Effective Directors : Learning the Skills of Persuasion and Advocacy
Author:
Stephen Schneider
One of the many stumbling blocks facing successful managers on entering the boardroom is how they handle the transition itself. The very characteristics that made an individual successful in an operational role may derail them when they reach the board.
A manager who has succeeded at the operational level will have employed command and control skills. Successful managers use positional power to get things done. For a board director, this is no longer appropriate: what is required is the effective use of personal power - the ability to influence others by reasoned argument and persuasion.
One of our clients, a newly-appointed marketing director aged 36, could not understand why his early contribution had not been well received by his board colleagues. He had taken time to prepare for his first meeting, as making a strong impression was important to him.
He soon realised that by taking his command and control tactics into the boardroom he had ensured that his approach would jar. His insistence on closing down the options, removing uncertainty and ambiguity, reaching a conclusion quickly and moving forward ran counter to what was expected of him in his new role.
The chairman repeatedly interrupted his meticulously planned presentation with: "No, no, no. Don't rush to a conclusion. All we want you to do is put forward your position on the issue. Let others probe and challenge your thinking."
What was important to the board was that by a process of challenge and debate it would eventually attain a collective view of the best way forward. The manager felt patronised, confused and perplexed at getting his footwork so wrong.
Persuasion, not status
Boardroom effectiveness flows from a member's powers of persuasion by the exercise of advocacy skills. Status counts for nothing in the boardroom but argument and reason will have powerful results. Directors now carry onerous responsibilities - and indeed liabilities - so the commitment to a course of action by the board only comes from consensus about its suitability and acceptance of any likely consequences.
Such conviction will be gained only after a campaign of reasoned argument by the individual putting forward an idea or approach. That will be successful only if the individual can present the best case, balancing the upsides and the downsides, the opportunities and the risks, and convince the board that the suggested way forward is the most appropriate.
Focus on strategy, not operational issues
Strategy is the process of positioning an organisation for future advantage. It requires deep understanding of internal and external factors. Leadership is the weapon that provides strategic impact. It demands the articulation of an argument so compelling that other people see its merit and are prepared to act on it. A retreat into the comfort zone of management, by exerting influence in a narrow area by a vested authority, is an abdication of leadership.
As for making the transition to becoming an effective leader for those entering the boardroom for the first time, the director must learn new types of behaviour, which cannot necessarily be learned at business school. Indeed, some would argue that leadership cannot be taught at all. Although few boards offer any training, most are quick to point out the immediate rewards of having new directors who can make effective early contributions.
Another critical issue for fresh boardroom players concerns the confusion about what they can and cannot comment upon in the boardroom. There is a natural tendency among new board members - and indeed even among more experienced directors - to see their role as "functional heroes" rather than "trustees of the business". Thus the board is treated as an operational team, addressing operational issues rather than "matters of state". This is a common mistake and may reduce boardroom effectiveness.
Members of the board should try to become familiar with all aspects of the business and should aspire to be as capable of advocating issues outside their own functional portfolio as within it. New appointees must learn to resist pursuing individual or narrow functional interests and must start to think in terms of collective responsibilities and detached objectivity.
The role of board director is to exercise judgment in areas outside his or her area or direct responsibility. The person who is on "home turf" regarding a particular issue is there to give the facts, paint in the background and present the decision to be made - but it is for the board collectively to decide. As such, strategic perspectives are more relevant in the boardroom than the command of operational detail.
At the end of the day, the individual has to master the art of persuading the board. Ultimately - and this is in stark contrast to the relationship between manager and subordinate - it is the board that decides. The new game for the incoming director to master is all about advocacy skills and personal powers of persuasion, much as a barrister needs when seeking to convince a court. It is all about providing evidence, reaching conclusions and making recommendations - and not necessarily in that order. And, of course, a little personal charisma will certainly help.
Stephen Schneider is Managing Director of CPS, a London-based executive mentoring and boardroom development company.