|
|
|||||
|
|||||
| Path: Main Street : Resources & Library : Research Articles : Feature Article |
Board of directors performance evaluations
By Doreen Pendgracs, author of Before You Say Yes...
September 7, 2010
We can never be too good at anything, so something to consider as a new director of any given board is whether your performance will be formally assessed or evaluated. If so, welcome the challenge and opportunity for improvement, as it will help you continue to grow in your role — and as a person.
On one board I served on, we evaluated every aspect of board relations. This included:
The results of these assessments should be carefully tabulated and compared (i.e. your assessment of your own performance should be compared to how others on the board assessed you).
- self-assessment (you evaluate your own participation and understanding of board matters);
- peer assessment (directors anonymously evaluate one another);
- leader assessment (directors evaluate the board’s chair(s); and
- board interaction with key staff (such as the executive director).
As a director trying to do the best job I could, I found this information to be quite valuable as it helped me focus on areas that could use some improvement. It also made me realize that I was doing a pretty darn good job. It also provided the organization with a formal mechanism by which directors not fulfilling their roles or responsibilities could be coached, further encouraged, and, if necessary, asked to leave the board or informed that they should not seek re-election. Board evaluations are likely to get more buy-in and cooperation from all parties if they are not perceived as punitive — meaning not intended to punish, create embarrassment, or be of a finger pointing nature. But it is also important for all parties concerned to believe that the evaluations are meaningful and will be acted upon if results warrant that some form of corrective action be taken.
An organization with which I am intimately familiar once had trouble with a director who didn’t attend meetings, and when he did, was always leaving the room for smoke breaks. He also reportedly drank too much and was not an effective contributor to the board. Some said he was taking up space, and not providing enough value by way of his service in return. This director was asked to resign from the board but would not do so willingly before his term was up. If that organization had a board evaluation system in place, there would have been a mechanism by which that director’s performance would have been evaluated and the director possibly forced to resign if corrective action wasn’t taken when his shortcomings were addressed.
I have also been on a board where more than one director did not attend meetings regularly. This was not fair to the directors who did attend regularly as they ended up having to take on more work than they bargained for when they took on a director’s position. In my opinion, being subject to board evaluations is a good thing, as it increases the accountability of each and every director, and of the board as a whole.
Now let’s look at it from an organization’s point of view. As executive director of Access Copyright, Maureen Cavan’s constituents are governments, educational institutions, and other users of copyrighted materials, as well as the publishers and creators who have produced that material. She reports to an eighteen-member board comprised of various members of these communities. "I believe board evaluation is a necessary and valuable tool to ensure board members fully understand their individual responsibilities to the organization and to each other," says Cavan. "How each board goes about doing this is very dependent on the size and make-up of the board itself. It is more difficult to do peer assessments on a large board where members see each other only occasionally and may not work together on committees. The most valuable tools, in my opinion, are those that measure overall board functioning and self-assessment as a board participant."
Cavan believes that self-assessment forces each director to take personal stock of his or her contribution to the responsibilities held by the board of directors and that sharing this self assessment with the chair of the board also allows for performance evaluation — an important part of any role that carries responsibility. Since her organization has introduced a formal board evaluation system, Cavan has seen less effective board members decide not to stand for re-election when their terms were up, resulting in a more effective board comprised of individuals who may be more passionate about the issues and have sufficient time to embrace them. She says, "I think a board that practices self-assessment becomes more conscious of the important role held by each member individually. This, in turn, leads to an increased effort to become and remain more aware of the issues and challenges faced by the organization they are charged with leading."
Points you might be evaluated on in your role as director
- Attendance and promptness at meetings.
- Effectively contributing to discussions at meetings.
- Being prepared for meetings (reading/doing your homework).
- Willingness to take on roles and duties.
- Willingness to help others (mentoring).
- Interacting well with fellow directors and staff.
- Ability to think independently and without bias.
- Demonstrating sound judgment.
- Being consultative or a team player in nature.
- Being knowledgeable of the organization’s issues.
Excerpted from Before You Say Yes by Doreen Pendgracs.
Copyright © Doreen Pendgracs, 2010
All rights reserved.
http://www.dundurn.com/books/you_say_yesDoreen Pendgracs is a freelance writer and author based in Matlock, MB. She is the author of Before You Say Yes... a guide to help nonprofit board directors be more effective in their volunteer roles. The book is published by Dundurn Press and available online and in bookstores across the country.
|
|||
