One Minute Governance

Every Wednesday, OMG will share an audio version of a definition from the Ground-Up Governance platform. 

Every organization does complicated stuff that’s hard for the rest of us to understand. Not to mention, every organization has to somehow measure whether it’s doing that complicated stuff well or not, which is even more complicated. Add on top of that the fact that every organization’s complicated stuff affects groups and individuals inside and outside the organization in complicated ways. It’s a lot. It wouldn’t be very good if our CEO didn’t understand how our complex operations worked. It wouldn’t be good if none of the board members understood, either. But, let’s say we have a company that makes robots that perform brain surgery. Do you need your CEO to be technically skilled at surgery AND robotics AND software development in addition to all the regular CEO stuff like managing people and projects and financial oversight etc. etc.? What about the board? How many surgeons do you need on a ten-person board? Is it ten? Zero? How many robotics specialists? Accountants? Lawyers? If it’s zero, how do we communicate the important surgical stuff to them in a way that they will understand and feel confident being accountable for? If it’s all ten, where do we find these people who have technical expertise across so many different – and divergent – factors? Don’t forget that you can always supplement with consultants and stuff. No matter what path you choose, there are trade-offs that affect decision-making conditions.

I find it really interesting, strange even, that some people HATE sci-fi but LOVE fantasy, or vice versa. And lots of other people hate or love both. All this despite the fact that they are simply styles of worlds in which stories are set. I mean a magical hero *should* be just as compelling whether they’re flying a spaceship or a dragon, right? But that’s not how things work. Style matters. Bland and factual or hilarious and abstract? Long and descriptive or pithy and metaphorical? The fact is that there’s no perfect balance that will engage and inspire everyone. And that’s really the point I’m trying to make here. Some people in the room will be inspired by wizards, and others by Jedi, and there may be no middle ground. This is pretty closely tied to the information medium piece in episode 152. Even though the idea of learning styles like “visual learners” has been debunked, that doesn’t mean that different ways of presenting information won’t inspire different people in different ways. Remember in episode 129 when I said Thing Explainer by Randall Munroe might be the best management book ever? What I like about it isn’t just that it’s got really cool illustrations and simple language (although that’s a HUGE part of it). I also like that he takes very serious and complicated stuff and isn’t afraid to make it a bit silly. The silliness makes it more accessible to me. For others, it might be a turnoff, maybe because it feels patronizing. For me, though, it’s the Goldilocks zone – just right. I learn a lot and have fun at the same time. It’s too much to expect that the people sharing information with your board will be gifted storytellers, but I don’t think it’s unreasonable to step back and ask what the current style or vibe is, and whether trying something a little bit different might help to engage people’s attention and imagination.

Every Wednesday, OMG will share an audio version of a definition from the Ground-Up Governance platform. 

Remember that wish list from last episode about boards wanting information that’s shorter, more detailed, and sooner? What are they *really* asking for? They just want to be able to come to the table knowing as much useful stuff as possible. That sounds pretty reasonable, right? Funny thing about the content of board pre-reads is that a lot of it is stuff that nobody needs to know or wants to talk about. Sometimes that’s because of regulations – meaning the content *has* to be there, even if it’s useless. But sometimes it’s something less defensible, like 40 years ago some director asked for a report on usage stats for VHS vs. Betamax and for some reason management still puts time into crafting that report before every board meeting just. because. we’ve. always. done. it. that. way. So you can imagine why having a bunch of useless information in the pre-reads might be a problem. But it’s not just about editing. We can also think about the balance between reporting on the past and asking questions about the future. We can think about the balance between reporting facts and sharing opinions or forecasts. We can think about the balance between data dumps and pithy summaries. But you can be sure about one thing, every decision about what to include or exclude *will* affect directors’ ability to come to the table ready to engage.

I sometimes remind senior executives that their board’s information wish list is that they want it shorter, more detailed, and sooner. And yeah, sometimes those wishes are mutually exclusive. We’ve all heard the famous Mark Twain quote: “sorry for the long letter – I didn’t have time to write a short one.” And it’s true: creating something brief that also has substance takes time and practice…I should know. But I also think we tend to over-index on the timing piece. Think about it: your board doesn’t need all of the material at the exact same time. It’s not like they’ll consume every part of it simultaneously. It makes sense to have deadlines for getting critical material to your board to make sure they have time to actually consume and understand it. Also to get their thoughts and feelings and questions sorted before they come to a meeting. But it’s also not like they will somehow refuse to read, or watch, or listen to something just because it comes through a week earlier or two days later than the rest of their pre-work. In fact, sometimes we get brilliant last minute ideas or urgent information that we just *have* to share at the 11th hour. It’s cool – don’t worry about it. But for the rest of the information you’re sharing with your board I think it’s worth wondering how you can time the dissemination in ways that might make their lives easier, or might make them more likely to engage in future-oriented thinking. If you provide a written brief on Monday, could it help to follow up on Friday with a voice memo or podcast that sheds additional light on the topic? Could it help to provide weekly updates by video in between board meetings to keep the juices flowing before the main packet goes out? Different approaches will work in different circumstances, but you can start by just trying new stuff!

Every Wednesday, OMG will share an audio version of a definition from the Ground-Up Governance platform. 

Let’s say you’ve decided to start a podcast to include as part of your board pre-work. You’ve got a lot of decisions to make. Will it be scripted or spontaneous? Will it be one voice – maybe your CEO – or many, like the entire executive team? Will it be short, pithy, and brilliant like OMG, or long, boring and arduous like other podcasts (sorry). Maybe it will be an interview format. Maybe those interviews will be featured exactly as they happened for completeness, or maybe they will be edited to pick out the juiciest bits with some voiceover added for emphasis. And so on, basically to infinity. Pick a medium and the formatting choices are kinda endless, from font and font size, to length, to punctuation styles, to pull quotes. Some of the formatting might be intended to keep the consumer’s attention, and some might be intended to just add fun flair. Some might be intended to make sure specific pieces of information get seen…and retained. You might use one format for communicating facts and another for commentary. What I hope is obvious, though, is that you have *a lot* of control over formatting. I might even argue that formatting can serve you really well, but that if you don’t put much thought into it, it’s probably serving you poorly. So…let’s be intentional about it, shall we?

There’s a quote I really like from an article called The Elements of Good Judgment by Sir Andrew Likierman in HBR back in January 2020. Also the article has a beautiful image at the top of what looks like a great gray owl with a super poofy face. Anyway, the quote reads: “As a director of a large listed company, I would get up to a million words to read ahead of a big meeting. Confronted with such a deluge, it’s tempting to skim and to remember only the material that confirms our beliefs. That’s why smart leaders demand quality rather than quantity in what gets to them.” There’s a lot about this quote that I like, but I also see an opportunity missed. It’s just taken as granted that board pre-reads will be, well, pre-READS. Sure, those pre-reads are usually no longer literal physical binders – intimidatingly huge ones, at that – but don’t you find it a bit strange that Mr. Likierman’s focus is only on the amount of information, and not the medium? I mean, I think we can confidently say that people like consuming information through all kinds of media, right? You’re listening to a podcast right now, for instance. Later, you might stream a video on Netflix or Disney or YouTube, or poke through Twitter or Instagram or TikTok. Maybe your team at work does most of its interaction through Slack instead of email or phone or text. Maybe you like looking at your calendar on your desktop computer more than on your phone. Maybe you’re reading the transcript of this podcast instead of listening to it. Anyway, the medium matters. Each of the media I’ve mentioned in this episode *COULD* be an element of your board packet. And all of them are better than a million words in PDF format.

Every Wednesday, OMG will share an audio version of a definition from the Ground-Up Governance platform.