The Fall/Winter 2008 issue of Oregon Humanities arrived in the mail with a series of articles about civil discourse, one featuring comments by David Gutterman, a political science professor at Willamette University (and surprisingly a teacher for our eldest daughter.) Gutterman said (among many other insightful comments) “We’re unnecessarily tuned to be defensive about our ideas. That prevents us from engaging with people unless we’re sure we agree.”
Sounds like the way some parents handle their teenagers: Seeking agreement instead of engagement!
Now how does this apply to the concept of Board retreats? And why do we call them “Board retreats” in the first place?
We don’t need to “retreat” right now. We need to – as the Victorians used to say – re-trench. Maybe they should be called “renewals” or, perhaps, “revivals”! In any case, Board and staff need to track on the same facts and need to know and believe the same story. There’s not enough time and energy to do it any other way these days.
New challenges require new answers. And new answers won’t come from the same-old, same-old full day Board retreat with post-it dots and sticky notes, visioning discussions and strategic planning approaches. To find new answers, to open ourselves to unexpected sources of wisdom, to host real dialogue we need to start with essential questions, good data and level the playing field so we bring the best of everybody to the table.
If there isn’t a critical issue that needs discussing nor a decision that needs making, a retreat can feel like a “retreat” instead of a “revival”. Don’t even bother with the effort!
A Board retreat should provide both staff and Board leadership the opportunity to fully engage with the most important issues (or challenges) confronting the organization. But that engagement only occurs if the meeting starts with an understanding of what issue/challenges will be the heart of the retreat agenda.
Who identifies the critical issue/challenges that need retreat discussion? The best person is the one who knows every complexity the organization faces. The one with the desk where the bucks stop. Sometimes that’s the Executive Director, sometimes a CFO, sometimes a Board President. (The best person is seldom your consultant or retreat facilitator.) Retreat planning begins when a small group of staff and/or Board reaches agreement on a very short list of critical issues/challenges – a discussion that often needs a very good facilitator to achieve most effective results.
This is your pre-planning team: those who understand the true state-of-the-organization.
Next, a planning team of Board and staff meets to outline 3-5 retreat outcomes – specific and measurable – and gains agreement from attendees that the outcomes will be well worth the time being invested. (This includes pre-loading the meeting with participation of both Board and staff leadership.) During the planning sessions, this “process-planning” team focuses on answering specific questions. In what order will we discuss the most important issues or opportunities? How much do we already know? Do we need to make decisions together in the room or are we considering perspectives and developing wisdom together? If we’re exploring, who gets to synthesize, analyze and decide? And who will have the final authority to review, approve and scenario-test decisions that flow from the retreat discussions?
Here are my “Six Suggestions to Stimulate Value” at a retreat:
- Focus on a very limited palette of issues or opportunities. One single essential strategic question is actually best. (i.e. Which of our programs is the least and most effective in pursuit of our mission and what should we do about it?)
- Input in leads to input out. A substantive discussion must start from clear and unbiased data and information, displayed in narrative, charts and graphs that are presented, explained, discussed, poked at, questioned and understood. Until the facts are laid on the table, no one should be allowed to expound on their interpretation until this bare-boned analysis is complete. Think about what we all learned listening to the Presidential debates this year. Issues are complex. Discourse becomes sound-bites if the facts aren’t clear.
- Pre-retreat research (opinion research from stakeholders, comparative research gathered from similar organizations or from the web, or even surveys and phone interviews collecting feedback from those who will attend the retreat) can open up new avenues… especially on controversial or tricky issues.
- Everybody in the room is reminded (before the retreat and at the beginning of the agenda) that their individual and unique perspective is critical to the results of the discussion. It’s essential that this “diversity is our strength” philosophy is embedded in the retreat design and facilitation. Its the reason to meet!
- Head and heart (or right brain and left brain, whichever model you prefer) must be equally – and separately – valued.
- No conversation should go for more than 90 minutes without some break.
Peter Senge, who imagined the concepts of the learning organization, tells us that there are three forms of leadership that are needed for an organization to be a success in rapidly changing times: Vision leadership (usually in no short supply). Process leadership (management training has provided us all many models of this.) and Learning leadership (where we make sure that a group is learning together and growing together by analyzing and interpreting the experiences of the past and integrating new lessons before determining the future).
More to learn – more to come.
Or as my father-in-law would say, “For every complex problem there is a simple answer, and its invariably wrong.” The key is to engage, directly, with complexity and come up with a plan that optimizes your engagement.
Michael Kosmala here from The Canoe Group…
Given my past experiences as a participant in multiple non-profit board retreats, I’m particularly interested in item #2 from Marta’s checklist above.
Chances are that you have a series of reports (in a mutually agreed upon format) that you have been using on a regular basis to assess your organization’s progress and guide strategic adjustments.
While there’s great value in having such reports, recycling your standard organizational reports for board retreats or other important strategic discussions as the sole source of information can hinder the level of engagement and discussion significantly.
Presenting the same data in multiple formats will not only increase the level of engagement from your participants, but can frequently open the door to new perspectives that in turn produces stronger, more accurate results.
In short, you’ll spend more time engaged in meaningful discussion during retreats when you invest in this type of planning on the front end.
I am a part of the pre-retreat planning team for a non-profit foundation board retreat. An issue has surfaced in regards to the attendance of staff (other than the CEO). Is there any references or thoughts regarding this issue.
Good question. Planning who will attend any meeting, retreat or large group convening should always begin from the answer to this question:
What are the outcomes you want to achieve at the gathering?
Crafting those outcomes is the first step of pre-planning. Until you know what you want to accomplish together, there’s no way to determine who needs to be in the room.
One of the challenges that surfaces (at the start-up of pre-planning) is: Who should sit at the table to pre-plan the retreat? Our counsel to non-profits is that the CEO/Executive Director is part of pre-planning for 99% of all Board retreats. As the outcomes for the retreat come into focus, it will become clear who else – besides board members – will provide value during the retreat discussions.
An additional factor to consider is your foundation’s core values, and to how you have divided roles, responsibilities and decision-making authority.
We believe that a key goal for all non-profits is a strong, collaborative working relationship between staff and Board, and that with good retreat pre-planning, design and facilitation, one consistent goal for all Board retreats to is strengthen the Board’s capacity to function as an effective team. Sometimes it is necessary for the Board to strengthen its capacities to work as a team – if this is a primary goal, staff might be invited to attend for part of the day.