One concern is that plank management decision making generally involves high-impact, highly-visible decisions. The broader organization community, investors and staff all check out the board for just how it makes those choices. That means the pressure to generate a good impression is also higher for board administrators than it could be in most workplaces.
The various other challenge is that there are a lot of low-likelihood, high-consequence foreseen surprises, at times called “black elephants. ” How does a table determine which of them to pay attention to? One way is to consider the range of potential impact as well as the level of certainty that it will happen. That can help to prioritize where a board should engage in decision making.
Another strategy is to partition large tactical decisions in to smaller factors and dwelling address each sequentially over a couple of meetings. That will enable the plank to discuss each piece completely and provides feedback in a way that board chair responsibilities can easily inform the decision. It will also give the board more time to follow through on second decisions that stem right from those principal decisions.
A third approach is to use techniques that encourage debate in a managed method. This could be done by using a variety of options such as determining informal roles (eg devil’s advocate) or using tools like thinking, Six Thinking Hats, the Disney Planning Method, and the Delphi Technique. Using these methods can help to steer clear of groupthink and be sure that boards are not easily rubber-stamping the decisions brought to them. Finally, it is important to use technology to facilitate engagement and enable remote access just for the benefit of panel members who have are not in the room. This is why successful board management software has voting and polling functionality that means it is easy for panels to keep impetus remotely in high-priority decisions.
0 Comments