Fact: There’s no such thing as a perfect board. But there’s a difference between an effective board and one that’s got too many folks sitting on the sidelines.
Many factors can contribute to an unproductive board, including what nonprofit consultant Joan Garry calls “dead-weight” members, or those who don’t cause trouble but don’t contribute anything either. Despite their best intentions when joining, they lay low while others get to work.
To deal with under-performing board members, Garry suggests amending the bylaws.
“When I was the CEO of Glaad, our bylaws stated that any board member who missed two meetings in a row would be automatically removed from the board and would have to be voted on at the next board meeting if he or she wanted to return,” she said on The Chronicle of Philanthropy.
Another idea: annual evaluations.
“I am clear that this idea fills board chairs and governance committees with dread,” Garry said. “Consider a nice and easy, informal process. In fact, don’t call it an evaluation. Just regard it as an annual opportunity to touch base about how board service is going.”
During these conversations, you can unearth red flags and learn how to better engage the board. In other words, “you will have a clearer sense of what successful board service looks like, especially to your more engaged members.”
Please select this link to read the original article from Associations Now.