Search Results

Research & Reports Research The State of Credit Union Governance, 2023 This report identifies four governing elements central to measuring good governance and what correlations exist between them. The State of Credit Union Governance, 2023 Download Report Research The State of Credit Union Governance, 2020 This report offers findings from 115 credit unions on Board structure, governance, leadership, strategy and decision-making. The State of Credit Union Governance, 2020 Download Report Research Should Credit Unions Pay Their Directors? This Report explores the state of director compensation and offers considerations when exploring paying board directors. Should Credit Unions Pay Their Directors? Download Report Research The State of Credit Union Governance, 2021 This report examines the impact of COVID-19 and increasing calls for DEI on the credit union community. COVID-19 and DEI: Revolution & Evolution in the Credit Union Community Download Report Research The State of Credit Union Governance, 2018 This report analyzes governance practices at 70 credit unions focusing on Board structure, leadership, fiduciary oversight and strategy. The State of Credit Union Governance, 2018 Download Report White Paper A New Model Based on Classic Principles This white paper presents discussion on a new approach to the credit union cooperative model. A New Model Based on Classic Principles Download Report

Strategic Planning Services Quantum Governance believes in a collaborative and iterative cyclical process between the CEO/Executive Management and the Board in developing a strategic plan for the fulfillment of your organization’s vision and mission. In addition to facilitating the strategic planning process, we can assist you in the following ways: Assessing and Reimagining the Planning Cycle Defining (or redefining) Your Vision, Mission & Values Identifying Strategic Goals & Objectives Contact us to learn more about how we can help you plan for the future of your organization. "An effective strategy drives your organization's mission by identifying what is possible, what is feasible and what is bold." Paul Dionne, Chief Strategy Officer

For Questions About the Grant, Fill Out the Form Below: You can also email gisele@quantumgovernance.net for a quick response. First Name Last Name Email Message Send Thank you! We will be in contact.

Resources Governance Learn More Strategy Learn More Research & Reports Learn More The Four Elements of Good Governance Learn More Board Succession, Composition & Renewal Learn More Supervisory/Audit Committees Learn More Leadership Learn More Committees Learn More

< Back Effective Communications in the Board Room Jennie Boden Feb 1, 2019 Key Findings for Communication A great number of the governance challenges that we come across in the work that our firm undertakes with credit unions can be boiled down to matters of communications. Are your board members crossing over into day-to-day operations? Well…have their roles and responsibilities been clearly defined, updated and effectively communicated to them? Are there two or three (or even just one) members of your Board who are coming to meetings ill-prepared each and every month? It’s probably time for your Board or Governance Committee Chair to have a heart-to-heart, one-on-one conversation that may be long over-due. Is the relationship between your Board and CEO riddled with micromanagement, executive sessions and a lack of trust? It’s possible that you stopped having authentic, open dialogue far too long ago. After years of surveying credit union Board members, supervisory committee members, CEOs and senior staff members, Quantum Governance, along with CUES, recently published T he State of Credit Union Governance 2018: Five Data-Driven Recommendations for Future Success (State of CU Governance). There were three key findings relative to the need for more open, trusting communications that both surprised and troubled us. We encourage you to take notice of them and discuss these key findings with your board. If your credit union is struggling with any of these issues, it might be time to polish your own communications skills – individually and as a group. Key Finding #1 : More than 1/3 of the respondents that we surveyed report that their board does only an adequate or less than adequate job of asking the hard questions that need to be asked . Key Finding #2 : Thirty-nine percent (39%) of respondents reported that their board is only adequate or less than adequate at holding each other accountable . Key Finding #3 : And only 25% of CEOs and 27% of senior staff reported that their boards are very effective at building a leadership culture of trust – compared to 53% of supervisory committee members and 44% of board members. So, what’s happening at all of these credit unions? We were recently working with a credit union that received what we would term “Below Average” scores on survey questions regarding “accountability” and “asking the hard questions.” ‘Where do we begin,’ they asked. Luckily for them, their score on the “Trust” question was particularly high — a good place from which to build. They were quick to say that they all got along and worked well together – maybe too well together, perhaps? How many of your board votes are unanimous? Are your Board members held accountable when it’s appropriate? And, how many hard questions are you asking in your board meetings? The mark of a good board is not unanimity or harmony 100 percent of the time. Your job as a board member is to ask good, hard questions. To trust but verify. In a respectful and professional manner. All toward the good of the credit union. Be authentic. Be direct. Be open. Keep your promises. Keeping promises builds trust, and you’ll need to rely on strong relationships of trust while you’re holding each other accountable in the boardroom. Speaking of accountability: hold each other accountable as board members. Ask the hard questions that need to be asked. It’s among your most fundamental roles as board members. Previous Next

< Back Are Women Better Leaders? Jennie Boden Sep 24, 2021 They are when they act with humility, self-awareness, self-control, moral sensitivity and kindness. I just finished an interview with the female CEO of a fairly large credit union. I love conducting interviews. It’s my favorite part of my job, and luckily, I get to conduct a lot of them. As president of consulting services at Quantum Governance , I’ve probably interviewed thousands of credit union board members, supervisory and audit committee members, CEOs and members of senior management. And each time, I learn a lot. During this interview, the CEO was talking about adding her opinion in the boardroom on a sensitive topic. She stopped mid-sentence and stared off into space for a minute. (We were, of course, on Zoom.) I pushed her just a bit, inviting her return: “What are you thinking?” I asked. “I’m wondering how much I can say, how much I should say,” she replied. “What’s the right balance for me to share in the boardroom?” I paused before I spoke. “I can’t imagine a male CEO ever pausing, even for a minute, to ask himself that important question,” I said. And I do think it’s an important question. There’s a lot of data out there that suggests that women are currently better leaders than men. For example, this article in The Washington Post reported that countries led by women “suffered far lower death rates” than those led by men during the first wave of COVID-19. A study by Pew Research Center found that while most Americans find few differences between women and men in terms of leadership, women are perceived as more compassionate, empathetic leaders. A recent Forbes article reported on Gallup data that suggests that “in 1953, 66% of Americans preferred a male boss—today the figure is 23%.” The author of the Forbes article, Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic, asks the million-dollar question: 'If women have more potential for leadership, then why are they still the minority group among leaders?' - Jennie Boden via X (formerly Twitter) That same Forbes article also cited studies demonstrating that among the central qualities that “make leaders more effective, women tend to outperform men. For example, humility, self-awareness, self-control, moral sensitivity, social skills, emotional intelligence, kindness, a prosocial and moral orientation are all more likely to be found in women than men.” And that’s what the CEO I was interviewing was demonstrating as she paused and considered her next steps: skills that make leaders more effective, such as humility, self-awareness, self-control, moral sensitivity, social skills, emotional intelligence. Yet women often don’t get much credit for applying their winning leadership characteristics in the boardroom or in executive roles. The author of the Forbes article, Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic, asks the million-dollar question: “If women have more potential for leadership, then why are they still the minority group among leaders?” Charmorro-Premuzic answers his own question by saying that employment choices are made more based on “ style rather than substance , so we pick individuals for leadership on the basis of their confidence rather than competence, charisma rather than humility, and narcissism rather than integrity. … The typical leader is not known for their humility or competence, but arrogance and incompetence.” Now, clearly, this isn’t always true. Some boards value humility more than charisma when recruiting new directors or hiring a CEO. And I’ve met many male CEOs and C-suite executives (within the credit union community and outside of it) who fully embody substance over style. I’m lucky to say that I work for one. And of course, men, too, can demonstrate self-awareness, self-control, emotional intelligence and all of the rest. Yet female leaders with substance, humility and competence still have a harder road to top roles. Chamorro-Premuzic suggests that this has to do with maintaining the status quo. I think he’s right. But even if it’s just a little bit true—this maintenance of the status quo, we all need to work together to shift this paradigm and begin to value even more substance over style and humility more than charisma. -Jennie Boden, via X (formerly Twitter) Fortunately, some significant inroads are being made in the credit union community. CUNA recently reported that 52% of credit union CEOs are female, compared to only 3% of bank CEOs, 5% of top leaders in commercial banks and 6% of chief execs in Fortune 500 companies. And having a substantial representation of women in the top job is not just common among the smallest credit unions anymore: At credit unions with between $1 and $3 billion in assets, more than 14% of the CEOs are female. Great. Good for us. Truly, that’s good for our community. But even if it’s just a little bit true—this maintenance of the status quo—we all need to work together to shift this paradigm and begin to value even more substance over style and humility more than charisma. Because we want our credit unions—as they pursue their mission to be people helping people—to be led by the best possible leaders. Previous Next

< Back Who Needs A Shadow Board? Jennie Boden Jun 25, 2024 Add younger employees and members directly to your C-suite and board to benefit from their skills and knowledge today. I read with interest a Fortune article entitled “ Companies are turning to ‘Shadow Boards’ to keep in touch with the real world .” The author, Lila MacLellan, defines a shadow board as “a committee of typically younger employees who come together within a firm to advise the management team on key topics, such as company culture, product marketing, trends in technology, and sustainability efforts.” She continues, noting “They are not an official board, of course, but their views often supplement those of experienced, much older corporate directors and C-suite leaders. “These advisory groups give some businesses insight into their customers’ tastes and passions.” MacLellan reported that companies like The Body Shop have embraced the trend, and her colleague, Fortune ’s Orianna Rosa Royle, recently found that The Body Shop developed its shadow board, with its members aged 30 and under, “when it became aware of the gap between the company’s youngest workers and its leadership team and directors.” After reading the article, a colleague of mine posed a logical question: “Would shadow boards be a good strategy for credit union?” The question made sense. After all, our own 2023 State of Credit Union Governance recently found that 89% of credit union board members are aged 51 or older, and the average age of most credit union members in North America is 53. But here’s the thing. Creating another board isn’t a ready-made solution to the problems of an aging board and membership. In my mind, it’s simply a workaround. In our work, we’ve found that most credit unions struggle managing the governing boards that they already have. Many credit union boards have failed to evolve their governing roles and responsibilities even as their credit unions have grown around them—from financial institutions with assets of $250 million to those with well over $1 billion; some face challenges with that ever-elusive balance of authority between the board and the CEO and still others are still lingering “in the weeds” too much, not finding their stride in being strategic thinkers. Marie Kondo has ushered in the era of “tidying up,” not “cluttering up.” You must attend to that which you have, and like I said, too many governing boards are already flying under the radar, receiving too little attention. Why add another? Instead, add those younger employees and members directly into your C-suite and onto your governing boards— of course, given that they meet the requisite qualifications . Don’t keep them waiting in the wings until they reach some magical age where you deem them acceptable for full service. Benefit from their skills and knowledge now. A Gen Z member of our team recently sat in on a webinar proclaiming to share insights into the mind of the Gen Z credit union member. It was taught by two individuals in their 50s. In. Their. 50s. To be fair, our team member said they got some things right, but they also got a lot of things wrong. After, we asked her to present to our team what she thought that members of her generation were looking for from their financial institutions. You know what she said? Hope. To learn more about what Gen Zers really think, read this May blog from Quantum Governance’s governance administrator, Lauren Paradise. Previous Next

< Back The Ever-Elusive Millennial Director Michael Daigneault Mar 28, 2017 Tailor your message and medium in recruiting younger board members. An almost universal goal among credit union boards in recruiting new directors is to improve their outreach to millennials. A common expectation is that prospective directors from the generation born from 1981 through 1997 would better understand and represent the needs of younger members. Moreso than previous generations, millennials are deeply immersed in the digital age and intuitively appreciate the new ways commerce and communications have morphed. In addition, younger consumers now spend $600 billion annually; by 2020, their total annual spending is projected to grow to $1.4 trillion annually, representing 30 percent of total retail sales. They are an economic force that must be reckoned with. Challenges in recruiting millennial candidates may be a reason only one in five board members we’ve surveyed report that their credit unions are “very effective” in attracting people with the attributes identified as desirable to stand for election as directors or to serve in other capacities. Our surveys also find that the average age of directors is on the rise, as is the average director tenure on boards. The combination of these factors puts the need for board rejuvenation at many credit unions at a critical tipping point. At the risk of being bearers of additional bad news, board recruitment won’t get easier in the years to come. Basic demographics are a reason that recruitment of younger candidates will become even more difficult. The Pew Research Center reported in April 2016 that the baby boomer generation (1946–1964) has been the largest in the United States to date, with a whopping 76 million births. Gen X (1965–1980) fell far short of that mark by nearly 21 million births. To some extent, then, the recruiting challenge boils down to numbers: There are simply fewer adults in the gen X age group. In addition, those born after 1964, perhaps because they have been submerged in the technological revolution throughout most of their lives, often engage with or give back to their communities in ways very different than previous generations. As Beth Kanter put it in her book The Networked Nonprofit, “Social media use is becoming ingrained in the way that people relate to one another and work together. In particular, social media are shaping the way that young people think, connect, engage, and work together.” Assuming this is the case, how should your credit union overcome the vital governance challenge of attracting future board members? The vast majority of boards will need to work much harder—and differently—to attract those elusive gen Xers and millennials. First and foremost, keep in mind that people in their 20s, 30s and 40s are as committed as older Americans to social good. However, they are inclined to engage in the world in very different ways, and they may be motivated by different factors. Gen Xers and millennials also may “join” in different ways than previous generations. They tend to: want to help others, but often not through a formal institution. support social issues, but less so the organizations affiliated with them. take small preliminary steps before fully committing to a cause. be strongly influenced by the decisions and behaviors of their peers. treat things they value (free time, money, friends, their network, key social missions, etc.) as having relatively equal value in their lives. experience an organization’s work—and offer their own time and talents—without having to be at a particular place. A strong commitment to mission is central to millennials. In your recruitment efforts, talk about your credit union and the cooperative movement as offering economic freedoms and opportunities in ways that will tap into their passion. Go well beyond the business aspects of what they will focus on as board members to emphasize the greater good. Another strategy is to recruit gen X and millennial candidates in multiples. It is hard to be the only younger person in a leadership position. Many young adults are influenced by the decisions and behaviors of their peers, and networking is as important for them as it is for your current directors. Finally, never treat younger candidates and directors as tokens or underestimate their skills. Depending on their age (and yours), they may be as young or as old as your own kids, but in the context of board service, they are your peers. Though their level of experience on a credit union board may be limited, the abilities, experiences and perspectives of gen X and millennial directors may offer extraordinary value in board discussions, planning and deliberations. Remember, millennials stand where you once stood, and your relationship with them should be one of genuine mutual support and commitment to the betterment of your credit union’s members—and your community. Previous Next

< Back More Listening, Less Mansplaining Jennie Boden Mar 22, 2022 In the boardroom and everywhere, it's important to hear all voices. I was recently facilitating a retreat for one of our credit union clients when one of the board members—a male board member—started going toe-to-toe with me on the subject of good governance. Really? I thought to myself. Okay, let’s go . I’ve been a professional in the national not-for-profit sector, focusing on governance, strategy and C-suite management issues, for almost 30 years. And I’ve been working specifically in the area of credit union governance for almost a decade. I’ve probably interviewed more credit union board members than, well, most everyone, and I’m an author of The State of Credit Union Governance studies published by CUES and Quantum Governance. I help assess and review governance data from 50 or 60 credit unions every year … every year . Now, I’m not trying to boast. But I am saying that I know my way around a discussion on credit union governance. Apparently, however, my male client knew more. The term mansplaining is relatively new—it first appeared in a Los Angeles Times piece in 2008—but the concept, of course, is not. The phenomenon of mansplaining is so common that it even now appears in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary and is officially defined as “when a man talks condescendingly to someone (especially a woman) about something he has incomplete knowledge of, with the mistaken assumption that he knows more about it than the person he’s talking to does.” For many women, mansplaining is a frustrating, recurring part of their professional lives, regardless of their position or tenure. While some may be tempted to call mansplaining a mere annoyance—or invoke gendered stereotypes that women are “too sensitive”—the impact of mansplaining behavior goes much deeper than words. In the boardroom, it can be a clear signal that a board member’s expertise is discounted and, according to the Society for Human Resources Management , it can even affect the way board members are nominated and selected for committees or leadership roles. Mansplaining in the Credit Union Boardroom So, why is this particularly relevant among credit unions? We know that credit unions have made significant progress in diversifying their boardrooms, especially as compared to other sectors: 36% of credit union board members are women, whereas women hold only 25% of board seats in Fortune 100 companies, according to a 2018 report by Deloitte and The Alliance for Board Diversity of America. Yet, even at 36%, women are still significantly underrepresented in our credit union boardrooms, which remain male- (and white-) dominated spaces. Much more work remains to be done to improve gender diversity in the boardroom to ensure that boards truly reflect the communities they serve. As most women know, mansplaining happens everywhere: It begins on the playground and carries through to the boardroom. But it doesn’t stop there. In fact, the concept of mansplaining is so universal that in 2016, a union in Sweden temporarily set up a hotline for workers to report incidents of mansplaining and seek counsel from professors, authors and other gender experts on strategies for dealing with this condescending behavior! Even the BBC offers a flow chart to help readers identify mansplaining even when they may not realize it’s happening to them! As we encourage boards to reflect on and improve their own diversity, we know that many credit unions will recruit new directors who don’t necessarily have banking or accounting backgrounds, but who are bright, driven leaders in their fields. They are strategic thinkers who are ready to learn more about what the credit union does. This diversity—both in terms of gender and racial background and also professional expertise—undoubtedly helps advance a credit union’s service to its members not only by ensuring a strong “ear to the ground” but also by deliberately crafting a leadership group that brings diverse experiences, skills and viewpoints all to strengthen the decisions made in the boardroom. Board members with prior sector experience will, naturally, lead in helping their new colleagues develop a greater understanding of the credit union and their responsibilities as board members. In fact, we encourage it. In offering guidance, however, it’s important to remember that your support should be offered in a way that’s conducive to learning and recognizes your new colleagues’ own talents and expertise versus sharing your own knowledge in a way that is condescending, meant to intimidate and discredit. Board members of all tenures and backgrounds should approach their role with what David Smith , an associate professor of practice at the Johns Hopkins Carey Business School, calls “healthy doses of humility and a learning orientation.” Smith also notes that a “prove it again” bias that women often experience “questions their competency by having them continually prove that they have the experience and ability to perform. Most men do not experience this bias as it is usually assumed that they are competent, and they are advanced more often on potential.” While this observation is based on his experience in the U.S. Navy, a credit union boardroom—a similarly male-dominated space—can also encourage these dynamics. How to Move Past Mansplaining How do we recognize and move past the mansplaining we observe in the boardroom? Smith’s research found that what women most appreciated in male mentors and allies was their capacity to listen—which Smith summarizes as “generous listening with an intent to understand and not fix her or fix her problem.” Recognizing the root impulse for this is also important: “As it turns out, many of us as leaders are socialized to be problem-solvers. We listen to a colleague until we discern the problem and then tell them how to fix it.” (Read more on this from Smith in “ More Listening, Less ‘Mansplaining’ Make Men Better Allies to Women Co-Workers .”) In the credit union boardroom, where we find various levels of expertise in accounting or banking, but a steadfast desire to learn, this is equally important for male colleagues to internalize. What are some other key strategies for creating inclusive, welcoming, and respectful spaces? Arin N. Reeves, Ph.D., of the University of Michigan offers a few suggestions : Create and use agendas for meetings to define intentions, decrease interruptions and offer clarity on who should be speaking and why. Adopt a “take turns” approach in meetings; it will provide additional structure around who should be speaking and offer all participants an opportunity to give their perspective. Separate “divergent thinking” (unstructured brainstorming and idea generation) from “convergent thinking” (idea analysis and decision-making) to prevent unwanted interruptions and allow for women’s voices to be included as an active part of the leadership and decision-making process. Speak up! We can all recognize the symptoms of “mansplaining,” and if we can respectfully call out and encourage reflection about this behavior, we can create more respectful, productive and effective board and committee meetings. We all know that there are challenges to recruiting board members. Don’t make the mistake of not fully appreciating or realizing the full potential of your board members by silencing those voices that will help to further the vision and mission of your organization. Previous Next

< Back Does A Divided Vote Make You A Divided Board? Jennie Boden Apr 25, 2023 A divided vote makes you a human board. And it’s what you do afterward that matters most. While most of our clients are credit unions, Quantum Governance also works with a wide variety of other non-profit organizations—foundations, associations and charitable groups, even a small children’s home in India with an annual budget of just $50,000—helping their boards and chief executives level up their governance and strategy. We learn from every organization, adding to the knowledge bank from which we draw for all of our clients. For example, in recent times, a former credit union board chair called to ask if we could help his local school board find its way back to solid ground. This school board, like many others, had experienced wars over masking, vaccines and more that arose during the COVID-19 pandemic. And these experiences had taken their toll. When the school board chair said, “You’re our last hope,” we knew we had to help. And so it was, when in the middle of an offsite with that school board client that a fundamental, universal governance question was asked: “If we have a divided vote, does that mean that we’re a divided board?” It was one of the best, most nuanced governance questions that I’d ever been asked. I share it with you now, my credit union colleagues who serve on the board, because I believe you do everything you can to elude divided votes. I think you loathe divided votes. I think you fear divided votes. I’ve even been told that you refrain from putting what you even think might become a divided vote on your meeting agendas. But have no fear. I’ll share with you the same answer that I gave my school board client in the hope that it will benefit you: “Divided votes do not mean that you’re a divided board. They mean that you’re a human board. They mean that you’re a board made of living, breathing people with different perspectives and different thoughts.” I continued, “Divided votes mean that you feel comfortable enough as a board to have robust conversations and share compelling and, yes, contrary points of view and to support them with your votes.” “It’s what happens after the vote that determines whether you are a divided board,” I said. “Do you speak with one voice?” I asked. “Or do you leave the boardroom still advocating strongly for your position to anyone and everyone who will listen? Or are you respectful of the will of the whole as your board service demands you to be?” While I don’t wish upon any board the contention and divisiveness that our school board client has faced in recent years, I do hope every board will have the courage to wade deeply into robust conversations, the strength to tolerate divided votes, and the respect, in the end, to support the will of the whole. Previous Next

< Back Is Your Organizational Success An Accident? Gisele Manole & Jennie Boden Nov 22, 2022 New study suggests where to look for the answer. We’ve been studying credit union governance for more than a decade now and amassed mountains of data on credit unions of all asset sizes and from all over North America. Perhaps the most frequently asked question we hear is some variation of, “How do we know when we’re getting it right? Our assets are increasing, and our membership is growing so we must be governing ourselves well. Right?” As we prepare to publish The State of Credit Union Governance, 2023 Report, we looked closely at the data to see if it was clear to us what the key indicators were that a credit union was governing itself well—that as a credit union’s assets and membership grew, the organization’s governance practices were evolving too, both in terms of meeting changing regulations and best practices. What we learned focused our attention on four things: 1) board members meeting their roles and responsibilities; 2) members of the credit union’s governing system (board and supervisory/audit committee members and senior leadership) meeting high accountability measures; 3) strong levels of volunteer engagement; and 4) building and maintaining a leadership culture of trust. We found there is a significant positive correlation among each of these four areas of governance—meaning that if a respondent reports that their credit union is highly effective in one of the governing elements, they generally report that they are highly effective in the other three elements, too. Therefore, the four elements—accountability, board member roles and responsibilities, engagement and trust—are inextricably linked and together provide tremendous insight into the strength of your credit union’s governance. Figure 1: The Four Elements of Good Governance These findings identify the four elements as likely keys to unlocking the secret to good governance and creating a high-functioning board. In addition to pinpointing areas of focus, our findings suggest that actions to improve the effectiveness of one of the four elements may lead to improved effectiveness in the other three elements. So, as we begin to more succinctly answer the question, “How do we know when we’re getting it right?” we can look to these four areas of governance for some indication of whether your credit union’s board and executive leadership are “getting it right” or not, and whether further study is necessary to identify which element of your governance needs your focus to ensure the continued success of your vision and mission. Previous Next

< Back Get Your House in Order—Now, If Need Be Michael Daigneault and Jennie Boden Aug 30, 2018 There is no ‘wrong’ time to deal with fundamental governance issues. We read with interest a recent article about governance that discussed the importance of boards not addressing their governance issues “in the wrong places at the wrong times.” The authors suggested that many times boards discuss governance issues during precious time in sessions dedicated for other important work—such as strategic planning. They posit that this is distracting and a poor use of time for those taking part and to the goals of the session. They have a point. On one hand, the limited time a board spends together should be treasured– and treated as a resource to be judiciously and appropriately allocated. Strategic planning discussions with management need to happen and are a vital aspect of a board’s role. But on the other hand, if your credit union’s governance challenges are so real that they are clouding your ability to strategize or otherwise effectively lead, there may not be a “wrong” time to deal with them. If governance discussions arise in the context of other discussions, unresolved issues may exist that need to be effectively dealt with ASAP so that governance differences or issues don’t unduly interfere with how you successfully execute your governance roles and responsibilities—strategic planning included! A Need for Conversations on Governance Our recent study, The State of Credit Union Governance, 2018, Five Data-Driven Recommendations for Future Success , found evidence that a good number of credit unions are struggling with governance issues. Of our six key findings , two help tell the story of when to discuss governance: 1. Board members and CEOs frequently differ on their perceptions of governance, with board members and CEOs differing on 84 percent of the survey’s key questions, agreeing on only 16 percent of them (with the exception of the supervisory committee survey section, where more agreement was found). 2. CEOs and senior staff perceive lower levels of trust, with just 27 percent of senior staff and 25 percent of CEOs reporting that their boards were very effective at building a leadership culture of trust, compared to 53 percent of supervisory committee members and 44 percent of board members. We see evidence of these challenges and more in our work with credit unions. Time and time again, we’ll incorporate a strategic and governance assessment and a planning session into one engagement. After all, what could be more strategic than getting your governance house in order? At a recent strategic planning session, a client spent some time in a facilitated executive session, building trust between the board and the CEO. From our point of view, this discussion was probably one of the most important, strategic steps this credit union could take. More and more credit unions are opting to include a strategic goal on governance in their strategic plans. This is not to suggest that you should completely eclipse your normal agendas for all things governance. The article’s authors made some relevant points, and we agree wholeheartedly with most of their recommendations: Dedicated time for governance training is a must. Focus on board member education and governance issues—and to this we would add strategic matters—at every board meeting. Give permission to each other (not just to the CEO or senior staff) to check each other (appropriately) when boundaries are crossed. And as already mentioned, we could support the idea that governance issues not take over every meeting unless the governance issue is so fundamental (i.e., a loss of trust between the board and the CEO; a lack of engagement among board members; critical disagreement on roles and responsibilities, etc.) that it would derail all other discussions or progress. If this is the case, you must have the courage to change course. Agendas are important. Timelines, yes, are meant to be kept. But, remember the saying, “culture will eat strategy for breakfast,” and it’s true. Get your governance house in order. Now’s the right time to do so! Previous Next