Kites rise against the wind… aka, the board/staff relationship
Dearest comrades,
It’s been a year since I’ve written due to a combination of external chaos, lost momentum, and, if I’m honest, a bit of stuckness. My work is in fundraising and organizational development. I care deeply about social change organizations and how we can build the resources, cultures, and structures needed to advance a vision of liberation and change. And… it’s really challenging to dig into those things in the midst of illegal war, ICE at airports and on our streets, and descending authoritarianism.
And, of course, we know the small and the large are connected. We need to build powerful movements, we need to support and train staff and leaders, and we need to build effective organizations to win. Microcosmic change create macrocosmic change - we can’t have one without the other.
So in that context - I’ve been thinking again about Boards of Directors. In a previous newsletter, I wrote about the challenges of building boards that are a real value add to an organization’s work - focusing on role clarity, strong recruitment and onboarding, as well as the importance of meaningful investment from Executive Directors. One thing that keeps coming up is the challenges and opportunities that arise in the tensions and relationships between board and staff.
In some organizations, a kind of firewall exists between board and staff. In others, that boundary collapses into micromanagement. Sometimes, there’s a lack of respect for the knowledge and experience of staff; other times, a dismissal of the value that thoughtful, engaged board members can bring through questions, perspective, and accountability. Trust is central here. When trust is low, organizations tend to default to extremes - rigid separation or overreach.
As with most things in our sector, there’s no one-size-fits-all model. Boards are as unique as their organizations, and there is no single definition of a “good” board or a “right” relationship between board and staff. Recently, I’ve been working with a client trying to “professionalize” their board - particularly clarifying how board members engage with staff beyond the Executive Director. At the heart of that work is a familiar tension: how do we trust the knowledge of those closest to the work, while also making use of the outside perspective and resources that boards often hold?
I often think about this as a kind of dialectical balance - a “both/and” rather than an “either/or.” This isn’t a problem to solve once and for all. It’s something to navigate continuously through relationship building, humility, and deep listening. It asks everyone involved to embrace nuance and to tolerate discomfort and conflict in service of something stronger.
There’s also real complexity in many of the organizations with whom I work that reflects the limits of the Nonprofit Industrial Complex: boards that are not reflective of the communities served, that hold disproportionate class or institutional power, or that lack lived experience in the organization’s core work. These dynamics don’t disappear - but they can be named and navigated.
At their best, boards and staff function less like opposing forces and more like a system in tension. I sometimes think of the idea that a kite rises against the wind, not with it. The goal isn’t to eliminate friction, but to make it generative.
One framework I’ve found useful is clarifying when a board should lead, partner, monitor, or stay out of the way*:
Lead: Executive Director selection and support, board governance, ethics
Partner: Strategy, budgeting, risk tolerance, major decisions
Monitor: Financial health, accountability, progress toward goals
Stay out of the way: Day-to-day operations, staff management, implementation decisions
This is not necessarily in flux nor set in stone - but having a shared framework can reduce confusion and conflict.
When challenges arise, I often come back to a few core questions:
Is there enough trust and relationship between board and staff?
Are motivations and assumptions being surfaced and understood?
Are roles actually clear - or just assumed?
There are also structural considerations - like how boards are recruited and supported and how organizations navigate the very real challenges of building multi-class, multiracial boards while also meeting fundraising and leadership expectations.
This work is rarely quick, but it is deeply impactful.
If your organization is grappling with any of this, I support the organizations I work with to:
Clarify roles and responsibilities between board and staff
Facilitate joint retreats and conversations that build trust and alignment
Strengthen board development practices, including recruitment and onboarding
And, as always, if you’d like to set up a free consultation to talk about these ideas, or any questions related to individual donor fundraising, organizational structure and culture, or organizational change management, you can book me at https://calendly.com/nikkimorse/30min.
I’d love to hear what you’re seeing in your own organizations - what’s working, what’s hard, and what you’re experimenting with.
In solidarity,
Nikki
* h/t to Boards that Lead by Ram Charan. Although it was tough to wade through the business focus and corporate speak, I found some parts useful in the context of our organizations.
