Keeping Vision
March/April 09
A while
back the international ministry, whose board I chair, developed a mission's
project in conjunction with a large church, an innovative project that was
to unfold over several years. We were into it. Then the pastor of the church
left and a new pastor came who, it turned out, had a different "vision" and
took the church in a different direction - eradicating the investment we
made. This is an indication of a church with neither good governance nor
sustained focus. Where were the church elders or the board? Indeed, they
were waiting for the next pastor to provide the next vision (to say nothing
of the implicit moral commitment to the project).
Good governance and enduring focus (which derives from that governance) go
together. If a board does not own the direction of its organization, it is
not governing.
Governing is leading, ...and sustained leading with a long term perspective.
Many believe (and write articles and books) that the vision or focus comes
from the leader (CEO, pastor, etc.). It is true, most boards are simply so
passive in their governance that what vision and direction there is must
necessarily come from the CEO or pastor. So we come to expect it. It becomes
part of our paradigm of organizational (and church) governance. Good luck,
however, to sustained direction and focus - only so long as that particular
leader is around, sometimes for decades, sometimes for just a couple of
years. Certainly, the purpose of the organization must also be owned by the
executive or pastor, but if the board has not participated in, and owns it,
we will see the organization engage in herky jerky behavior with a new
direction from each new senior leader. Setting a new direction is part of
being a leader, right?
If the board is truly governing and represents its ownership, legal or
moral, what that board will look for in the next leader must be an
individual as committed to the board's expressed lasting purpose for the
organization as the last leader. Only together might they consider change in
direction for reasons rooted in study, need, ownership (constituency)
expectations and thoughtful discussion. Otherwise, who knows where the
church or organization is going next? Neither employees nor constituency!
Some leaders do arrive expecting carte blanche authority and freedom to
change direction based on their own beliefs and opinions. Others can leave
if they don't like it; immense arrogance (sometimes even in the name of
God). They essentially highjack the organization both for and to their own
ends. (And boards put up with it, perhaps hoping things might get fixed in
the process.) Then when things are rapidly going south, the board finally
kicks him out and brings in another leader to fix things.
Unfortunately, the problem of lack of focus is found across the board - from
churches to our largest corporations. Lasting alignment with traction never
occurs (Jim Collin's "fly wheel" principle). The organization changes
direction with every new leader. This, of course, is fatal to objectives
requiring long term tenacity such as serious quality improvement, cultural
change, or lean implementation culminating in excellence. Change becomes
tougher each time, because cynicism rapidly sets in among those remaining.
They simply wait out the next vision thing. Worse yet, trust in leadership
has now gone. Try rebuilding that with poor, irresolute governance.
Results-based Metrics
As you know, we are increasingly emphasizing the value and importance of
results or outcome metrics. The subject discussed above is important to the
development of outcome metrics, of course. These kinds of measures are not
necessarily easy to develop. The organization may spend a year developing
them and perfect the data capture and analysis over the next two or three
years. These metrics normally would have a powerful aligning effect on the
organization, but if the vision changes periodically, what value are the
results metrics? Much less all the work involved. A new vision requires new
measures.
Nonprofits and ministries are also learning that donors and funders are
becoming increasingly results-oriented. Clear ends/results and the
demonstration (by measurements) that the organization is knowledgeably (and
reliably) headed toward their accomplishment attracts funding and donations.
Dick Biery
Richard M. Biery, M.D. © 2009
Return to Newsletter Index
(Policy Governance is the registered service mark of John Carver; the authoritative website for the Policy Governance model can be found at www.carvergovernance.com.)