Effective Communication Throughout A Board Member’s Lifecycle
This research project was undertaken by the Director of Development of Thomas Jefferson School while attending graduate school at Teacher’s College at Columbia University. In this capacity, she acted as an external consultant on behalf of the college and partnered with Thomas Jefferson School (TJ), a co-educational, day and boarding independent school located in St. Louis, Missouri. TJ agreed to the partnership in order to evaluate their board’s effectiveness and its relationship to the leadership team, faculty, and school community. The evaluation would produce a final report that would summarize the project and include a list of recommendations to improve board effectiveness and its relationship with the greater school community.
Background
Thomas Jefferson School agreed to empower me, the Director of Development, to serve as an external consultant and conduct research starting in the Fall of 2023. With the goal of improving overall board effectiveness, my initial research focus considered the relationship between board governance and emotional intelligence and how that relationship can impact board alignment and effectiveness. The following executive summary highlights the key aspects of the process and ranges from the initial research questions, modifications of the study, and ultimately the key findings. I conclude with recommendations and considerations for enhancing board belonging and improving board alignment in order to better advance the mission of the school.
I initially worked with the leadership team at TJ, including the Head of School, Director of Enrollment, Director of College Counseling, Associate Head of School, Business Officer, and Director of Maintenance. All the members of the leadership team that I worked with reported quarterly to the board and had direct interaction with the board. We met weekly throughout the process and engaged in various discussions about our interaction with the board . Additionally, I began to review available media that addressed board governance and board effectiveness.
The research was rooted in the following question:
● What is the current state of board belonging and alignment?
● What is the relationship between the board and administration?
● How are the board and administration aligned in terms of the school mission?
Overview of Consulting Process
Phase 1 - Internal Assessment
From October 2023 until January 2024, I worked with the leadership team at TJ to assess the state of the board. We also worked together to evaluate the effectiveness of previous boards and administrations and took note of exceptional failures and successes.
Phase 2 - Literature Review
I worked on a review of media from January 2024 to February 2024. The literature included various NAIS handbooks on trustees, NAIS The Trustee Table podcast, and Organizational Development, A Process of Learning and Changing, by W. Warner Burke and Debra A. Noumair. Of the resources reviewed, the focus was on five areas: Independent school board’s roles and responsibilities, the onboarding process, effective board membership, the relationship between the board chair and the head of school, and emotional intelligence.
Phase 3 - Qualitative Research
From February 2024 until April, I conducted qualitative interviews with current and past board members and board chairs of TJ. I shared the data analysis with the leadership team and board at TJ. Together, we defined the next steps for satisfying the board’s needs and leadership’s needs and created a roadmap for addressing issues discovered from research.
Findings
After talking with the leadership team and determining the data that I wanted to collect, I decided to conduct individual interviews with current and past board members and board chairs. 10 board members were asked to be interviewed. Of the 9 board members, 6 board members accepted the invitation, 1 did not respond, and 2 board members declined over concerns of sharing sensitive internal information that could possibly be made public.
I wanted to measure emotional intelligence but did not think it would be appropriate to ask each participant to take a standardized EQ assessment. Instead, I crafted my interview questions to be open-ended enough to allow the interviewee an opportunity to identify and define their own emotional intelligence but also included specific questions to gather some quantitative data.
The board members shared their understanding of roles and responsibilities of the board, their own onboarding process, what they found to be challenging and satisfying while serving on the board. In addition, they shared their interactions with the Head of School, staff, alumni, students, and other board members.
I divided their responses into three different categories: internal assessment, external interactions, and board assessment. Internal focused on their perception of themselves as board members. External focused on their thoughts and interactions with different constituent groups at the school. Board assessment gave the board members an opportunity to share their thoughts on board belonging and alignment. All three categories had positive and negative subcategories.
The interviews were all conducted virtually over Zoom.
The responses were aligned in two notable aspects. All of the board members expressed satisfaction working with other board members and with their interactions with students. All of the board members expressed negative experiences with school leadership and staff. Also notable was the response of a past board member who had served as a board chair. Although he expressed satisfaction working with the other board members, he described a significant conflict amongst board members during a process for selecting a new Head of School. The process became adversarial and consequently had a negative effect on the relationship of the selected Head of School and the board.
Sample interviews are summarized in the cards below. Key takeaways, a notable quote, and other notable data has been included on each card.
After reviewing the responses, I drafted the Board Lifecycle graphic and used it to identify key moments over the lifecycle of a board member. The responses revealed both a deficiency and an opportunity at these key moments and are summarized below:
Board Member Lifecycle Graphic
All the board members interviewed were recruited by the Head of School and the Board Chair. However, the criteria for recruiting and selecting a board member was unclear and not informed by any research data or feedback from the board.
"Why are we asking this person to join the board and where are the school's needs? A clear alignment there would be really good."
-Board member 1
“ I don't think I really was well enough briefed on school finances.”
-Board member 2
Board members were often selected from an alumni and past parents pool but a more strategic approach that aligned the school’s needs with the potential board member’s capabilities could produce a more valuable relationship. Additionally, having a clear definition of the school’s needs and expectations of the board member could facilitate recruitment and focus efforts on specific individuals. Although many alumni expressed
gratitude towards the school as one of their primary reasons for agreeing to serve on the board, clear benefits of serving were not developed nor highlighted.
Orientation
Although the school’s mission was made explicit, new board members were given little detail on strategy and objectives of the board. With no clear orientation process many board members, especially non-alumni, were somewhat adrift during their first year serving on the board.
“There was no orientation the year I started that I know of and no materials were given to me and you know, and having been both a board member but also working at a nonprofit, I knew how to kind of find most of those resources.”
-Board member 2
“I actually wasn't sent the handbook for the first year I [was] on the board. No handbook until recently.”
-Board member 5
Although orientation material does exist, a system for providing the material and mentoring incoming board members was not established and consequently delayed board effectiveness.
Onboarding
Because TJ historically recruited people who had never served on a board at an institution before, new members felt it would have been helpful if they had learned more about the state of the school, especially the financial state. Data on enrollment, development, and finances provided during orientation would have been helpful. Although the information was eventually provided, the delay in accessing the information extended the onboarding process unnecessarily and consequently delayed board effectiveness. Additionally, a clearer explanation of roles and responsibilities could have established a better system for communication. “Who should we talk to?” and “What sort of things should we be discussing?” were common questions amongst new board members . There was no clear understanding of who board members should contact, how frequently meetings with administrators should occur, and who would be responsible for setting up those meetings.
“It took a good year to kind of get used to how it worked on the board. So, you know, some classroom learning, but also just listening and observing, and kind of feeling my way through it.”
-Board member 3
"I think having those kinds of statistics and facts, particularly when you join a committee, like the finance committee, would have been very helpful. A more comprehensive explanation of where the school is at would be helpful.”
-Board member 1
Ongoing Governance
A lot of time and patience was given to new board members. Much of their first year was spent listening, observing and gaining an understanding of how things work. However, in order to allow for this lengthy onboarding process, there needed to be a viable number of veteran board members to effectively run the board while the new member acclimated to their position. Additionally, because of the limited number of board members, there weren’t enough veteran board members to serve as mentors for new members.
“So there's an often reminding of people, especially if the conversation is devolving into arguing to be right versus having a discussion in search of the truth - to remind everyone what the bigger mission is and to stay focused on that.“
-Board member 3
“[The board chair] was really good about calling about issues. And talking about those issues was very helpful and very effective...”
-Board member 4
Exit and Retrospective
One of the biggest challenges the board chair faced was keeping the board aligned and focused on the greater goals. This would be especially difficult when the school was hit with difficult news and choices. Everyone reacted differently to the news and the chair’s job was to bring everyone along while making sure that they had a voice and were heard. Additionally, it was critical that the relationship between the board and the head of school and key members of the administration were set up for success. Ongoing communication between the board and school leadership was essential but could be difficult if there were no dedicated channels and established protocols.
“I think you have to be a really good listener to be a leader. Anyone who has an agenda and things they want to get accomplished, and becomes kind of myopically focused on that - they tend to not listen as well. They eventually let things devolve into camps and you are the person who speaks in order to be heard rather than speaking to contribute to the process of uncovering the truth of where we should go.”
-Board member 3