The board of directors of an association was not achieving its goals due to a complex system of interconnected issues. Analyzing this system revealed the root causes of their problems. It showed that unclear mission and goals led to misaligned roles and structures, which caused issues like lack of time commitment and weak communication that hindered how the board worked together. Addressing the root causes, like revising vision and mission statements, will allow the board to improve its performance in engaging members and supporting education.

1. PEOPLE MATTERS BY TOM HUGHES, KEITH OWEN, AND TIM GOHMANN
Stop dysfunction, start analyzing the “true
influences” for boardroom success
This is an example of a board of direc- involves throwing out the old “linear” way is possible to understand which issues are
tors which pulled themselves out of the of thinking and starting to think in a “full causing the board to not reach their goals.
doldrums of mediocrity by their “own dimensional” way. A “full dimensional” Were issues looked at in isolation, as is typi-
bootstraps.” The board was engaged in a way of thinking is like putting on a pair of cally the case, their true cause and effect
never-ending struggle to achieve their orga- glasses that enables someone, finally, to see relationships would not be understood, and
nization’s mission and goals. However, they more clearly why the organization “be- efforts to improve performance would fail.
had not been making significant improve- haves” as it does.
ment against their goals for the past three Approach
years. Case Study Following a two-hour, in-person session with
Recently the incoming president of an a dozen board members, individual issues
New Way of Thinking association of business professionals was were isolated and their causal relationships
The success of any board is highly depen- preparing for their strategic planning established. The goal of the session was to
dent on a complex system of influences process. The president felt the organization build a clear and simple picture of the com-
(issues) that help or hinder its ability to needed to get to a higher level of perfor- plex system of true influences that current-
succeed (for example: direction, structure, mance and the board was holding it back in ly “runs” the board, the Systems Influence
roles, communication processes, level of three specific areas. The president needed Diagram (SID).
commitment and ways of working togeth- to step back from these specific issues and
er). Because board members seldom think look at the bigger picture (i.e., system) in Results
about the complete system of “true influ- which these issues occur. This would allow The SID for our board of directors is shown
ences” that produces success, their effects the president to understand their causes in Figure 1.
are rarely understood. Without knowing and thereby be able to deal effectively with The SID explained the reasons for the
these true influences, board functioning ap- these issues and others. problems the board was experiencing in
pears to be governed by a set of seemingly Any system can be fully described terms they understood and with which they
“mysterious” and unmanageable forces. in terms of just two concepts: (1) its parts agreed. Reading from left (causes) to right
Without a way to see and manage these in- and (2) the relationship among the parts. (effects):
fluences, the board truly is “unmanageable” Relationships are of two basic types: causes • Mission, Vision and Goals are
and runs the risk of never fully succeeding and effects. By looking beneath the surface the primary drivers (causes) of
in accomplishing its mission and goals. at all of the parts (issues that influence the the outcomes that determine the
There is a new way for boards to both board’s ability to achieve their goals) and organization’s success (Engaging
see and manage this system of influences. It the relationships between these parts, it Volunteers, Engaging Membership
20 Texas CEO Magazine Discuss. Learn. Lead.

2. IT IS POSSIBLE TO UNDERSTAND WHICH ISSUES ARE
CAUSING THE BOARD TO NOT REACH THEIR GOALS
and Supporting Education). In of communication, miscommuni- roles of the board will then be brought into
other words, a poorly-worded and cation across board members) alignment.
unclear Mission, Vision and Goals • The board’s weakness in Working
eventually led to poorly achieved Together caused problems with How to Use this New Way of Thinking
outcomes. The board admitted that Finances. Specifically, budgets and To achieve a higher performance outcome
it had not made it a priority to have revenue projections were inaccu- first identify the elements of the system
a clear linkage to its objectives and rate and financial decision-making in which the performance challenge is
this relationship had become weak was not a transparent process. embedded, understand the relationships
and blurred. • The impact of all of these true in- of the elements, and then modify those
• The Mission, Vision and Values fluencers on the organization’s ob- elements which can be improved. The
produced another effect; it caused jectives was lowered performance system in which all performance challenges
Board Roles and Structure to be in terms of Supporting Education, are embedded is comprised of people and
both unclear and misaligned to Engaging Volunteers and Engag- their working relationships. Unlike other
the objectives. This, in turn, caused ing Membership. Membership approaches, this one uses people who must
several additional problems which suffered as follows: deliver improvement to isolate the ele-
hindered the board in Working ments and their relationships, i.e. their “sys-
Together as follows: • Member attendance at events was tem.” By so doing, this “full dimensional”
• Insufficient and uneven Time below expectations. approach allows participants to explore the
Commitments (lack of support of • Members had a weak sense of efficient and effective system which they
board VP’s, and board member value being delivered by the as- themselves created. In the end it is all about
time conflicts with day jobs) sociation. throwing out the old, linear way of think-
• Closed and non-supportive Board • High profile professionals from ing (yesterday’s norm, today’s exception)
Culture (lack of ideas flowing target organizations were less and adopting a new, full dimensional way
freely, too much judgment and likely to participate. of thinking (yesterday’s exception, today’s
criticizing) norm) to ensure lasting performance im-
• Lack of Board Member Participa- Improvement Actions provement.
tion (decision making paralysis, The board took several actions immediately Tom Hughes, Keith Owen, and Tim
lack of board engagement and after the results were available. The vision, Gohmann are Principals at Somerset Consult-
ing Group, an Austin based firm that offers the
attendance at activities, lack of mission and goal statements are being latest in performance management solutions.
delegation) revised; the organization’s structure and Tom Hughes can be reached at 512.327.0090
• Weak Board Communications (lack ext. 2, or tom@somersetcg.com.
ORKING TO
FW G
Figure 1 O E
S ENGAGING
TH
Y
VOLUNTEERS
WA
TIME BOARD
ER
COMMITMENT COMMUNICA-
TIONS
ENGAGING
BOARD MEMBERSHIP
BOARD
MEMBER
CULTURE
PARTICIPATION
SUPPORTING
EDUCATION