Board Assessments that Benefit an Organization’s Board Governance Practice
Board assessments can range in scope from simple, post Board meeting questionnaire of 5 to 10 questions on how to improve future meetings to detailed reviews at the end of the year that cover not only Board performance, but also director’s views on Committee performance and their peers’ performance. While organizations tended to conduct these types of assessments internally in the past, more and more organizations are relying on independent third parties to help them during the assessment with 45% of Boards reporting the use of consultants during their Board assessment, according to a recent Global Board survey, conducted by InterSearch and Board Network.
There are three types of Board Assessments that will benefit an organization’s board governance practices:
Overall Board Assessments
This is the most common assessment utilized by Boards and involves having directors evaluate the Board’s overall performance by asking questions relating to:
- The Board’s overall understanding of organizational strategy
- Director skills and competencies
- Board Chair performance
- The effectiveness of Board meetings
- Board meeting materials and preparation time for meetings
- Director relationships and collegiality
- Director orientation
Typically, questions are provided with a 1 to 5 rating scale format and directors are given the chance to leave a comment where they may have evaluated performance at a low level (e.g. a rating of 1 or 2). Once the ratings from each director are consolidated, the range and average of ratings are generated for each question. From there, the Board is easily able to identify those areas where they have assessed performance as being weaker (i.e. Average Rating of 3 or lower) and is able to develop action plans to improve performance.
This is another common assessment utilized by Boards and involves having committee members evaluate the performance of the committees they participate in by asking questions relating to:
- Committee Chair performance
- The effectiveness of Committee meetings
- Committee meeting materials and preparation time for meetings
- Access to management and independent advisors
Like the Overall Board Assessment, a 1 to 5 rating scale questionnaire can be used to evaluate performance in these areas and, in turn, weaknesses can be identified and addressed through appropriate action plans to improve committee performance.
This is the least common assessment. Boards use it as a professional development exercise for directors and as part of the annual re-nomination and director selection process. Directors can evaluate their peers’ performance in several areas, including:
- Meeting preparedness
- Knowledge of the organization
- Level of engagement
- Understanding of their role
- Collegiality and ability to work with other directors
- Contribution to the Board
Peers can also be evaluated on a 1 to 5 rating scale using a questionnaire with directors who receive lower average ratings identified quite clearly. The evaluation can identify “problem” directors who can then be provided with the opportunity to improve their performance or resign well in advance of the re-nomination process.
Following Up on the Results of the Questionnaire
The most powerful used of the questionnaire is combing the results with individual follow-up interviews. The follow-up interviews can help the directors identify why they rated certain areas higher or lower and explore specific ways for the Board, Committees, and Peers to improve their performance. The feedback from these interviews must be kept confidential, with only the high-level themes of the interviews summarized. After the questionnaires and interviews are completed, boards can use the results to develop strong action plans that will establish specific ways in which performance can be improved.
GGA notes that communicating the results of the assessment (specifically peer evaluations) is a sensitive issue and typically is handled by either the Board Chair, Governance Committee Chair or an independent third party. Typically, the summary results are provided to the full Board, along with any action plans required to improve performance moving forward. Peer Assessment results are typically discussed individually with each director. Conversations with directors on their own performance are sensitive matters, so effective and diplomatic communication is required by whoever is delivering the feedback. They must identify existing areas of strength and contributions, so that they understand where they are already effective. When raising shortcomings, they must provide specific examples and keep comments constructive by avoiding personality-related comments. Most importantly, they cannot dodge the sensitive issues. Sensitive issues must be addressed for improvements to be made.