Ted Hull Consulting FYI

FYI - Policy Governance - A Whole New Game

April 28th, 2015

Policy Governance - A Whole New Game

In North America football is played with an oblong ball on a field where said ball is thrown, kicked, caught - or dropped. Players run, block, tackle and are tackled. Touchdowns are scored and field goals are made- or missed. This game is played in both Canada and the US, albeit with a few different nuances.  In Canada there are three downs while in the US there are four downs. The Canadian field is ten yards longer and twelve yards wider. In the US there are eleven players whereas in Canada there are twelve players on the field at one time. In Canada the defence scrimmages one-yard off the ball but in the US it scrimmages on the line. These are some of the variations of what is essentially the same game. American players come up to Canada and play successfully on Canadian teams when they have never played on a Canadian field or by Canadian rules before. Why? Because football is football.   Even within each league, rules are changed every year. But no matter how much the rules are changed, football will never evolve into baseball. Baseball is a different game, requiring an entirely different field, different equipment and different athletic skills.

When a board is introduced to Policy Governance, sometimes referred to as the Carver model, as a way to help it govern better, it often views the exercise as a variation of the same game. Sure there will be new terms, some rule changes and variances; but after all a board is a board so any changes will be primarily cosmetic – won’t they? So the board goes for it. Directors show up at the next board meeting with their football, helmet and shoulder pads.

But the field looks more like an octagon rather than the long and narrow field they are used to. The players are in one corner of the field with a round ball and a stick. There is nothing virtuous about carrying the ball but running around a square without it is applauded. This isn’t a deviation from the same old game; it is an entirely different sport.

As a Policy Governance consultant I fail miserably at communicating the idea of a new game. Despite my finest but ineffective efforts in making sure the players come with their gloves and bats, sooner or later they will show up with their football helmets and shoulder pads. After some training and practice we have the idea of hitting the ball figured out. But I am once again shocked when they drive the ball to centre field and then run through the infield chasing the ball.

Yes; Policy Governance is that different. And yes board members will chase the ball instead of running the bases and carry the ball when they should be throwing it; which leads us to the biggest challenge facing boards which have converted to Policy Governance.

 

SELF-DISCIPLINE:

Athletes have been instructed and coached about how the new game is played. The coach has done a great job of explaining, illustrating and reviewing various aspects of the sport. The players are buying into the philosophy; they get it. Even the first quarter – I mean inning goes well. However under the pressure of the moment there is a tendency to revert to the old way of playing the game. Instead of hitting the ball, it seems easier to pick it up and carry it. When the old game was played it was okay to run anywhere on the field; now the only place to run is on the base lines. The propensity to do this is natural and shouldn’t cause any undue alarm. However if those old habits of playing the game are not avoided, winning will be illusive.

Policy Governance is not an easier way of playing the same game. It requires an understanding of the fundamentals of governance and then the discipline to play the game in a way that heightens the likelihood of governance success.

 

SO WHY CHANGE?

If this new governance game is so different and requires so much discipline, why bother changing?

This is a common question asked by boards which are contemplating a move to Policy Governance. It is also asked by board members who come onto a board which is already practicing Policy Governance. I’m not sure how I can squeeze the game-changing analogy out of this point, so let me get straight to it.

When a board converts to Policy Governance it must understand and own the advantages of this change. Many of the decisions we make in life seem like a good idea at the start but then the muck, mess and monotony of change clutters our memory as to why we decided to make the change in the first place. So how can the decision to embrace Policy Governance be solidified?

  1. Formally state the reasons for the change to Policy Governance. Not only should a board formally enter the decision to move to Policy Governance, but it should state the reasons behind the decision. If a decision seems to be wise at the time it was made, why was it deemed to be wise? One way of doing this is to look at the ten basic principles of Policy Governance and note how they align with the values of the board. After all that’s why the changes are made.
  2. Require an annual review of the rationale for Policy Governance as part of the Board Process policies. This not only forces the board to examine and reaffirm its decision, but it’s an opportunity to reflect on the values of Policy Governance that the board embraced at some point in the past. You never want to tear down a fence (in this case the Policy Governance fence) until you know why it was put there in the first place. If the result of the annual review shows that the reasons for which the change to Policy Governance was made in the first place are no longer valid, at least the board will understand that the original decision made sense at the time.
  3. Make the review as part of the orientation of new board members. It is understandably frustrating for new board members to have Policy Governance foisted on them especially if they have had experience on a traditional board. They may feel that the difference and the discipline of Policy Governance are being pushed on them without necessarily understanding the why. All they have to go by is the sales pitch of some Policy Governance fan who comes across more as a fanatic. The challenges that a new board member will face in learning the new game are tough enough without feeling she is also dealing with a sales pitch. The key is patience and not pressure.

 

IN CONCLUSION

A board needs to collectively brace itself for change. If you are a Policy Governance consultant don’t understate the way in which Policy Governance is different. Nor should Policy Governance be seen as something that will make the job of the board easier. However once it is in place, the reasons for change and the rewards of a disciplined board will result in effectiveness and excellence in governing. 

Policy Governance® is an internationally registered service mark of John Carver. Registration is only to ensure accurate description of the model rather than for financial gain. The model is available free to all with no royalties or licence fees for its use. The authoritative website for Policy Governance is www.carvergovernance.com.



Ted Hull Consulting FYI


Why Bother Evaluating Your CEO?
June 25th, 2017

Wisely Investing My Time
May 19th, 2017

Is Policy Governance Too Big For a Small Charity?
March 26th, 2017

Why Bother With Board Education? Video
January 5th, 2017

Board Priorities and Policy Governance
December 15th, 2016

Fishtailing is for Losers
September 19th, 2016

Ditch Your Board Executive Committee
August 25th, 2016

Personal Trainers Can Be Overrated
August 12th, 2016

The Difference Between Cost and Worth
April 25th, 2016

Policy Governance and the CEO Evaluation
March 12th, 2016

Two Sides of the Value Coin
February 12th, 2016

FYI - But a Church Board is Different...so Can Carver's Policy Governance® Model Work?
October 12th, 2015

FYI - Policy Goverance Isn't the Silver Bullet for a Church Board
July 21st, 2015

FYI - The Difference Between Owners and Consumers
June 24th, 2015

FYI - A Board is Greater Than the Sum of its Parts
May 18th, 2015

FYI - Policy Governance - A Whole New Game
April 28th, 2015

FYI - The Ten Drawbacks to Policy Governance
March 10th, 2015

FYI - The Features of Policy Governance
February 18th, 2015

FYI - Five Key Words For Effective Governance
January 6th, 2015

  • Why Bother Evaluating Your CEO?
June 25th, 2017
One of the most common questions I’m asked is “How does a Policy Governance® board evaluate its CEO?” Let me suggest that if your board is asking this question, it is asking the wrong one. This FYI sugges.....
Home
Services
Introductory Policy Governance® Workshop
Policy Governance® Implementation Workshops
Policy Governance® Coaching
Counselling
Evaluate Your Board Experience
Books by Ted Hull
Testimonials
About Ted
FYI
The Governance Coach
Contact Us
So Your Board Can Better Serve
204.898.6740

Ted Hull Consulting FYI

FYI - Policy Governance - A Whole New Game

April 28th, 2015

In North America football is played with an oblong ball on a field where said ball is thrown, kicked, caught - or dropped. Players run, block, tackle and are tackled. Touchdowns are scored and field goals are made- or missed. This game is played in both Canada and the US, albeit with a few different nuances.  In Canada there are three downs while in the US there are four downs. The Canadian field is ten yards longer and twelve yards wider. In the US there are eleven players whereas in Canada there are twelve players on the field at one time. In Canada the defence scrimmages one-yard off the ball but in the US it scrimmages on the line. These are some of the variations of what is essentially the same game. American players come up to Canada and play successfully on Canadian teams when they have never played on a Canadian field or by Canadian rules before. Why? Because football is football.   Even within each league, rules are changed every year. But no matter how much the rules are changed, football will never evolve into baseball. Baseball is a different game, requiring an entirely different field, different equipment and different athletic skills.

When a board is introduced to Policy Governance, sometimes referred to as the Carver model, as a way to help it govern better, it often views the exercise as a variation of the same game. Sure there will be new terms, some rule changes and variances; but after all a board is a board so any changes will be primarily cosmetic – won’t they? So the board goes for it. Directors show up at the next board meeting with their football, helmet and shoulder pads.

But the field looks more like an octagon rather than the long and narrow field they are used to. The players are in one corner of the field with a round ball and a stick. There is nothing virtuous about carrying the ball but running around a square without it is applauded. This isn’t a deviation from the same old game; it is an entirely different sport.

As a Policy Governance consultant I fail miserably at communicating the idea of a new game. Despite my finest but ineffective efforts in making sure the players come with their gloves and bats, sooner or later they will show up with their football helmets and shoulder pads. After some training and practice we have the idea of hitting the ball figured out. But I am once again shocked when they drive the ball to centre field and then run through the infield chasing the ball.

Yes; Policy Governance is that different. And yes board members will chase the ball instead of running the bases and carry the ball when they should be throwing it; which leads us to the biggest challenge facing boards which have converted to Policy Governance.

 

SELF-DISCIPLINE:

Athletes have been instructed and coached about how the new game is played. The coach has done a great job of explaining, illustrating and reviewing various aspects of the sport. The players are buying into the philosophy; they get it. Even the first quarter – I mean inning goes well. However under the pressure of the moment there is a tendency to revert to the old way of playing the game. Instead of hitting the ball, it seems easier to pick it up and carry it. When the old game was played it was okay to run anywhere on the field; now the only place to run is on the base lines. The propensity to do this is natural and shouldn’t cause any undue alarm. However if those old habits of playing the game are not avoided, winning will be illusive.

Policy Governance is not an easier way of playing the same game. It requires an understanding of the fundamentals of governance and then the discipline to play the game in a way that heightens the likelihood of governance success.

 

SO WHY CHANGE?

If this new governance game is so different and requires so much discipline, why bother changing?

This is a common question asked by boards which are contemplating a move to Policy Governance. It is also asked by board members who come onto a board which is already practicing Policy Governance. I’m not sure how I can squeeze the game-changing analogy out of this point, so let me get straight to it.

When a board converts to Policy Governance it must understand and own the advantages of this change. Many of the decisions we make in life seem like a good idea at the start but then the muck, mess and monotony of change clutters our memory as to why we decided to make the change in the first place. So how can the decision to embrace Policy Governance be solidified?

  1. Formally state the reasons for the change to Policy Governance. Not only should a board formally enter the decision to move to Policy Governance, but it should state the reasons behind the decision. If a decision seems to be wise at the time it was made, why was it deemed to be wise? One way of doing this is to look at the ten basic principles of Policy Governance and note how they align with the values of the board. After all that’s why the changes are made.
  2. Require an annual review of the rationale for Policy Governance as part of the Board Process policies. This not only forces the board to examine and reaffirm its decision, but it’s an opportunity to reflect on the values of Policy Governance that the board embraced at some point in the past. You never want to tear down a fence (in this case the Policy Governance fence) until you know why it was put there in the first place. If the result of the annual review shows that the reasons for which the change to Policy Governance was made in the first place are no longer valid, at least the board will understand that the original decision made sense at the time.
  3. Make the review as part of the orientation of new board members. It is understandably frustrating for new board members to have Policy Governance foisted on them especially if they have had experience on a traditional board. They may feel that the difference and the discipline of Policy Governance are being pushed on them without necessarily understanding the why. All they have to go by is the sales pitch of some Policy Governance fan who comes across more as a fanatic. The challenges that a new board member will face in learning the new game are tough enough without feeling she is also dealing with a sales pitch. The key is patience and not pressure.

 

IN CONCLUSION

A board needs to collectively brace itself for change. If you are a Policy Governance consultant don’t understate the way in which Policy Governance is different. Nor should Policy Governance be seen as something that will make the job of the board easier. However once it is in place, the reasons for change and the rewards of a disciplined board will result in effectiveness and excellence in governing. 

Policy Governance® is an internationally registered service mark of John Carver. Registration is only to ensure accurate description of the model rather than for financial gain. The model is available free to all with no royalties or licence fees for its use. The authoritative website for Policy Governance is www.carvergovernance.com.

Primary Contact
272-3336 Portage Avenue
Winnipeg Manitoba
R3K 2H9
204.898.6740
  • Why Bother Evaluating Your CEO?
June 25th, 2017
One of the most common questions I’m asked is “How does a Policy Governance® board evaluate its CEO?” Let me suggest that if your board is asking this question, it is asking the wrong one. This FYI suggests what the right question should be......

Copyright Ted Hull Consulting All Rights Reserved | Developed and Hosted by M9 Corporation