5003 Policy Governance for Church Boards: Panel Presentation
Pacific Central District

Presenters:

• The Rev. Marge Keip, Accredited Interim Minister and Policy Governance Consultant, co-manager of UUA Policy Governance listserv, policygovernance-l, mkeip@uuma.org
• Greg Meyer, Executive Director, First Unitarian Universalist Society, San Francisco, gmeyer@uusf.org
• Louise Livesay, Board Member, Unity Church-Unitarian, St. Paul, Minnesota, louiselivesay@yahoo.com
• Janet Tharp, Executive Director, First Unitarian Church of Dallas, Texas, jtharp@dallasuu.org
• The Rev. Edward Frost, Senior Minister, Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Atlanta, eagle37@attbi.com
• Kathy Converse, President, Florida District, kathyconverse@earthlink.net
• Gretchen Dorn, past Board Member, Unity Church-Unitarian, St. Paul, Minnesota, co-manager of UUA Policy Governance listserv, policygovernance-l, dorns@attbi.com

Gretchen Dorn, co-manager of the UUA Policy Governance listserv and member of Unity Church-Unitarian in St. Paul, Minnesota, began by saying that two years ago, in the workshop on policy governance, they began with a skit. The presenters pretended to be at a board meeting of All Souls Congregation of Deluge Falls, a congregation whose logo was water falling over into an abyss. As this meeting began, the "board chair" came with a lengthy agenda, and then others tried to add more items, and a committee appeared asking to be added. Then they debated the priority and relative placement of the items, and whether or not they could meet for longer than three hours. The surprise was that although the presenters thought they were presenting a caricature of board meetings, others in the audience obviously thought this was an example of the Carver model of policy governance, and entered into the discussion! The presenters good-heartedly ended the drama, and went on with the workshop.

Marge Keip, a graduate of the Carver Academy, then presented a summary of policy governance. This system was designed by John Carver to aid non-profit boards, and although congregations are non-profit organizations, there are some differences that complicate the process for UUs. Under the policy government model, first one identifies a body of people with a common interest who are the stakeholders, or owners, in Carver’s language. For congregations, that is generally the membership, and they are the ones who elect the board. The job of the board is to govern on behalf of the people not seated at the table, and to articulate the vision of why the church exists. The board identifies the vision in "ends" policies, which are then accomplished through the programs of the church by the staff, paid and volunteer. The role of the board is to govern, while the role of the staff is to administer.

Flowing out of the work of the board, there are also some essential responsibilities. While discussion within the meetings should incorporate a variety of views, once the board has come to decisions or conclusions, the board should speak with one voice. As well, it has the responsibility to state their intentions clearly, and produce words that describe their vision and ends policies. The ends policies state what good is being produced, for which people, at what cost, taking into mind not just financial matters but also stewardship of staff and volunteer resources as well as other opportunities lost by choosing these particular ends. Keip encouraged boards to begin with their congregation’s vision statement as they seek to determine their ends. Ends policies prescribe the vision, and should be stated in positive and clear terms.

Means policies circumscribe the vision, especially those policies dealing with executive limitations. These latter policies restrict what the executive leader can do, and are always phrased in negative language. These policies help the executive know the limits placed on the means, for while the board is in charge of the ends policies, the executive or executive team is charged with carrying out this work. The board is thus left to govern and deal with big issues, while the executive carries out or oversees the programming.

Carver suggests one executive (chief of staff), although many UU congregations are adopting teams to carry out this function. When this is the case, the board may choose to adopt policies requiring the executive team to also speak with one voice (as done at Unity Church in St. Paul, Minnesota.). Provisions are made that if the executive makes a decision contrary to the board’s liking, but is within a reasonable interpretation of the policy, that there will not be any punishment. Rather, it will be the responsibility of the board to rework the policy decision to make a clearer policy than before.

Keip stated that the policy governance model may not work well for family or pastoral size congregations, but for any congregation seeking to move into a program or larger style of congregation, this model can work well.

Keip asked the panel about the constitution of the executive position. Meyer serves on an executive team with the congregation’s two ministers, while Frost acts as the sole executive in his congregation. The Florida District has the district executive act as the executive, while the congregation in St. Paul has a team approach. For all, the primary goal is to ensure that there are healthy boundaries, competency and high expectations, because the executive, whether team or solo, is where accountability resides. Without trust, the system also will not work well. When there is a board member on the team, the boundaries between governance and administration blur, and so this is not recommended. The executive is responsible for overseeing all other staff, paid and volunteer, and for supplying the board with adequate and necessary reporting on how the articulated ends policies are being fulfilled.

Within the policy governance models, congregations face the same challenges about how to communicate well with the membership, both sharing information and receiving input. This can be done by a variety of means, including newsletter and email communications, forums, congregational meetings, presentations, and through other creative means.

Just like one cannot be a little pregnant, one cannot be doing policy governance by picking and choosing the aspects that they desire. To be effective, the system must be supported by all of the various components of the policy governance model. The less clear boundaries are, the more ineffective this model will be. Clarity of roles, clear lines of authority, and a well articulated vision all support and are supported by our UU principles. This system is not about power, but rather is about connections and communications. It is a way to energize and empower people by providing them the support and trust necessary to do the work, and fosters spiritual growth through being responsible to each other in relationships.

• Workshop handouts are available on InterConnections site: www.uua.org/interconnections/policy/;
• additional web resources: www.carvergovernance.com;
• www.josseybass.com for CarverGuide series, videotapes, audiotapes, and the bimonthly newsletter

Various print resources available: Boards That Make a Difference: A New Design for Leadership in Nonprofit and Public Organizations, John Carver (Jossey-Bass, 1990, 2nd edition, 1997); Reinventing Your Board: A Step-by-Step Guide to Implementing Policy Governance, John Carver and Miriam Mayhew Carver (Jossey-Bass, 1997); The Policy Governance Fieldbook: Practical Lessons, Tips and Tools from the Experience of Real-World Boards, Caroline Oliver, ed., (Jossey-Bass, 1999)

Reporter Lisa Presley, Editor Jone Johnson Lewis

General Assembly 2002 · Program Grid 2002 · General Assembly Home