Appointed Boards
Appointed Boards. It sounds so appropriate and reasonable on the surface.
The rationale goes like this: the entity(ies) investing the cash to power a community’s Destination Marketing Organization should have the right to specify the individuals that will sit on their Board of Directors. After all, we hear elected officials so often say, “it’s our money. You want it? We get to appoint the Board to ‘watch over’ the expenditures of these funds. It is our duty to protect the interests of the taxpayers.”
Except, it rarely works out well.
Here’s why Appointed Boards are a bad idea….
In our almost 30 years of working with DMOs, I can count on one hand with fingers to spare the number of Appointed Boards that actually could be depended upon to get stuff done. Appointed Boards are rarely engaged. Even when the appointers follow their own rules and name industry-related individuals to Board seats, there is a decided lack of commitment and passion to the organization. And, achieving quorum among an appointed Board is always more challenging than with a Board made up of people who actually want to be there.
Appointed Board Members rarely talk to their Appointers. The whole point of an appointed Board (past the tired “watchdog” saw) is that the appointed are expected to have a strong and effective line of communication with the appointer. And yet, when we work with Appointed Boards, 9 times out of 10, there is little more than an annual conversation between the two. And, I’m being kind here as I’ve had some Appointed Board members tell me they never converse with their appointer. One actually said to me, “I have no idea why I’m on this Board.”
One of the most highly publicized DMO embezzlement cases of the 2000s occurred under the decidedly unwatchful eye of an appointed Board. So much for the concept that government appointees are better at preventing such shenanigans from occurring than an organically grown Board.
And beyond the simple fact that organically grown Boards are typically more representative of the community they serve, more influential in moving initiatives forward and more willing to engage on behalf of the DMO, there’s this: What happens when an Appointed Board member becomes a distraction, causing meetings to de-evolve? What happens if they begin utilizing information about the organization to actively work to derail its funding or an initiative it has been pursuing for years (or both)?
One of the hallmarks of most Non-Profit bylaws is a section that pertains to the removal of Board members for actions injurious to the organization. If there was a cancer within your company, you’d remove it for the good of your clients and employees. Why is a non-profit any different…especially one as critical to the health and vibrancy of a community as a DMO? And yet, it’s next to impossible to remove an Appointed Board member if the Appointer refuses to take action. Oh, the Board could eject the rogue…but what will the Appointer do in retaliation?
Now, there are some places where Board composition is dictated by State Law (I’m looking at you, parts of Indiana). And, the statutes state that there will be, for instance, 9 members, appointed by the City and the County. And, changing State Statutes could open up a Pandora’s box that could wind up jeopardizing future revenue streams. I get it. But limiting a DMO Board to 9 individuals inadvertently and unintentionally conspires against the diversity of voices we should crave. There is simply no way that a 9 member Board can effectively represent all the sectors of the hospitality industry, the neighborhoods and geography of a destination, and ethnic, gender, age and handicapped interests…shall I go on?
In my first book, Destination Leadership for Boards, I promoted a Board of 18 (with only two appointments) as ideal. For the second book, Destination Leadership, I was persuaded to pare that to 15. In the next book (spoiler alert), I’ll likely return to 18. There’s just no other way to get the right people around the table on behalf of our communities.
I know that our society is too polarized and control has never been a more powerful elixir for electeds…but can’t we attempt to do the right thing and get the right people around the table? Can’t we agree that Appointed Boards pale in comparison to a well designed contract for services to satisfy the “watchdog” instinct that is so pervasive in the need by some to have Appointed Boards?
Nobody trusts government and government trusts nobody. Isn’t it time to put down the pick axes and torches and do what’s right for our communities?
Appointed Boards rarely work. There…I’ve said it.
Now let’s find a better path forward.
Til Next Time,
Bill
