March 12, 2007 | Read Time: 2 minutes
Nonprofit groups count on their board members to give them direction, offer expertise, and provide much-needed oversight.
But what happens when some of those board members don’t take their roles seriously?
Two blogs — Starboard’s Blog and PhilanthroMedia — offer strong opinions on the issue.
Jeff Wahlstrom, a nonprofit-management consultant in Bangor, Me., writes in Starboard’s Blog that he encourages charities to be aggressive in setting attendance expectations for board members.
“Board members who don’t show up suggest to others that they are working from a different set of expectations, that board service for your organization is not a serious commitment, and that your bylaws probably aren’t being followed,” Mr. Wahlstrom writes. “Perhaps most troubling is that these individuals are occupying a seat (though not physically!) that could be better filled by someone who could make a real contribution.”
This problem could be headed off if charities spell out expectations early and communicate with those who are missing meetings to gauge their commitment, he writes.
Robert Thalhimer, senior vice president for advancement at the Community Foundation Serving Richmond and Central Virginia, writes on PhilanthroMedia that he is often taken aback when he watches how some business executives approach their nonprofit board commitments.
“I am amazed at how cavalierly some business people approach their nonprofit board duties of obedience, care, and loyalty,” Mr. Thalhimer writes. “Would they ever dream of missing half their company’s board meetings? Would they show up for a company board meeting without studying the meeting materials, yet opine freely? Would they openly advocate for their personal interests over those of the company and expect to get away with it?”
Are nonprofit groups being well served by their board members? When they run into problem members, how should those problems be solved? Click on the comment link just below this posting to share your views.
