Reluctant Leaders
Last night I heard Sybrina Fulton, mother of Trayvon Martin, talk about her heartbreaking journey to now, essentially leading a movement. The auditorium at the Pittsburgh Theological Seminary was packed with two rows deep of people standing in the back.
Ms. Fulton told us about how average her life was - she had a job, a house, a car and felt “happy 95%” of the time - until her unarmed 17-year-old son was shot and killed. That 95% being happy flipped to 95% being sad, outraged and angry. She told us about being in New York and seeing hundreds of people wearing red hoodies in honor of her son and was shocked that these strangers cared. Though still hurting, she told us after losing her son, she feels it launched her purpose.
The officer who killed Trayvon was acquitted of 2nd degree murder.
After a period of time in which she reflected and prayed, Sybrina realized that she had the ability to influence others to open their eyes to injustice and to honor Trayvon. Over the past 7 years since Trayvon’s death, Sybrina Fulton has established a foundation in her son’s name and holds “Circles of Mothers” groups internationally for mothers who have lost a child from gun violence. She holds Peace Walks each year on Trayvon’s birthday and regularly speaks to groups across the nation. She told us she doesn’t have any “fancy training” but is simply an ordinary mom who wants to make a difference.
Sybina Fulton is an example of an everyday leader who is influencing many of us to take action against injustice. Her authenticity, passion, anger and ability to connect to us everyday folks are the qualities that propel this important movement. She said, ”We have to fight now! Don’t wait until it hits your door. Don’t wait until it’s someone you know. Fight now.”
I was moved and inspired by this leader - reinforcing my belief that there are people everywhere who are leaders.
February 2019
“Cover” the Executive Director
Last week I was approached by a member of the board of directors of a fairly well-known non-profit agency in Pittsburgh to be a possible candidate to join their Board. I was flattered and humbled to be considered. In our conversation about the organization, its vision for the future and expectations of board members, the officer of the board who was meeting with me said, ”One of the most important jobs we have is to watch the Executive Director, to make sure she is doing what she’s suppose to do.” I pressed him for what he meant and he said, “She’s good at some things and bad at others and we need to call her to task when she fails.”
Yikes!! Watch the ED for her slip ups?! Call her to task?!
This is not my idea of the relationship between a board and the Executive Director. Something strange has happened over recent years with a lot of fear-mongering about how boards of directors could be sued for just about anything since the buck stops with them, and some boards believe their role is to supervise “from the top down” and tell the Executive Director what to do. In a sense some of that is true, but not to the extent that it eclipses the real role of a board, that is, to protect, promote and advance the mission and vision of the agency. And by the way, most nonprofits have directors and officers insurance and other liability insurance that protect members of the board from mishaps.
At a moral leadership conference a couple of years ago, sponsored by the Heinz Endowments, an out–of-town speaker (sorry, I forget her name) talked about the moral relationship between a board of directors and the Executive Director and she used the phrase, “The board needs to cover the Executive Director”. I thought this wording was very interesting.
Basically, what I think she meant, and the way I interpreted it, is that the role of the board is to assist the ED as they both carry out the vision of the organization and where the ED feels free to lean on the board for help and the board understands that the ED may be weaker in certain areas and stronger in others. Their role is to make sure those weaknesses are “sured up “ by additional staff, training for the ED and/or assistance from the board. The board’s role is not one of harshly judging the ED, telling him what to do, nor catching her “slipping up”.
The board is there to make sure the mission and vision of the organization is carried out via the Executive Director and his staff. That’s their primary responsibility - being on the same team as the ED, understanding that they’re in this together, that no one in the organization is above another, despite role definitions. Yes, a board can hire and fire an ED and yes, the buck does stop with the board. If the relationship between the Executive Director and the board of directors is “questionable” or lacking trust and respect, the agency will suffer greatly. If you can’t embrace the culture of the organization or the board, don’t agree with their approach or, for what ever reason, don’t like or respect the ED, don’t be a member of that board.
I know of boards that essentially do nothing, in fact don’t even meet, and I know of boards that put in the meeting time and that’s it. I, too, know of boards that have a culture of mutual admiration and respect between the Executive Director and the board and have regular and open communications and I know how productive and powerful that relationship can be for an organization to thrive.
Needless to say, I withdrew my candidacy from consideration for membership on that non-profit’s board of directors.