Case Study #5

In a small community with a long tradition of art appreciation, a board managed the policies of the local arts council. Over the course of many years, the reputation of the community's appreciation of the arts grew statewide. For decades, the arts council thrived and the community benefitted greatly from the business, industry, and education that developed through local pride in the arts.

One year a new member of the board became disenfranchised with the director of the arts council because he did not include the board member's art piece in the annual art exhibit. The director assured the board member that the artwork was judged to be good by the advisory committee that selected art for the art exhibit, but many other art pieces were superior to that piece of artwork. For decades, the selection of art for the annual exhibits by the advisory committee was sacrosanct. The thought of interference in the selection process by a board member of the arts council was unthinkable. The new board member was selected by his peers primarily because of his financial standing in the community, not because he had a history of supporting the arts. In fact, he had shown very little interest in the community's arts endeavors and exhibits before joining the board. This was widely known by many others on the board and by the director; yet, he was added to the board. It became obvious soon after his appointment that the board and the director had sacrificed its purpose and commitment to the arts for the status of and possible financial contributions from the new board member. It was also obvious that the new board member was not committed to the arts and he had no respect for the long-standing process of selecting art for the annual exhibit. After the director explained the process of selecting art for the exhibit and the critical role of the advisory committee, the new board member was unmoved. He insisted that his artwork is included in the exhibit. The director informally and formally addressed the issue with the other board members. Rather than maintaining its integrity and focus on the traditional process of artwork selection; instead of standing strong against one board member's inappropriate demands; instead of appreciating and respecting the authority and responsibility of the director's position and key role in the council and community; instead of standing on its own principles, all of that was compromised and the questionable artwork was included in the exhibit. This unfortunate and ill-advised decision by the board and director created chaos. Other board members began to question the art show selections by the advisory committee and each one began to name their own favorite art pieces. Over a brief period, the selection process broke down completely; the quality of the art exhibit declined; the trust of the director diminished, and the once broad community support of the arts council started to erode. The director was removed and without a succession plan for the leadership position, a director was selected that was unqualified for the position and who was told by the board that he was not to operate independently of the board. In other words, the board made it clear that they would run the organization.34 Years later that once proud and prestigious arts council became a shell of its former existence, and its decline started with one board member who put himself over the best interests of the organization and was supported by a board and leader that failed to carry out its duties and responsibilities when they abandoned the organization's purpose and traditions. Once the trust was eroded and the focus of the organization shifted from its mission to individual self-interests, the core of the organization was damaged from the inside out. The purpose of leadership was lost. But more importantly, sustainability of the effectiveness of the organization suffered.

Antidotes: There are many examples, almost too many to note, where sustainability was lost and an organization faltered because of conflicts between a board and leadership of the organization. In every story told in this chapter, the goals and the effectiveness of each organization were compromised and the organization's ability to sustain good, effective programs was weakened substantially.

In Stephen Covey's book The Speed of Trust, he states that an effective leader must have the trust of everyone in the organization. The failure to act in the best interests of the organization comes from a lack of trust and over self-indulgence from the leader at the CEO level and at the board level. Covey asks the question: "Do people trust their boss?" If the trust of leadership is diminished it reverberates across the organization. In the book The Twelve Absolutes of Leadership, Gary Burnison suggests that the lack of trust and the forfeiture of leadership develop when an organization loses its purpose.36 That purpose is compromised when the trust and integrity of the leader and the board have diminished due to role confusion and the failure to remain true to the purpose of the organization. In this chapter, there are examples of board members replacing the purpose of the organization with their own agendas and ambitions. This is most likely to occur when the leader of the organization abdicates his role to please board members, which compromises the functions of the organization. The antidote to this type of determinant is an absolute, unbreakable devotion and commitment to the organization's purpose.

Burnison writes: To be a leader is to be passionate about purpose, authentically and genuinely. Leaders make purpose their North Star and continually lead the organization toward it. Embody purpose-people will watch you and follow your lead; shape and continually deliver the message about purpose; walk the talk of purpose in everything you do-if you don't, the purpose is just the slogan du jour; be grounded in purpose over time.

Board members and leaders must maintain the purpose of the organization and protect it because the insidious effects of even the smallest slippage away from the organization's purpose can ruin it. Boards must also understand their role as leaders. Carlo Corsi listed several effective components of board leadership.

The effective functioning of a board depends on a number of factors, including the mix of knowledge and experience among the directors, the quality of information they receive and their ability to operate as a team. The chairman's role is pivotal in managing the group dynamic, playing to the board's strengths and maintaining regular contact with organizational directors between meetings. High-functioning boards rotate meetings around.

I need a brief SUMMARY and LESSON LEARNED for this case study.