# Zombies on the Board

- Link: https://fundraising.co.uk/2013/09/18/zombies-board/
- Published: 2013-09-18T14:50:45+01:00
- Author: Howard Lake

I was giving a presentation to the Board of Trustees of a client last year explaining
why their fundraising was failing and what they needed to do to avert catastrophe,
but they barely reacted and then went on with business as usual, as if what I had
just explained existed in some other reality and for some of them it probably did.

## Lack of reaction

A lack of reaction to new possibilities or events is typical of zombie boards, not
that my presentations were earth shattering or even particularly organisation shattering,
but the lack of thought and reflection expressed in the decision making process 
of some boards has sometimes been quite staggering.

Any group of people who work together over a period of time may acquire group characteristics
and group beliefs which are hard to alter, which may be our herd instinct coming
to the fore. In management boards this can be crippling and is sometimes due to 
a lack of proper governance procedures, such as a failure to set up proper search
teams and person specs for new members or simply not having a fixed term of office,
like the usual three years, with perhaps a second term then you are really off and
no sneaking back. No fixed term is particularly pernicious as it often leads to 
a long term Chair dominating the proceedings and clear group views about the organisation
solidifying into inertia as times change – and we live in changing times do we not?

## Advertisement

## Day of reckoning

In another organisation, one particular chair used his position to appoint the other
Board members and began to feel it was his personal charity, which was fine as long
they had a great director and took a hands off approach. However, as with most badly
organised activities, the day of reckoning came with the inevitable change as a 
new director had to be appointed. Whilst looking and sounding just like a typical
old board member, the new director was actually quite passionate about the beneficiaries
and felt the organisation had not moved with the times from the days they provided
residential homes for people to providing the rather more relevant services currently
required.

I changed something there, so sorry you haven’t guessed which organisation it is(
I hope) but it might just ring a bell?

## Zombie inertia syndrome

At first the board reacted with the typical stifling zombie inertia syndrome: putting
off making a decision, asking for more information, querying the need and the figures
then saying, “Not yet, let’s review the situation next year”, and it went back to
sleep, preferring to hold rambling discussions about the colour of the new logo 
the director had proposed.

He did not, however, let things rest there and having become even more convinced
of the merits of his case on one particular issue, through a professional fact finding
process, decided to put it out to the local support groups for consultation. If 
you have ever seen a board versus local group fight, you will know that this is 
as close to civil war as you can get without shots being fired. The local groups
loved the new direction as they were involved with the beneficiaries and often worked
closely with them as practitioners.

It all came to a head at the AGM when many of the oldest local group members discovered
they were ‘members’ of the charity and entitled to vote which they did most effectively.
A host of new resolutions had been put forward both for the new direction for the
organisation, but also for new governance procedures. At first the board reacted
as zombies usually do and dug their heels in before the meeting, disallowing proposals,
changing motions and leaving a couple key votes off the ‘consolidated’ agenda so
neutralising the effect of many of the remaining changes. The chair was heard to
mutter repeatedly “this just won’t do…” as if his disapproval alone made the motions
invalid.

Lawyers were consulted many of whom were already working with local groups and tactics
discussed with much leafing through the Arts & Mems, which set out the procedures
for the AGM. Fortunately, they were just standard procedures and quite clear about
the conduct of the meeting. So on the day the majority prevailed and in the end 
a new group were appointed to the Board mandated to make changes.

## One by one, they staggered off

At first, the old Board members reacted badly with individuals talking of betrayal
and the imminent collapse of civilisation, but they had little choice and one by
one, including the old Chair, they staggered off leaving the new Board to bring 
in a governance expert, set up more open transparent procedures and in time the 
Board even contained two beneficiaries who confirmed the huge benefits the charities
new programme was making to all their lives. Next the director was charged with 
developing monitoring and evaluation procedures to ensure the work was measured 
and remained relevant.

Charities are often not half so malleable or interested in change, and boards often
sleep on, shuffling the papers and making no real decisions from year to year. Indeed
the zombie board is almost a built in tendency with elderly amateurs, who take a
passing interest in the cause, and are often the only people willing to serve on
them.

## Fundraising as unnecessary evil

Fundraising, for them, is sometimes not just seen as a necessary evil but a rather
unnecessary one, as if funds arrived by magic because they were deserved not because
they were professionally sought. This is turn gives zombie directors free rein to
do very little for a very long time.

The, perhaps mythical, US model whereby board members take an active role in fundraising
and are famously tasked to “give, get or get off” at least involves board members
in events, meeting the major supporters of the organisation and in learning about
the everyday reality of the work through presentations, field trips and meeting 
beneficiaries, not that this cannot also be achieved through well run communications
programmes etc.

Sometimes zombie boards are so bad at their job that the Charity Commission is called
upon to close the organisation, and sometimes it actually does exercise its guardianship
powers and close organisations, though this seems to be mostly when there is fraud
involved.

Given a zombie board and a zombie director an organisation can stagger on almost
indefinitely until financial collapse puts it out of its misery. The situation is
especially prevalent when a charismatic founder passes on after long years of devoted
service. These bright, driven and passionate people often cannot abide contradiction
and argument so more often than not they appoint ‘yes’ people as their lieutenants
and key partners.

## The answer to zombies? The super-hero

Indeed the organisations funds may also come from their contacts whose loyalty is
to the founder, rather than the organisation itself, and who may be the first to
note that it has ‘lost its way’ if the true path is not followed. Courting such 
donors in post-founder years may fall to acolytes remaining on the board who are
then unmovable because of their perceived connections. It is often better to give
free reign to fundraisers to invest raising new funding streams.

The answer to zombies on top really often comes from someone with great personal
courage and organisational insight, who is prepared to put their position on the
line and doing what they think is morally right – enter the super-hero.

_Image: free vector by Tutsking_