Is Your Board Practicing Regular Self-Evaluation?

The association leadership experience is a group experience and a group responsibility. This group experience is most successful when expectations are clearly defined and agreed to by all parties. One way an association board of directors can promote clarity of purpose is by engaging in a board self-evaluation.

The purpose of this board self-evaluation is to focus on key responsibilities, relationships, and outcomes – and to foster an environment of organizational excellence. Only a commitment on the part of board and staff members to strengthen the capacity for group excellence can overcome the complex challenges facing many associations today.

I want to share a Board Self-Evaluation instrument developed by TI and examined in ASAE’s CEO Symposium. It has been used successfully by countless Associations.  The TI tool has metrics in five areas:

1. Oversight and Direction Setting
2. Relationship with Chief Staff Officer
3. Board Meetings and Relationships
4. Stakeholder Relationships
5. Personal Qualities

Note: The discussion of results is what matters the most. 

Some groups tend toward interpretations based on mean averages. Avoid this. Ten people can average a 5 on a scale of 1 to 10 if 5 say 1 and 5 say 10; or if all ten pick a different rating!

Fifteen to 25 people is usually not enough of a population for differences between high and low mean scores to be useful. Beware of comparisons of high and low ratings that purport to identify strengths and weaknesses when the statistical differences are meaningless. They create controversy where there is none. What is useful is uncovering the reason behind the differences of opinion reflected in the patterns in responses. (See the last slide in the attached set for an example.)

Some assessments focus on function, some on role, some on responsibilities. We find that the most effective governance assessments also examine Board norms, behavior, systems for work, and culture.

Benchmarking against the experience of other groups is extremely misleading when the scoring system itself is indefensible. Additionally, be wary of instruments for sale where the items have a bias based on assumptions about the character of the Board that will be using the instrument. The governance dynamics of non-profit charities, trade associations, universities, health care systems, public agencies, and professional associations are, by definition, different.

Therefore, we encourage all associations to start somewhere with regular board self-evaluations. Careful thought, examination and discussion of the results will improve the outcomes from your board of directors.

Also, check out Leigh’s recent blog post Nine Characteristics of a Good Board Self-Evaluation.