Over the years, i’ve come to expect resistance from executive leaders and board chairs at the mere mention of board self-assessment. Given the immense pressures facing theological schools today– and the reality that board members’ time and attention are at a premium – pausing for what one boardroom critic described to me as “navel gazing” can seem a colossal waste of time.
However, when assessment is approached with curiosity and openness to learning and change, good things happen. A board that regularly evaluates its impact is better positioned to lead with wisdom, adapt with integrity, and wisely steward a theological school’s mission and future. That’s my long-time sermon and I’m sticking to it.
For most boards, a survey instrument serves as the entry point into self-assessment. These tools offer a composite snapshot of individual members’ perceptions of how closely the board’s practices align with the ideals of exemplary governance. The findings provide valuable, real-time insight into the board’s sense of its strengths as well as shortcomings and blind spots.
Leaders of high-functioning boards understand that the true value of self-assessment emerges when the findings are mined for insight – when those insights equip the board for purposeful learning and action. While governance committees often take the lead, the work and learning must be shared by all members.
Start small.
As with the proverbial question of how to eat an elephant, the follow-up to a board self-assessment is best approached in manageable, bite-sized portions. Attempting to respond to every finding in one fell swoop is neither wise nor good for a board’s health. A more effective path is for the board to identify a few priority issues – ideally, no more than three – that warrant immediate attention and then get to work.
When it comes to tracking the impact of that work, boards have countless opportunities for embedding ongoing evaluation into their usual work, most of which are simple, organic and easily adapted to any board. Pursued with intentionality, these small acts of reflection become enduring habits of good governance.
Spread out the work.
Once the board has identified the two or three issues most in need of its attention, the next step is to assign responsibility for moving the work forward. Fortunately, boards need to look no further than their standing committees. The more relaxed setting of committee meetings lends itself to the deeper conversations required to shape a learning-action-assessment plan tailored to each committee’s area of focus. Committee members are encouraged to conduct micro-assessments throughout the year to gauge the effectiveness of their efforts. As iterative insights – what’s been learned, what remains unclear, and what next steps are needed – are shared with the board through committee reports, the typical staff-driven, report-heavy pattern of plenary sessions begins to shift, one mini learning module at a time.
Celebrate results.
Following a brief exchange among board members about the work of which they were most proud, a board chair commented that he had lost sight of how much the board had accomplished. “I’m going to make conversations like this a regular part of our board meetings,” he told me. The board chair got it. I was delighted.
Nothing deepens a board’s appreciation for the power of self-assessment like witnessing the cause and effect of their own efforts. Pausing amid the press of board business to recognize and evaluate progress sends a clear signal: governance isn’t just about oversight. It’s about the board’s growth, stewardship, and shared purpose.
In conclusion.
Thoughtful and regular assessment of the board’s work is crucial to moving a board from the sidelines of institutional life and into full participation in advancing a theological school. Massive strategies aren’t required for doing so. Small things matter. Despise them not.
See more wise practices at intrust.org
