Who does what? Board and staff relationships

The Board (or Committee of management) of a non-profit agency is the highest authority in the organisation. In the last analysis, what the Board says goes.
If the staff can't agree to implement Board policy, it's the staff that has to resign.

The Board has to provide purpose, leadership and overall strategy, and it has the responsibility of assuring the public that the organisation's finances are sound, its operations are legal, and its procedures work.

On the other hand, it's generally the staff that has a deep understanding of the day-to- day working of the organisation. They are closest to the needs and opinions of the clients and supporters, what kinds of fund-raising initiatives have worked before, staffing pressures and when the photocopier is too old to carry on for another day.

Governance and management

Every large community group will have a Chief Executive Officer (CEO) in charge of the management and its Board has a Chairman. As these two roles mirror each other it is vital that the individuals in question are able to maintain a good working relationship.

The Board has a central role in choosing a CEO for the organisation.Management has to be done by a manager, and no Board member is likely to have the time, the skills or the day-to-day know-how to be able to outperform the staff.

The organisation is paying staff to do the work so, stand back and let them do it.
Some friction is normal. The staff will always gripe about some of the things the Board does or says, and the Board will always feel that there are things that they would do differently if they were running things. In moderation, this is neither unusual nor undesirable. Regular managed discussions on issues with representation from both sides can be very productive for an organisation.

If there are issues that aren't being solved, the first thing to do is to invite those involved to go and have a coffee together and see if they can work it out. If the troubles go on, the problems are going a lot deeper and some further steps will obviously need to be taken.

1. Is there a clear vision and sense of purpose in the organisation?
   • Are the organisation's goals and values clearly stated in its mission?
   • Is there a long term strategy to achieve the organisation's purposes?
   • Has the Board signed off on it?>

2. If you think your goals are clear and that everybody knows what they are and agrees with them, then the problem lies in the implementation of your strategies.Check your procedures, your materials and your management structures:
   • Have the staff got realistic short-term objectives and clear plans to achieve them?
   • Are there job descriptions to provide work standards for monitoring staff performance

The partnership

1. Suitable processes and procedures
2. Clearly defined management roles
3. Defined boundaries
4. Clear limits to the authority of the staff
5. A CEO whose performance is adequately monitored by the Board.

Processes and Procedures
What are the links between the staff, the CEO and the Board? Are there regular systems to have frequent and full reports presented at Board meetings, or do Board members feel inadequately briefed on activities while the staff feels resentful about the increased workload involved in reporting? Is there a staff representative on the Board? Is the CEO a member, or is at least permitted to attend the meetings?

If the Board wished to instruct the staff, it has to say so, in a motion from the Board meeting. Motions should be phased in such a way as to allow the staff maximum flexibility in implementation. Staff members should be able to use their expertise and experience to carry out board decisions, without having to keep dashing back to the Board to change minor points.

The Board should never undercut the authority of the CEO by going past the organisation's management structure and instructing a staff member. If the Board trusts the CEO, all business should be conducted through the CEO; if this is not the case then they must take steps to replace the CEO with someone they do trust. Staff must work to the CEO, not to the Board. This means that the Board can give an order to the CEO, but not to the typist.

The aim is not to cut the Board off from the staff. Board members have many important skills that the staff needs. Board sub-committees can help bridge some of these gaps and bring the Board members closer to the pointy end of the organisation, able to look at the detail of an issue without overburdening the business of the Board.

Management Roles and boundaries
The Board concerns itself with the longer term - strategic - issues: setting overall aims, establishing policies, and working with the CEO on strategic plans, objectives and targets.

Staff-members under the CEO have responsibility for short-term, day-to-day operations- carrying out administrative work, monitoring progress, and reporting to the Board.

To complete the circle, the Board must work to evaluate the organisation's performance against its targets.

Both the Board and the staff should know, understand and support this division of responsibility.

It's just as important that Board members know the limitations of their roles as that staff members know and understand their roles. If Board members put up motions that wander too far into operational territory, the Chair should steer them back. If this happens often, the Board may have to set aside a session to go through its proper roles and functions, preferably by reference to the Board orientation package that your organisation should have on hand for new members, until all members are clear.

Limits
The Board must authorise all important policies and all important changes in policy. These decisions, and the reasons for them, must be documented.

All decisions that come before the Board should be supported by background material to show what's involved and what the consequences of each course of action will be.

This material should come from the staff, either in the form of a written paper or from the staff representatives at the meeting. However, the staff should not run the show; and this means that the Board should be given options where there are options, not simply presented with a single decision to sign off on.

If the Board brings up options that staff hasn't canvassed, hold off finalising matters, if possible, until staff members have had a chance to comment on their feasibility.

Both staff and board perspectives are needed, and the final word must come from the Board. But a productive partnership between both will smooth the path to clear and solidly grounded decisions that everybody can fall in behind.