embody the impact of boards and their decisions, and their actions related to strategy. A board takes a decision. The decision unfolds as actions. The actions are translated into financial results. And so that's how a board gets to see how did I do with the strategic decisions that I made? But interestingly, a lot of times sports can't even read their financial statements. There's a lot of financial literacy questions there. So how can you ask tough questions if you can't read the financial statements or financial reports and understand them? And sometimes there are issues with what's delivered to boards too, in terms of information, but sometimes it's just a basic lack of understanding. I think too, there's also a fundamental issue that sometimes with boards, they don't get enough board development or board training and they really just don't understand their key role when it comes to accountability. And so, they don't understand that it's their job to ask the tough questions. These are a few things, but I think you put them all together, Tommy. And isn't it a wonder at all that any charities have boards that do ask the tough questions and that are excellent? There are a lot of pieces that all have to come together to make that happen. +++++++++++++++++   [00:18:11] Tommy Thomas: At the crux of any board is the Board Chair. Give me words and phrases that would describe the best chair you've ever seen or served under.  [00:18:20] Caryn Ryan: Okay. I would say some of the things that I've seen the chairman do… They're tough, but they're relational, right? They're goal driven, but they're people driven. They stick to a vision of what they have for the organization and for the board. They tend to be performance oriented. I think if you have board chairs who don't understand the value that the board is supposed to bring it's hard for them to be performance oriented. The best board chairs really understand deeply what the value this board is bringing to this organization. And therefore, because they understand that they're able to act in that way. So I see those are some of the characteristics that differentiate a great board leader from a less than great board leader. [00:19:11] Tommy Thomas: Do you think every board needs a glass half empty person?  [00:19:16] Caryn Ryan: Does the board need that kind of a person? No. I guess it depends on how you define that, Tommy. So, for me if you mean by that, that there's a person who can see that they're on the side of half empty, that there's upsides and downsides, right? Then maybe. But in general, I think when a board comes together, they need to be so enthusiastic, so passionate about the mission and vision. So, the ability to look at an opportunity and say, no our glass is not half empty. I know where we want to go as a board, and we're going to fill this glass, right? They're going to say, we're going to absolutely fill this glass. We're going to pivot and do what we have to do because maybe there are some circumstances out there that are making some people think the glass is half empty, but we're going to pivot. We're going to figure out what we need to do. Always moving down the field toward the goalpost, toward the vision for the organization. So I think if people can try to look at environments and circumstances and say, how do we get the most from these?  How do we use this? Change this, maybe this negative circumstance. How do we use this negative environment? How do we use this risky situation? How do we just use this to help us down the goalpost? Or if we just absolutely can't find a way, how do we dodge it for now so we can come back and get back on track later? Is there a better way for a board member to function? [00:20:39] Tommy Thomas:   Talk a little bit about the CEO Evaluation and the Board.  You've seen a lot of boards. What's some best practices you see there?  [00:20:48] Caryn Ryan: How about for starters doing it? That to me is critical and mostly what I've seen over the years are annual assessments. When it's done. What I see is annual assessments sometimes every two years. When I've helped boards, I sit on boards that I've helped. What I've done is I've stolen shamelessly from other organizations to develop an assessment. And by the way, I don't think you need to be overly concerned with whether a professional developed this assessment. Most board members know this is what's important for us and for the CEO. Just write those questions out and, go or go steal them from somebody and tweak them a bit to make them fit your circumstances. I've noticed other nonprofits are very generous in sharing that way. They're happy to say, this is my evaluation tool. But it's important too, to just do it and to remember too, it's not the tool, it's the conversation around it.  You're actually using that tool because you want to improve. If it's a Board evaluation, you want to improve the Board. If it's a CEO evaluation, you want to give it to the CEO to develop the CEO. And sometimes to make a tough decision on retention. But a lot of times it's for the development and the good of the CEO and the organization. So don't focus on the what, focus on the how, when it comes to these evaluations, and keep in mind what the goal is, right? To encourage and to support and to develop your CEO. [00:22:13] Tommy Thomas: I talked to Jerry White, The Board Chair for The Navigators International, yesterday.  And Jerry's comment was that whatever comes out in the evaluation shouldn't be a surprise.  [00:22:22] Caryn Ryan: That's quite true because if it does turn out to be a surprise, Jerry is absolutely correct. You've had a trust breakdown. The results of the Board's evaluation of the CEO should not be a surprise to the CEO.  If that happens you have a breakdown in trust and communications. When you have that big of a communications breakdown, there's a trust dynamic at work there. And that has to be treated as a separate issue and a precursor to really doing CEO evaluations. You first have to address that trust issue, what is causing the trust issue?  And you have to get that out of the way before you can then have reasonably productive conversations around an assessment.  That's such a common dynamic, Tommy. [00:22:56] Tommy Thomas: Jerry said that, I'm probably paraphrasing, but something to the effect of the evaluation should really be going on overtime and not just every 12 months or whatever.  [00:23:06] Caryn Ryan: He's absolutely right. So there should be informal feedback occurring. Some of the better boards, I've seen the chairman meeting monthly with the CEO, right? They have lunch, an informal kind of lunch. And they're having a very frank and relational though dialogue during the month about, what's going, what's going wrong. It's a chance and opportunity for linkages and feedback to the board and back. And so that in and of itself is building trust and leading to the ability for the board to have a positive session when it comes to the performance management. But I'll say this, even when that's occurring at which it does in the best board, there are going to be, because the CEO Evaluation is the sum of all, typically of all the board members. It's not always the case. Sometimes the chairman will do it, or they'll select a few people to do it, but a lot of times it's the whole board. There's almost a benefit to seeing that total perspective because maybe there's an aspect of it that's a surprise. The overall flow is in accord with what the chairman and CEO have been talking about and having dialogue on through the year. But there's a couple of points that generally come out that make that wrap up in the annual evaluation valuable. There's something about the faith life of the CEO that hasn't been addressed and it's coming out and there's a way to have a conversation in a different kind of pulling up. Over the past year and maybe even looking forward a little bit into the challenges, it's just a way of pulling up above the fray and looking with a little bit more distance at the year that can generate a couple of new revelations. But I totally agree with Jerry. There shouldn't really be a lot of surprises on that because there should be this ongoing dialogue. +++++++++++++++++++ [00:24:44] Tommy Thomas: I want to ask you one question, then I'll close. My next to the last question has to do with succession planning and the board. At what point should that begin to occur? And how does the board address that without the CEO thinking? I'm a short termer.  [00:25:03] Caryn Ryan: Okay. Yeah, that's great.  I'm dealing with that right now at one of my one of the boards that I sit on. And I've just dealt with that last year as well. And it works both ways if it works all, all different ways. So let me just talk about one where the CEO does get the feeling. If you have this conversation, they're a short termer. I want to just say first of all, that can sometimes go back to the trust issue again, right? When there's a lack of trust between the board and the CEO then, and you bring up the question of succession planning, the first thing that goes of course into the CEO's mind is, oh, I'm getting fired.  I'm a short termer here.  So that has to again, be addressed, the trust issue before you can have productive conversations around succession planning. But even longer term issues are going to take some time to get resolved. There's something you can always do on the succession plan that's very short term and that every single board must have in place. And that is you need a succession plan in case of an emergency. If your CEO becomes ill, is hit by a bus, whatever, right? You need an emergency succession plan that is an interim structure or very well thought through way that you'll manage in the absence of the CEO.  And usually, it's not going to bring out the same negative feeling for the CEO.  On the part of the CEO because they understand that, oh yeah, if I'm not there, we need to have some interim structure. And so, they'll begin helping the Board and thinking through, look, okay, if something happens to me, let's make this person on our staff, the interim, or let's pull this Board Member out and see if they'll be the interim. Or they'll start to engage in the ideas for how that could work in an interim structure. And as long as you can get that interim structure put in place and everybody's in agreement that it's workable, that then gives a chance during the interim structure for the Board to go out and begin doing a search to find a replacement candidate. Regarding succession planning for a Founder – She/he just might not be willing to step aside. They might have created a whole lack of number twos in the organization who can step in, even in an emergency. It just may not be anybody. So that's a different situation where the board needs to probably, in addition to working on trust, which can be very difficult with the founder. You might be off the board if you start having those kinds of conversations. But what you can do as a board is do your research. How you would do a search. You can get your research done on executive search firms who could step in and help you. You can just keep in mind, it takes and Tommy, you're the one who should be telling your podcast listeners this, but it's a long process to do a search. You've got to set up a search committee. You have to figure out how you're going to recruit, the person. You've got to have an approach. You have to execute it, you have to review the candidates. It's just really time consuming. You at least have to think through all of these, how that's a minimum thing, even if it's a founder situation. So I'd say two things. Number one, for sure, have an interim emergency succession plan, no questions asked. That's an absolute minimum mandate for every board. And number two, if you're on a founder board, you have to do some special extra work along the side with networking, quiet networking, just to figure out the process and figure out how you would do, how would you do that if something did happen to your founder, if your founder's not willing to participate or help with that.  Does that make sense?  [00:28:32] Tommy Thomas: Yeah. The founder conversation is probably a three or four podcast discussion that I haven't had yet. Maybe I'll have you back with two or three other panelists and we'll talk about founders because I did some research three or four years ago on that, and it's an easier said than done proposition. [00:28:49] Caryn Ryan: Yes, I totally agree, and I'd love to hear the wisdom of some other panelists on this one too, because we all encounter these founder situations.  [00:28:58] Tommy Thomas: So, let's go to my last question.  Somebody comes to you next week, they want to have breakfast or lunch, and somebody has asked them to serve on the Board of a nonprofit, and they're coming to you saying, Caryn, what should I be thinking about? [00:29:13] Caryn Ryan: I'd say, if they ask that question, they're on track to be a good board member first of all. Because sometimes people will jump into these situations without asking that very question. But what I would give somebody who's thinking about joining a board the advice is number one,  For a nonprofit Board Member - Does the mission of the organization excite my passion? Am I passionate about it? I think if you're not passionate about what the organization is doing, it's just not going to work. It's just not going to interest you inherently. So, you have to be able to see this as a way to realize or support your passion. Number two I would talk about - I would think about conflicts of interest. I was recently counseling the Executive Director of an organization who'd been asked to serve on a board where there were some competitive aspects to her organization. So we talked that through. And she in effect decided, no, there's too many conflicts of interest here for me to take that board position. Number three might be do you have the time? Okay. So, there's a real issue. You need to dig in and understand how much time is it going to take. Do you have to serve on committees? How much time do the committees take? How many, how frequently are the board meetings? Is there a retreat every year that you have to go to? So you really need to add up the time and make sure that you're able to make that commitment. I'd say those are three of the big things that I see with people. And a lot of times I'll start doing positive coaching to people too, in terms of, also, why don't you ask yourself, what development will I personally get by sitting on the Board? What will it do for me and my professional development or my development as a person and a human being? And sometimes that can make the difference. They can say, I really don't have the time to do this, but I need to do this because I really believe it's going to focus and sharpen at home this strategic skill set that I need to be successful in something else that I'm doing in life. And so, they'll do it and they'll be really glad, because they'll get that development. Just let's think about that lens too.  [00:31:05] Tommy Thomas: That's interesting.  A good friend, Joe Arms, who used to be the Chairman of the Baylor Board is the CEO of a large private sector company.  He said he makes that a part of the management training program for his employees that he encourages board participation in the nonprofit sector in Dallas as part of their grooming. [00:31:27] Caryn Ryan: I can see that you get a lot of personal development when you're a part of a board and it's where you're really learning that what you learn about governance is not so distinct from what you need to be a top senior executive in a corporation. There are just a lot of parallels there. So I can really see why he'd say that.  So he makes a very good observation. [00:31:48] Tommy Thomas:  Caryn, thank you. This has been a great conversation. I just believe our listeners have picked up some things that probably hadn't been covered in other board conversations, so thank you for taking this time with me. I really appreciate it.  [00:32:03] Caryn Ryan: Absolutely.  Thank you, Tommy. I'm so glad to have reconnected with you and been able to remember some of my fond memories with some of the people who are in your network as we've talked.  [00:32:14] Tommy Thomas:  Life has been good to me over the years, and the two men you mentioned, Nick Isbister and Rob Stevenson - both of those guys they put a lot of time into this project, and I'm grateful for their part in my life.  [00:32:26] Caryn Ryan: I'm grateful too and I can add you to my circle of gratitude now.  [00:32:30] Tommy Thomas: Our guest next week will be Alec Hill The President Emeritus of InterVarsity Christian fellowship. You may remember Alec from Episodes 18 and 19, where he and Rudy Hernandez, a former board chair at InterVarsity discuss the working relationship between the CEO and the Board Chair in a nonprofit organization.  Alec is also a prolific writer. He's a regular contributor to postings on the Christian Leadership Alliance website. One of his recent posts was titled Finding Gold in Manure. In that article Alec shares lessons that he's learned for some of the hard times in his life. And in our conversation we'll dig into some of those lessons.    Links and Resources JobfitMatters Website Next Gen Nonprofit Leadership with Tommy Thomas 2021 Distinguished Alumni Recipient Caryn Ryan, ‘79 Missionwell Website Transforming Performance Measurement: Rethinking the Way We Measure and Drive Organizational Success by Dean Spitzer   Connect Tommy Thomas - tthomas@jobfitmatters.com Tommy's LinkedIn Profile Caryn Ryan's LinkedIn Profile  

[00:00:00] Tommy Thomas: This week, we're continuing the conversation that we began last week with Paul Mauer, the president of Montreat College. If you missed that episode, we've talked about what one writer has referred to as the “Miracle at Montreat”. Today Paul is sharing lessons that he's learned about nonprofit board governance over the years.  Let's change over a little bit to the board aspect of being a president. What was the biggest adjustment that you had to make between, say, reporting to the CEO as a cabinet member and then as the President reporting to the board? [00:00:40] Paul Maurer: Yeah, it's a great question. I'm a bit of a governance nerd. I really think about and study governance. I did that in my doctoral work. I do it as a college president in nonprofit governance.  Your board policy manual really matters. It matters because your board needs clarity. The president needs clarity. What is the role of the board? What is the role of the president? What's the role of the relationship and what's the role of everyone else on campus in relationship to the board? And so, in the world of board governance, there are working boards and there are policy boards. Startups tend to have working boards, like true startups, like really small organizations, more established organizations. If they haven't transitioned to a policy board, they probably ought to consider doing so. Because you don't really want a board involved in the operations of an organization. I'm deeply grateful that my board gave me the lead role in board development, meaning recruitment of new board members, training of board members, and the board policy manual. And we have a great board today, and they really understand that the board should not be involved in operations. That's the CEO's job but one should be sure that they're being fiduciaries, that they're making sure there's a strategic plan that's being carried out, their success along the way, and that they manage or evaluate. They don't manage, they evaluate the presidents. They hire and fire the president, the CEO. I do think that my argument would be that it's more important for a President to be a CEO than a President. The President is, as I think of a bit of an old model for college leadership, it's rooted in what I think is not a very useful model of shared governance. I think the CEO is a better model, but you also need a CEO who's sensitive to campus dynamics and the idea that consensus really matters. And a consensus building CEO I think is the best model, but I think that the CEO also needs to be the CUO - the Chief Urgency Officer, because things are changing so fast.  And if the CEO is not leading change with a great sense of urgency, then I think the institution puts itself at some measure of risk. [00:03:21] Tommy Thomas: You've served on other boards, and you've reported to at least two, give me some attributes of a great Board Chair.  [00:03:29] Paul Maurer: I think the central role of a Board Chair is to manage the board. It's not principally to be a person of wealth or to be connected to persons of wealth. I don't think that's the right model for a Board Chair of a college. I think the right model is someone who understands nonprofit governance and manages the board meeting to meeting because the board ultimately is the boss of the President - CEO, only during those board meetings. So the board chair needs to constantly instill clarity in the board to encourage them and steer them away from being involved in operations from directing the presidents, and to maintaining the role of being an overseer that the CEO reports to three times a year or however many times a year that board meets. The best chairs I've worked with really understand governance and really do well in managing the board's expectations of what that governance entails.  [00:04:41] Tommy Thomas: How does a good Board Chair draw out the silent board member?  [00:04:47] Paul Maurer:  In our board meetings, we have blocks of time for plenary sessions for the big picture items. And there's always time in there for dialogue and for feedback. And there are times when we build into our board meetings. When I give my board report, I give a little bit of a board update, a little bit of a report, and then I just open the floor to questions. And so there's just this open dialogue that I have with my board during the president's report at the beginning of the day and then the middle of the day during plenary sessions. If I'm informing or bringing an action item to the board as a whole, we are sure to build in time for dialogue, deliberation, questions, understanding, and in between board meetings, I'm sending information on kind of the latest update on what's happening in my world. So, they're getting articles on a regular, semi-regular basis that if they're able to take time to read them helps keep them abreast of the most pressing issues that I'm facing on a regular basis.  [00:06:04] Tommy Thomas: So how often do you and your Board Chair, do y'all have regularly scheduled times or is it as needed?  How do y'all relate to each other?  [00:06:12] Paul Maurer: I'm aware that friendship is a tricky element in these things. I happen to have a very deep and strong friendship with my board chair, which preceded him coming on the board and he became a board member. And now as chair and I've changed my mind on this, Tommy, because there was a time earlier on when I thought that those were mutually exclusive and now, I don't think they're mutually exclusive. I think it can work very healthfully. And now I actually try to cultivate friendships with my board members in a way that I didn't early on in my first presidency, certainly not early on at Montreat. And so I think that dynamic when healthy is a really powerful part of making it work well. Any model can be abused. Any model can go awry. And I've seen that and I've heard about it an awful lot. I've experienced it. But I've also experienced the flip side of that, where a really meaningful friendship can also be the basis of a really healthy CEO-Board Chair relationship.  [00:07:34] Tommy Thomas: Can you think back as to, you mentioned early on at Montreat you hadn't gotten there yet.  What changed?  [00:07:43] Paul Maurer: In the relationship with my board chair?  [00:07:46] Tommy Thomas: Yeah, how did you make that transition from thinking it wasn't healthy to realizing that it could be healthy?  [00:07:52] Paul Maurer: I guess experiencing it along the way, initially without intending it to be that, and I went, this actually works. And so, when my current chair, when I began discussions with him about, because he had led a major healthcare nonprofit and grown it from a $25 million budget to $125 million budget. He had led a nonprofit.  He had worked in that sector for all of his career in healthcare, not in education. And so, I knew that I wanted him to be my next board chair when that time came. And so it was really then that I began to think in this kind of new model that maybe there's a way for and as I look back, I've actually had these like really healthy relationships with my past two board chairs here at Montreat. And gosh, what a better way to do it, and it really is possible. It eventually dawned on me that I could intentionally pursue that.  [00:09:01] Tommy Thomas: Do you have a term limit for your board chair?  [00:09:04] Paul Maurer: Five years, but it's year to year, up to five years.  [00:09:09] Tommy Thomas: And what about your board members? [00:09:10] Paul Maurer:  Nine years, the terms are three years renewable, two times for a nine year max with a one year minimum required off before renomination. One of the changes we made here was that every three-year term we do the board does self-evaluations for those that term and peer evaluations for those that come to term. There's an honest, self-reflective, peer reviewed process that goes through a committee on trusteeship every year for those at a term to ask the question, is this going well? Is this a time to continue on or a time to step off? And so it's not a nine, it's not a nine year. Every three years we talk about it. [00:10:08] Tommy Thomas:  Is that fairly common in the nonprofit sector from your experience?  [00:10:12] Paul Maurer: The board policy manual that we use was the work of Bob Andringa who was the CEO of the Council for Christian Colleges Universities some years ago. And Bob developed the BPM (Board Policy Manual) that we use. And as I understand it, there are 60 or 70 or 80, I think mostly CCCU schools that have adopted some version of Bob's work. And I just think it's so well-crafted and we of course made it ours with Bob's permission. And it's just a really, it's a really well done, thoughtful way to do governance. ++++++++++++++++++++   [00:10:53] Tommy Thomas: A lot of people that I talk with, there's a move toward lowering the mean age of the board and also increasing diversity. What kind of experience have y'all had at Montreat on those issues? [00:11:03] Paul Maurer:  We're intentionally trying to increase diversity. We've not found that to be an easy pathway, but we are committed to it. And on age I would just gently push back on the median age lowering. I'm very much of the Aristotelian camp that young people have less wisdom. And part of what you want for board members is wisdom. Wisdom comes with experience, and experience comes with age and the hard knocks of life. And just the journey of life with gray hair and getting beat up occasionally. And I want younger people on the board, but that's more, that's less common. They're actually very hard to get on the board because they're less really qualified candidates in my view, and they're uber busy with career and family. So the young members I have, the 30 somethings I have on my board, I have two of them. They're like up to their eyeballs, four or five kids each, they're CEOs or leaders in their own rights and rising in the ranks. And these people have large portfolios and enormous demands on their time. Then my 70- and 80-year-olds, and even I have a 91-year-old board member who I recruited at the age of 87. And he said to me, he said, Paul, what if I die? And I said, Bill what if I die? We're all going to die. You've got a lot of gas left in your tank. You've got an enormous amount of wisdom. And you may have others who think that you're too old to be a board member. I don't think that at all. And if there comes a day when your health has slipped, your metro capacities have slipped, we'll have that conversation and we'll have it openly and honestly. Honestly, the seventies, eighties, and 90-year-old trustees I have are really easily among my best trustees.  They're phenomenal. [00:13:22] Tommy Thomas: Let me get you to respond to this quote. You need a director on the board who will be a pleasant irritant, someone who will force people to think a little differently. That's what a good board does. [00:13:39] Paul Maurer: I think I would probably not gravitate toward the word irritant, and I would say I, I'd probably substitute something a little softer than that, that you want to be objective and you want to be able to deal with the hard issues. And frankly, the CEO ought to be leading the way on that, not a board member. I think it's fine for a board member to raise difficult or uncomfortable matters, and I certainly have board members who do that, and I think that's fine and it's healthy, but I think that can come by from different means, and it can come without it being quote unquote, maybe I'm just hung up on the word irritant. I think you can have really robust, difficult, honest, truthful conversations without it being irritating.  [00:14:40] Tommy Thomas: Okay. Talk about your philosophy or your use of the executive committee?  [00:14:48] Paul Maurer: I think it's vital and extremely valuable in a healthy board situation, and I'm qualifying a lot of my comments with a healthy board because I've worked for both healthy and unhealthy boards. I happen to be working for a very healthy board in my time here at Montreat. And so the executive committee functionally is a decision that needs to be made quickly between board meetings and the CEO either doesn't have the authority or just wisely wants the board to help own that decision and goes to the executive committee in between board meetings for a fast decision. Early in my time here, I used that executive committee with more frequency than I do now. But I don't have the number of fires now that I had back in 14, 15, 16, 17. And so I still use the executive committee, but it's less frequent and the larger board has fully embraced the executive committee in that way. [00:16:01] Tommy Thomas: How often do you use the executive session?  [00:16:04] Paul Maurer: Every board meeting, we have two executive sessions, one with the president and one without the president. Actually in inverse order - the first without the president. And then I'm brought back in for executive session with the president and where I'm told what was discussed in session without the president fully briefed and then engaging in a conversation where it's just me and the board in whatever they want to talk about freely, they don't feel free to talk about necessarily with a cabinet in the room. +++++++++++++++++++++   [00:16:37] Tommy Thomas: We mentioned strategic planning a few minutes ago. Does your board, are they involved in that, or do you and your staff bring that to the board?  [00:16:44] Paul Maurer: The latter in our board policy manual, the board's role is to approve a strategic plan recommended by the president and to receive updates and make sure that the CEO is making progress on the strategic plan. And so I give reports on the strategic plan, but the board is not involved in the creation of the strategic plan.  [00:17:07] Tommy Thomas: How does the CEO evaluation take place at Montreat? [00:17:11] Paul Maurer: So I submit a set of goals to the board on an annual basis that are metrics tied to the strategic plan, and they're evaluated at the end of the year.  And we, in our executive session, have a conversation about my delivery toward those goals.  [00:17:32] Tommy Thomas: Is that on an annual basis?  [00:17:35] Paul Maurer: It is in our policy manual. It is an annual activity.  [00:17:39] Tommy Thomas: How have you and your board addressed board turnover? In terms of maybe involuntary or voluntary?  I guess people decide they don't have time. They don't enjoy it. How are y'all doing with that?  [00:17:53] Paul Maurer: We've grown our board over the years, but we've certainly had people who, I had two resignations in this last run up to my board meeting last week. And they were just personal situations that they felt like they just needed to focus on some personal matters that they didn't feel like they could do justice to their service on the board. And we regretfully accepted their resignations. But in those cases, it had nothing to do with the college or the board or it was purely personal. That's mostly what we've experienced over these years. Most of our trustees go to term and we have them term out after nine years. We celebrate them and thank them. We've grown our board from our bylaws. Say that we can have between 12 and 36. It's a very wide range. When I first got here, we were in that 12 to 15 range for a number of years. Maybe ironically, maybe not. Ironically, during covid we had just a tremendous breakthrough in people saying yes to joining the board. I do a lot of board cultivation with board members who are bringing prospective trustee names to the table. We have a very robust list of prospective trustees at all times. Somewhere between 10 and 15 on our prospect list. And some go fast, some go slow, some never materialize. We're about 20 board members today.  Our target is to get in somewhere between 25 and 28. [00:19:31] Tommy Thomas: What kind of strategy do you use to keep that list at 15 to 20?  [00:19:36] Paul Maurer: Probably closer to 10 to 15. Yeah. And that's really the work of the committee on trusteeship to surface names. We also have, as we recruit new board members in, they bring fresh names to that list. So we're constantly messaging like that. That's a document. That's a living, breathing document. And some people stay on the A-list, some move to the B, some move to, we ask and they said no. We've got six or eight tabs on that spreadsheet, and it's constantly a living, breathing kind of document. [00:20:15] Tommy Thomas: This might be a mundane question, but I hear it asked a lot. Do you have a board meeting evaluation fairly regularly, or how do y'all approach that? [00:20:25] Paul Maurer:   Every board meeting, as soon as the board meeting is over, they get a email in their inbox asking them to fill out an evaluation of the board meeting. They've just finished. We give just a small number of days to do that so it's fresh in their minds. And then the Committee on Trusteeship takes that feedback which is both on a Likert scale as well as open comments available to, for them to make. And then that is discussed at the next committee on trusteeship meeting. And we're always trying to get better and refine and bring some changes to how the board meetings are conducted. And those surveys have served a very valuable role in that way.  [00:21:09] Tommy Thomas: What did you learn through Covid that you'll take forward? That maybe you didn't do before Covid in terms of board relationships and board governance? [00:21:19] Paul Maurer:   One of the observations I made during Covid was man, we're in this together. And my board chair is a public health expert, as I mentioned before and when Covid hit I remember calling him in early April and I said I don't have a clue how we're going to reopen. Can you help us? And he said I'd love to help you. And I said I've developed a friendship with the other four-year residential college presidents here in Western North Carolina. There are four privates and then a couple of major publics. Would you be willing to help them too? And he said, absolutely I would. That group of six presidents plus my board chair met on a zoom call at noon every Wednesday for a year and a half to figure out how to open residential both years of covid. And that was a powerful experience of teamwork and collaboration and friendship and setting aside the inevitable competition that exists between these institutions and saying, there's a bigger picture here, and I think the benefit of that was very great for all of us. The second thing I'd point to is that the level of fear that I observed during covid was something I'd never seen before, how widespread, how deep it was. And so the word courage became a central concept that whatever we did, we needed to really lean into the courage of critical thinking and what's best for the institution, what's best for the students and the staff here. And there was no one size fits all in Covid in vastly different circumstances in different parts of the country. Vastly different realities of the impact of covid with different age groups and so we had to make decisions for 18- to 22-year-olds in our campus and our employees. That's how we had to make decisions. And you can't possibly have state mandates or county mandates or federal recommendations fit every circumstance. And we made decisions that we believed to be in the best interest of our community. And we took some criticism for that. But overall, I would say that those who chose that kind of a pathway were probably more rewarded than not. +++++++++++++++++++= [00:24:20] Tommy Thomas: I'll ask you two final questions and we'll try to land this thing. Go to the board and the CEO's succession plan. What have y'all done there to ensure some sort of untimely succession?  [00:24:35] Paul Maurer: So we're actually just starting that conversation like literally last Friday at the board meeting with kind of keyman questions. And we haven't done a lot there on the longer question of succession. I've started thinking about that. I'd like to stay longer. I don't really have an interest in retirement. Not at this point anyway. And today I'd love to go another decade or so. We'll see what happens. But I'm increasingly of the mind that the best succession plan is to bring one or more people onto your team who may have the potential and groom them.  Talk openly about succession and see what happens with the possibility that the CEO can actually play a central role in the recommendation of his or her successor. The way the church does this, and the way colleges and universities do this, in my experience the pastor and the president really play very little role at all. Either limited or none. And the more I've been thinking about this and talking to peers about this, the less that makes sense to me. And again, in a healthy situation, the board I think could and should rightly lean on and engage at a very deep level, the CEO of the college to say, what do you think? Who do you think we should hire? What are the core competencies? Can we get that person on board? And so, what I'd like to do in the years ahead is get two or three, maybe even four people on my cabinet who have the potential capacity for becoming a college president and see if we can't raise one of them up into the role as my successor. Whether that works or not, I can't predict that, but that to me seems like a wise model if you can do it healthfully.  [00:26:43] Tommy Thomas: What are you going to say if you get a call next week from either a friend or maybe someone you don't know that says Paul, I've been asked to serve on a nonprofit board. What kind of council are you giving somebody who's considering a nonprofit board service?  [00:27:00] Paul Maurer: It ought to be done with a significant measure of time, talent, and treasure. It ought to be a major commitment of yours if you're serving on lots of nonprofit boards. Unless you're willing to put this new one at a higher level of commitment than the others, maybe you shouldn't do it. I think that the best board members of nonprofits are vested. They've got skin in the game. They're giving of their time, their talent, and significantly of their treasure. The treasure's the hardest one, I think. We ask all of our trustees to commit to Montreat being a top three philanthropic priority prior to trusteeship. And that's a stumbling block for some people. But I think in the end, it also fosters the creation of a board that has skin in the game and that really is serious about the future of the institution. It's not a casual kind of volunteering. It's a serious kind of volunteering.  [00:28:13] Tommy Thomas: It has been great. Paul, this has been so much fun. Thank you for carving out an hour and a half of your time for me. I appreciate it. [00:28:20] Paul Maurer: Tommy, I've enjoyed it very much. You ask a lot of very good questions and I'm certain that your podcasts are of great value to those in leadership and those thinking about leadership. So, thank you. ++++++++++++++++++++++++ [00:28:32] Tommy Thomas (2): Next week, we're going to conclude the conversation that we started with Caryn Ryan and Episode 84. In that conversation, Caryn shared her leadership journey from BP/AMOCO to CFO for World Vision International to her current role as Founder and Managing Member of Missionwell.   In next week's episode, Caryn will be sharing lessons on nonprofit board governance that she's learned over the years.  [00:29:04] Caryn Ryan: There's a lot of financial literacy questions there. So how can you ask tough questions if you can't read the financial statements or financial reports and understand them? And sometimes there's issues with what's delivered to boards too, in terms of information, but sometimes it's just a basic lack of understanding. I think too, there's also a fundamental issue that sometimes with boards, they don't get enough board development or board training and they really just don't understand their key role when it comes to accountability. And so, they don't understand that it's their job to ask the tough questions. ++++++++++++++++   Links and Resources JobfitMatters Website Next Gen Nonprofit Leadership with Tommy Thomas Montreat College Website The Miracle at Montreat Montreat College Facebook Montreat College Instagram   Connect Tommy Thomas - tthomas@jobfitmatters.com Tommy's LinkedIn Profile Paul Maurer's LinkedIn Profile  

[00:00:00] Jerry White: Risk has to be uncertain categories. There's legal risk, there's financial risk, and then there's what I call uncontrolled risk of things you don't expect that the government may impose. What if they decide for our property at Glen Erie that it no longer is going be tax exempt? Or what if the state were to do that sort of thing? Those are risks over which we have no control. The risk on leveraged investments, I think, is quite important. For instance, you may propose to a larger organization a $3 million project, but the money is not in the bank. And you have four donors who said they'll fund it, but will they, and if they do, what voice should they have in it? That's a huge thing.  Money given with strings attached is really quite risky. +++++++++++++++++++++ [00:01:02] Tommy Thomas: In this episode, we will conclude the conversation that we began with Jerry White in Episode 85. If you didn't hear that episode, Jerry White is the President Emeritus of The Navigators International. Prior to that he enjoyed a distinguished career in the United States Air Force, retiring as a two-star general. One of the reasons I wanted Jerry to be a guest is because of the depth of his nonprofit board service.  Among the boards he has served include  World Vision,  The Navigators.  Christian Leadership Alliance.  The Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability. The Lausanne Committee on World Evangelization.  The Air Force Association.  Let's pick up the conversation where we were beginning to discuss board governance.  Let's shift over to board service. How did your first board show up? [00:01:56] Jerry White: My first board that I served on was a small organization and besides a church board, every board is different. When I got into leading boards, like the Christian Leadership Alliance and being on boards like World Vision and leading The Navigator board the biggest thing is who you have on the board.  And that they understand what their role is on the board.  And my view is that they're not operational. They don't make operational decisions, and they give the CEO a clear path to glide on. And hold that person accountable. And on the board service, I found it extremely important to have people of varied backgrounds and competencies so that we weren't all monolithic and the board could not be a rubber stamp board, whatever the leader wants. Yeah, that's fine. Just go ahead and do it. But to take on true, what I call policy governance, and to realize that you aren't running it, but you're holding the CEO accountable for what they say they're going to do. And once in a while you have to intervene.  [00:03:14] Tommy Thomas: You mentioned having the right people on the board.  What is the secret sauce? [00:03:20] Jerry White: One secret sauce is you don't bring them on just because they've got money. That's probably the worst criteria you can have if people do not share the vision of that organization on whose board they serve. You don't want them on there. And if they happen to have wealth and are generous people, that's fine, but we don't own them. They have to be people who give more broadly. And before we bring someone on the board we have to first make sure for me, in the Christian world, to make sure that there are people of spiritual maturity. Not just people with a high reputation or lead a big church or are well known. I would not care if none of the people on my board were well known as long as they were people of high integrity and then have had some experience. We're always pushing for getting a younger generation of board members, but there's a limit to that. You have to be sure that they're really qualified as they come in. And then the next thing that I feel is extremely important is you train. You train them how to be a board member and what's expected of them as a board member. In a few weeks, I'll be going to Kenya with The Navigators and we'll be gathering the board chairman from all over the world for a time of interaction and sharing. That's a trickier one, by the way, when you become a board chair, is how to become a board chair, particularly in our developing world where things aren't quite westernized as much. Yeah. And what should a board really do? Because people have different experiences. It's different from a second board, a secondary board who has financial responsibility and is held accountable for the quantitative results of the organization. That's a whole different picture, a different kind of board. [00:05:40] Tommy Thomas:  Let's go to the board chair. Give me some words and phrases that would describe the best board chair you've ever seen or served under.  [00:05:48] Jerry White: I'll tell you, there are two board chairs that I think of. One was a man by the name of Clay Brown. He wasn't the board chair, because I was chairman at the time. But he was certainly the key senior statesman on our board. He was measured. He was wise. He had a strong business background, and he had a passion for what we did. Our current Board Chair for The Navigators is doing an absolutely remarkable job and he leads several companies but has really given himself to being Chairman of The Navigator US board. The other thing is that the Board Chairman cannot be a jack of all trades. In other words, they can't be chairman of five different boards at once. Because I don't think anybody who has another job has that kind of time. But in knowing that they bear a particular responsibility within that organization to draw together the board, the executive team or the executive committee, and to really help lead them and keep them in their track and their track being on the policy governance side. And so the board chairs, and when I've done a board, I hope I've done this, is to really be prepared. You do not do this on the backhand, walking into a board meeting and 10 minutes ahead of time asking the CEO – what's the agenda? [00:07:25] Tommy Thomas:  Speaking about that working relationship, I know that's critical. Think back on your experience. How often does the Board Chair need to meet with his or her CEO? [00:07:35] Jerry White: First of all, they need to be friends, but I remember as a board member of a particular organization I wanted to be friends with the CEO and very much was. Then I became Board Chair and I said to him, our relationship is going to be a little different. I am your friend, but also, I'm accountable for the direction of the organization. And therefore, I'm going to be asking things of you that maybe I would not do if I was just a good buddy walking alongside and wanting to affirm you. So I think you need to be friends, but you'll also need to know that you have the responsibility for the policy direction of the organization and for the health and wellbeing of the CEO.  [00:08:27] Tommy Thomas: Go to that board meeting for a minute. What's been your best experience and who sets the agenda for the Board Meeting? [00:08:32] Jerry White:  For me, the Executive Committee needs to set the agenda. It needs to be proposed by the CEO because he knows the action items. And you've got certain performer things you've got to do on accountability of finances and income and disbursements and so forth and certain things on personnel. But I would want the CEO to come up with a list of what needs to be addressed, work with that CEO and perhaps the CFO to create an agenda with the Executive Committee that actually says how is this going to serve the work? And what are the decisions?  And I have three ways of assessing an agenda for the Board Meeting. What is information? We don't have to make any decision on it.  What is counsel? The CEO or somebody wants counsel on a particular item.  What decision needs to be made? So, every topic in the board meeting, I like to write along the side, the margin, inform counsel, decide. [00:09:48] Tommy Thomas: From a functional point of view, they wouldn't necessarily be in any order. They just as they come up, they're one of those three.  [00:09:58] Jerry White: No, it'd be one of the three. Your board meeting is usually divided into segments.  The CEO Report The Field Ministry Report The CFO Report Then there's a legal report. There may be certain personnel decisions that need to be affirmed. And by the way, that could be another way you would put it to affirm a decision. That's a little weak. And so you would structure your meeting not according to what you're going to decide, but according to what topics need to be addressed in the 24 hours you have together. And by the way, to really require that homework be done on the part of the staff making the decisions that “read-aheads” are there. And the right people come to make reports inside the meetings.  ++++++++++++++++++++   [00:10:51] Tommy Thomas: When somebody joins your board what does onboarding look like? [00:10:55] Jerry White: The onboarding looks for several organizations I've been working for two to three years with before they come on board, talking with them about it, seeing their interest,  getting a biography, bringing it to what I would call the nomination committee of the board. And the good boards that I work with have a roster of people that they're talking to that's very confidential and some of them never come on the board. And then as they are approaching it, you may even ask someone to actually sit in on a board meeting. And to see whether or not it meets their expectations. That isn't always possible. But in one board that I'm on, we have some junior members on it. This is on a board where we have younger leaders who come and serve for two years, and they don't stay on the board, just to give them experience. But then when you're onboarding, every board annually at least, there needs to be, in my mind, an orientation for the board where you go over the history of the board, you go over things. So they're not just in a befuddled mystery at terminology and history. It's like being in a family joke and nobody knows what the story was behind it. They have things that are ongoing and they have no clue. We need to bring them up to speed, both emotionally, historically, and personally. And it doesn't need to be long. It's for maybe half a day. And I've done this in a secular organization too, insisting that no one come on the board who doesn't have some orientation, both as to what a board does and what a board has done. [00:12:55] Tommy Thomas: Do you do a meeting evaluation or how do you keep your meetings fresh?  [00:13:00] Jerry White: Most boards do have a little evaluation afterward that they fill out. It's often, Tommy, their perfunctory and there of some limited value, the value mainly being that you asked, but I think the Chairman and the CEO, when they see things happening in the board, that afterwards they need to interact with them and saying, what do you think about it? How do you feel that board meeting went? And now that you've been in on X number of board meetings, say to tell me what you think and how can we help you be a better board member? Committee assignments are pretty important. Also, when I went on one board, it took me, Tommy, it took me two years to really figure out what was going on. And I served nine years and it was such a complex organization that it was really hard and took a lot of work to try and understand the dynamics behind this organization  [00:14:08] Tommy Thomas: Let me ask you to respond to this quote. “You need a director on the board who will be a pleasant irritant. Someone who will force people to think a little differently.  That's what a good board does.”  [00:14:21] Jerry White: In one board that I'm on, we appoint someone at every board meeting to be what we call a responsible skeptic. And that person is designated ahead of time. And that person, their job in that board meeting is to be a bit skeptical. Now, I think you have to be a little careful about always having a person who's always skeptical. I don't think I want a board member who every time something comes up, they raise their eyebrow, and you wonder what they're thinking. I think everybody ought to be a little skeptical at some time. And the main thing is if they don't understand something they need to ask. In other words, they need to do it. I was in a board meeting recently where a particular decision was in the process. And two of us on the board, I was an emeritus to the board, and the other was on the board. And I could tell there was a bit of discomfort. And so the chair asked that other person, they hadn't said anything, what do you think? And came up with a pretty good counter. Now I haven't got real good hearing, so I couldn't hear what he said. And then the board chair said, Jerry, what do you think? And I was like a deer caught in the headlights. And I said I couldn't hear what he said. And I said, we said exactly the same thing. And what was moving down the road to be a crafted decision was put aside and not done. I'm very wary of creating board actions on the spot, a statement or whatever it may be. The best way is to say, would somebody take this and come up in three or four hours, take a coffee break and craft us a statement on what we're trying to do. So I do believe that the chair needs to be able to look in the eyeball all around the way and see if there are some questions or if someone has been particularly silent, I think you need to say what do you think?  ++++++++++++++++   [00:16:34] Tommy Thomas: How do you draw that quiet board member out?  Some people just don't speak up unless they have something to say, which is probably a good thing. But how do you draw the quiet person out?  [00:16:46] Jerry White: I just say, Jack, what do you think about that? I say be very direct. I say, you've been listening to this discussion. Do you have anything to say? I don't want to force him to have to say something, but I say, this may be the expertise of the person that I'm asking. And I'll say Joan, your expertise is in this area, I know you've been through this before. What are we not hearing? What questions do you have? And that gives them freedom to speak out. And the other thing is I don't think people should speak out, particularly declaratively. That is, I believe this, and you got to do this. And I don't like that because that puts themselves on the table. But people learn to be able to share in a non-confrontive fashion. [00:17:44] Tommy Thomas: Let's go to financial accountability. You and I are old enough to remember the Enron scandal, and then if you've been paying any attention to the last two or three days, you've seen the Silicon Valley Bank go under.  In both of those things, there was board culpability. Neither were nonprofit, but they will both board culpability.  How do you get your boards to make sure you're addressing the financial aspect, a judiciary responsibility of the board?  [00:18:10] Jerry White:  It's a CEO's responsibility to make sure that the right questions are answered.  And it's got to be more than just an audit.  We want a clean audit. And you don't want to have to go to the bottom notes and say, here's something we should correct, but we need to guide the board through the financial realities of what we're doing. But at the end of it, I think you need to have a risk analysis that says, okay, where are we vulnerable? For instance, in our litigious society today, we have a lot of risk, and I think of ministries that have Christian camps and all the sexual liabilities and all of that. They are at risk all the time when you're working with minors and then I think people need to ask questions of the CFO and the auditor, where do you see us being at risk? What would happen if, what if happened? You have a September 11 or you have a Covid pandemic. And you have to say, our whole income stream is going to be jeopardized. And then I think you need to look and say, where are our major vulnerabilities for both expenditure as well as income? Now that's, it's very different in a Christian organization than it is a secular organization like an Enron or the banks or whatever it is. The fault there goes so that people don't ask questions, or that the actual realities have been hidden from it and just saying, oh, it'll be okay.  ++++++++++++++++++= [00:19:56] Tommy Thomas: From your perspective, how does the board get involved in strategic planning?  [00:20:02] Jerry White: Boy, that is a good question, Tommy. The question is, who does the strategic planning? Okay. Let's say that we're in a very small developing organization amid developing, and a large organization, they're very different and the very smallest organizations, the board may be highly engaged in the strategic plan because it's such a small organization and they're so fragile. As a general rule of thumb, the board may do strategic thinking, but strategic planning has to be on the part of the CEO and his or her staff. And the plan needs to be brought to the board for their interaction. And then approval. And that's particularly true with a large organization. The board can't do strategic planning. They can do some strategic planning for the board. That is, how should we develop our board? What expertise do we need? But as far as a ministry for most organizations, as large as the navigators or crew or some others, they aren't gonna know the details of what's going on out in the field or how they have to pretty well react and respond to the strategic planning initiatives that they may come up with. How many staff, what countries are we doing to go into? What are we not going to do? What are we gonna stop doing etc. So the board certainly needs to approve the strategic plan. Chances are, even when they do that, They won't know it very well. I'm just sorry that, when you're not, when you don't have to carry out a strategic plan, it's hard to really know it. [00:22:00] Tommy Thomas: The ones that created it, that have been involved in hammering it out, they're the ones that know it. [00:22:06] Jerry White: That's right. And then you have to, with every strategic plan, you have to set, have a set of outcomes and a set of risks, and then you have to say, how much is it going to cost to implement this? [00:22:22] Tommy Thomas: I think the risk thing, that could almost be a podcast in and of itself. I interviewed Dr. Sandra Gray, the President Emeritus at Asbury University and she was a former banker before she got into higher ed. And her thought was that nonprofit boards probably don't pay enough attention to the risk of the organization. [00:22:40] Jerry White: I think there's no question on that, especially risk has to be uncertain categories.  There's legal risk, there's financial risk, and then there's what I call uncontrolled risk of things you don't expect that the government may impose. What if they decide for our property at Glen Erie that it no longer is going to be tax exempt? Or what if the state were to do that sort of thing? Those are risks over which we have no control and the risk on leveraged investments, I think is quite important. For instance, you may propose to a larger organization a $3 million project, but the money is not in the bank. And you have four donors who said they'll fund it, but will they, and if they do, what voice should they have in it?  That's a huge thing. Money given with strings on it is really quite risky.  [00:23:46] Tommy Thomas: Hadn't thought of that. [00:23:46] Jerry White: And I've served on the board of the ECFA and they're very good at this. In terms of helping people think through risk and failure and financial accountability.  [00:24:01] Tommy Thomas: Let's look at the CEO evaluation.  I know you've been involved in a number of those, and you've been evaluated as a CEO. What are some takeaways? [00:24:10] Jerry White: You must be evaluated. Now we have a number of kinds of evaluations. You have a 360 evaluation, and some people are very skilled at that. It's very threatening to some CEOs, but it's necessary. I feel that there needs to be an evaluation within the organization, I had one. I had someone who evaluated me every year and they had the freedom, and they did call my wife, call my kids, talked to my coworkers, my peers, talked to those who worked for me, gave a free reign to ask certain questions. The questions need to be carefully thought through. They can't be so invasive. But the evaluation is of several levels. One is certain on a moral personal level. I do not think a committee can do that. Every CEO needs to have the kind of people in their lives who will blow the whistle on them if they say anything wrong. And the small Executive Committee needs to be aware of how that could happen. The second in terms of an evaluation is performance against set out goals. The third is relational. How's their team going? What do they think? What are the issues? And to give the feedback to the CEO and I think to give it privately and then in the board, and we do this to give a summary analysis, but the board should not be privy to the detailed questions. It's a really touchy process. And the evaluation needs to be, not be a pass fail, but Loren Sanny taught me it should be a progress review. How are you making progress toward the things that you have said you want to do? [00:26:15] Tommy Thomas: Let me close with a question that I ask often, particularly to people that have been on boards a long time as you have. How has board service changed over the last decade?  [00:26:25] Jerry White: I'm not sure about the last decade, but certainly over the last two decades the area of risk and financial accountability has increased tremendously. The litigiousness of our society has made a tremendous impact on how a board functions. So those two things, the financial accountability and the potential lawsuits and things of that nature. Tommy, I don't know that I can make a generalist statement about how boards have changed, but I can say that through the last 20 to 30 years, the boards have become more important and more vital to our organization's future than they were a number of years ago. Many years ago, even in The Navigators, the board was a cheering section for Dawson Trotman and Lawrence Annie.  Go get 'em and thanks for letting us know what's going on. To a point where we had to be accountable for the finances. 911 changed everything, by the way, particularly for anyone operating internationally. When you're sending money across international boundaries, you have a whole different level of accountability financially imposed by the government. And I'm speaking only from the viewpoint of the United States, and you get into all these other countries with all different kinds of demands and requirements and corruption and what have you. The boards have become far more important to the organization's health. And I think the public has a right to know who's on your board. And when I look at an organization as I've done even the last few days, and I look through who the board members are, it isn't that I need to know them, but that they're there as real people with real names that if one needed to, you could connect with them. ++++++++++++++++++++++ I hope you enjoyed this conversation with Jerry White. If you're ever at a conference where Jerry is speaking or leading a breakout session, make sure you attend those sessions. We all have so much to learn from Jerry White. Our guest next week is Paul Mauer. Paul is the president of Montreat College.  When Paul was selected to be the President of Montreat, the college wasn't very far from closing its doors. What has happened at Montreat over the past nine years is nothing short of miraculous.  [00:29:06] Paul Maurer: I started my first presidency 13 or 14 years ago, and I remember going to the president's conferences and coming back after two or three of those, and I said to my cabinet, here's my takeaway, change or die. And then I was out of the presidency for a couple years. I began to go back to those meetings again. When I came to Montreat nine years ago, I came back to my cabinet, I said, they've inserted the words fast change, faster, die. We've taken on the mindset of a startup. So, we consider ourselves a 107-year-old startup. We're not a turnaround. We're not maintainers.  We're not traditionalists. We try to employ the principles of a startup, meaning we're creating something new. And so, I think in the next five to ten years, we're going to see a pretty dramatic change in the number of colleges and universities in the United States. The enrollment cliff is real. The declining birth rates are real. And it's going to have a really major impact on the number of schools that close.   Links and Resources JobfitMatters Website Next Gen Nonprofit Leadership with Tommy Thomas The Navigators Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability Christian Leadership Alliance   Connect Tommy Thomas - tthomas@jobfitmatters.com Tommy's LinkedIn Profile Jerry White's LinkedIn Profile  

A podcast for deans and academic leadership.DEANS COUNSELJames Ellis | Moderator | Dean of the Marshall School of Business at the University of Southern California (2007-2019)David Ikenberry | Moderator | Dean of the Leeds School of Business at the University of Colorado-Boulder (2011-2016)Ken Kring | Moderator | Co-Managing Director, Global Education Practice and Senior Client Partner at Korn FerryDeansCounsel.com--EPISODE 07: Sri Zaheer (Minnesota) on Creating Effective Corporate Relationships On this episode of Deans Counsel, moderators Jim Ellis and David Ikenberry speak with Sri Zaheer, Dean of the Carlson School of Management at the University of Minnesota, and Chair of the Board at the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.With a deep background in International Business and Board Governance as well as a decorated career in academia, Sri brings her expertise to bear on a number of discussion topics, including: •placing structure on corporate relationships •creating and leveraging a comprehensive relationship  •exploiting software tools (Salesforce, LinkedIn, etc)•leading your staff to effectively support corporate relations Learn more about Sri Zaheer: https://carlsonschool.umn.edu/faculty/sri-zaheerComments/criticism/suggestions/feedback? We'd love to hear it. Drop us a note at feedback@deanscounsel.comThanks for listening.-Produced by Joel Davis at Analog Digital Arts

Board Governance. What is it and how many models of school board governance exist? Join Director of Public Policy & Advocacy, Matt Cook, and Policy Specialist Kristina Gutierrez as they dive into all thinks policy governance.

AJ Crabill is likely one of the most knowledgeable leaders on School Board Governance you can find. As you will hear Jeff and AJ discuss, governance is often messy work, but it does not have to be with the right guidance and support. AJ and Jeff unpack what they notice in terms of current trends and spend time talking about what leaders can do to help guide the process relative to what is best for students, schools, and communities. Very relevant stuff!