3b2 Setting Governance Expectations
The Board sets expectations for its own governance performance
This post will describe setting governance expectations, second of three essential elements of the board’s responsibility to provide governance guidance to itself.
(2) Setting Governance Expectations. [Does your board set expectations for governance?]
The board is responsible for its own performance and commits itself to continuous improvement. The board will assure that its members are provided with training and professional support necessary to govern effectively. As a means to assure continuous improvement, the board regularly and systematically will monitor all policies in this section and will assess the quality of each meeting by debriefing the meeting following its conclusion. – Horry County School District1
The above policy is an example of a board setting expectations for its own performance.
Josiah, a newly elected board member, met with the board president and superintendent for an orientation briefing. He was given a new board member handbook. Janice, the board president, emphasized the rules of the road for members, with examples of behaviors that should be avoided, such as surprise ‘gotcha’ questions at meetings that have not been shared ahead of time, no-notice school visits, personal verbal attacks during board meetings, etc. “This is helpful,” said Josiah. “Are there any ‘rules of the road’ for the board-as-a-whole?” Janice responded “No, your board handbook covers pretty much everything. As board president I see to it that the board-as-a-whole operates in an effective manner.” Josiah looked puzzled. “How can I be sure what we mean by operating in an effective manner?”
This new board member’s inquiry exposes a lack of attention to an absolutely essential level of operational guidance, an area that gets little mention in most board policy manuals, and one that is rarely featured at state and national association conferences. Policies that should not escape the board’s attention are those that set expectations for board performance, in addition to those that guide the performance of individual board members.
At the board meeting Roberta, as chair, opened a discussion on board performance by sharing survey comments that had been made by board members prior to the meeting, assessing whether or not the board was in compliance over the course of the year with its own policy. Probing deeper into the question of whether the board was complying with policy, the board decided that its policy was written in terms so broad that it failed to provide guidance and made it difficult to know whether or not the board was in compliance. It was agreed that the board should thoroughly review and clarify its governing policies.
Establishing expectations for a productive board process is the purpose of board policies guiding how the board operates.
Opinions differ on the meaning of board unity (e.g., “the board will speak with one voice.”) In a well-governed system, unity of board voice does not mean individual board members have to change their opinion. It only means the board as a whole has made its decision based on a majority vote and that decision will be honored by all. Individual board members can express their opinion without violating this principle, as long as they do not misrepresent the full board's decision or refuse to support the results of that decision. Some argue that dissenting board members should remain silent. Others would say that it’s a board member’s duty to support his beliefs to the end. Still others prefer to think expressing opinion during debate is all that is required.
The board was badly split on a policy decision. They had been invited to speak the next day on the policy issue at a local Chamber of Commerce meeting. Of the three board members attending, two had voted in favor of the controversial issue and one in opposition. Per board policy it was important to all three that the board decision be clearly communicated, but the one member who had voted “no” wanted to be honest about his particular dissenting opinion. The course of action taken by the one opposed member was simple, just speak last, and begin by saying his opinion did not prevail. Even after his carefully worded introduction the other two board members felt that the board’s decision had not been supported. From their perspective the losing member should have remained quiet, or even changed his opinion based on the majority board vote.
Boards need to manage differences of opinion, deliberate, make decisions, and move on. Those who want to revisit an argument that did not prevail in a board meeting should speak to board members, run for a seat on the board, or vote for candidates who hold a similar position. That’s the nature of representative government and is the reason elections are held.
The effective board writes governance policies that support and align with district goals and the community’s values. It follows a defined process for managing board meetings, such as Robert’s Rules tailored to suit local board use.2 Its policies enable the board to function in an efficient and effective manner, and it holds itself accountable in policy for assuring district success. It encourages diverse viewpoints and a collaborative mindset in policymaking.
Indicators. The following indicators demonstrate a board’s setting governance expectations:
Be (dispositions)
The board is willing to declare its expectations of board behavior.
Know (knowledge)
The board knows the impact of board behavior on student achievement.
Do (skills)
The board sets its expectations for board behavior.
Robert, H. Robert’s Rules of Order, Newly Revised, 12th ed.
Source:
A Framework for School Governance (2018) Rick Maloney
Rick Maloney
www.governance101.com