How Nonprofit Boards Can Recruit Great Trustees

Nonprofit boards often struggle to recruit ideal candidates. In its introduction to its set of powerful recruitment tools, Board Source notes, “More than half—58 percent—of nonprofit leaders report that it is difficult to recruit new members” and “Only 73 percent of chief executives state that they have the right board members to effectively govern their organizations.” At a time when nonprofit boards are challenged to adapt to rapidly changing trends and policies, these are troubling statistics. They mean that many organizations are ill-equipped to meet the needs of the communities they serve.

Boards struggling with recruitment essentially have two choices: they can ignore recruitment issues, hoping that in time things magically improve, or they commit to addressing them. The first choice ensures that the organization will stagnate and risks negligence; the second increases the likelihood that it will thrive.

Thankfully, most nonprofit boards have a mechanism in place to address recruitment challenges: the board’s governance committee. Among other activities, the governance committee develops recruitment matrices and pipelines of potential directors. It also envisions ideal board compositions, monitors trends and best practices, and devises solutions for overcoming current membership limitations. Most importantly, the governance committee is categorically empowered to have substantive conversations about what is and isn’t working when it comes to board recruitment.

Organizations like BoardSource and the Council of Nonprofits provide a wealth of free and valuable information about board member roles, responsibilities, and recruitment planning. Any governance committee struggling with board recruitment is well advised to start with a review of materials available to them here and here. Governance committees are also well-advised to consider the two-pronged approach outlined below.

First, the governance committee can look inward and ask itself a series of tough but important questions, including: What does an ideal board for our organization look like, and why? In what ways are we advancing or not advancing significant recruitment work, and why? What conversations do we need to be having, and why? What resources do our trustees need, and why? Are we doing all that we can to support a high-performing board culture, such as providing ongoing trainings and having consistent conversations with trustees about their participation? Why or why not?

These types of conversations—challenging, vision-oriented, generative—are key elements of successful recruitment. Having them ensures that, over time, governance committees can create precisely the kinds of board cultures that will be most attractive to highly desirable candidates.

These conversations may reveal that the governance committee has not implemented essential norms. Potential high-performing trustees are likely to insist on certain norms as a pre-condition of their service, including a clearly written expectations document and new board member training. Governance committees that do not have these norms will find that their recruitment efforts are more challenging than they need be.

The governance committee might recognize that it is a microcosm of the board at large, and see itself as a model for other committees. Some of the conversations that it will need to have as it considers board member composition may be uncomfortable, because they entail making clear statements about where the board needs to go, but by being willing to have candid, high-level discussions, the committee can inspire leadership throughout the board.

Second, the governance committee can look outward and completely commit to recruiting highly desirable trustees. If the governance committee has identified a set of candidates who would meet current or projected needs, defined timetables and goals must drive outreach to those candidates.

As part of their recruitment efforts, governance committees are also advised to take a long, hard look at why highly desirable candidates might decline offers to serve. Are there patterns to the reasons given? If so, what implications does this have for the governance committee’s recruitment efforts? Declines from highly desirable candidates can provide valuable feedback, allowing the governance committee to make effective changes and to target their work more precisely.

Governance committees will want to think carefully before recommending full board membership for any candidates who does not meet requirements outlined in expectations documents or areas of need identified in board matrices. If, for example, the governance committee has not identified a current need for financial expertise, it must justify why it is considering a potential candidate whose expertise is primarily financial. Spoiler alert: simply putting someone—anyone—on the board because they’re a warm body is not sufficient justification for board membership. Moreover, by making tough choices, by carefully considering recruitment trade-offs and options, the governance committee flexes decision-making muscle and fulfills core responsibilities.

Both approaches—looking inward and looking outward—necessitate diligence, patience, and thoughtfulness. Prioritizing the recruitment of highly desirable trustees may be difficult, especially in the short-term, because it may entail cultural change on the board and the governance committee, but at the very least it will be informative. In working through the difficulties, governance committees can rest assured that they have every incentive to recruit highly desirable trustees. A vision and focus for how their recruitment will positively impact the board will energize and sustain the governance committee as it moves forward.

The more governance committees do what they are explicitly empowered to do, the stronger and more effective their boards will be. In turn, governance committees may happily discover that fully functioning boards of highly desirable trustees can be their own best advertising.

Michael Walter writes about nonprofit leadership. He is Manager, Special Projects & Special Assistant to the Executive Director at Encore Community Services, where he works with senior leadership on strategy, governance, and special initiatives.