Tag Archive for: #boardengagement

Posts

The Board That Governs Generously (And Why That’s Not a Compliment)

/0 Comments/in /by

by That One Consultant You Hired and Then Ignored

There is a type of credit union board that every CEO secretly dreams about.

They show up prepared. They ask reasonable questions. They approve the budget without drama, accept the strategic plan with enthusiasm, and conclude every board meeting with a warm round of applause for management’s hard work. They are supportive. They are collegial. They finish on time, which means the CEO can make their dinner reservation, and the board chair can get home before the game starts.

They are also, in the truest sense of the phrase, asleep at the wheel — and the wheel is pointed at the members’ assets.

Welcome to the board that governs generously: the well-meaning, deeply pleasant governance failure that nobody talks about because it doesn’t yell, doesn’t micromanage, and has never once asked about the break room chairs. It just quietly fails the members it was elected to protect, with excellent manners, a unanimous vote, and a really nice gift basket for the outgoing director.

The Other Ditch

Most governance conversations focus on boards that do too much — the ones that interrogate invoices, re-litigate settled decisions, and treat every board meeting like a congressional subcommittee hearing with worse lighting and no C-SPAN coverage. We wrote about that board. That board has problems.

But there is a ditch on the other side of the road, and it is considerably easier to drive into, because the road into it is smooth, well-lit, and everyone on the bus is smiling.

The board that governs generously has convinced itself that support and accountability are the same thing. They are not. Support is what you give a CEO who is making good decisions. Accountability is what you give a CEO who needs to make better ones. Conflating the two doesn’t make you a good board. It makes you a very expensive cheerleading squad with voting rights and a fiduciary duty you’ve quietly decided not to exercise.

The cheerleading squad, for the record, is not what the members had in mind when they cast their ballots.

How It Happens (A Tragedy in Four Acts)

Nobody sets out to build a board that nods enthusiastically at everything. It develops gradually, through a series of individually reasonable decisions that accumulate into a collectively catastrophic posture.

Act One: A CEO who is genuinely talented arrives. The board, correctly recognizing this, gives them room. Room is good. Room is appropriate.

Act Two: Room becomes latitude. Latitude becomes deference. Deference becomes a standing pattern indistinguishable from a policy.

Act Three: Somewhere in that progression, the board stops asking hard questions — not because there are no hard questions, but because asking them feels vaguely disloyal, like questioning the chef at a dinner party they’re also hosting.

Act Four: A few board elections favor candidates who are enthusiastic about the credit union rather than skeptical in the useful sense, pushback is gradually reframed as negativity, and the board has quietly outsourced its judgment to the management team it was hired to oversee. Everyone is very pleasant about it. The members have no idea.

Curtain. Applause. Unanimous vote.

A Field Guide to the Generous Board

The generous board is hard to spot from the outside because it looks like harmony. Meetings run on time. Votes are unanimous. Strategic presentations land without meaningful challenge. The annual CEO evaluation produces a score that rhymes with “outstanding” and a salary adjustment that rhymes with “automatic.”

Here is how you know you might be sitting on one:

The last time a strategic initiative received substantive pushback was during a previous administration — of the credit union, not the country, though you may have to stop and think about it.

The CEO has learned to bring decisions to the board after they’ve been made, framed as updates rather than proposals, because the outcome is the same either way and this eliminates the awkward middle part.

The board’s version of a tough question is “That sounds promising — what’s the timeline?” This is then followed by appreciative murmuring and a motion to approve.

Questions that begin with “Have we considered the downside scenario” are experienced as vaguely hostile. They are not asked twice.

The annual strategic retreat produces a plan that is enthusiastically endorsed, framed in an attractive document, placed in a binder, and then consulted approximately never — until next year’s retreat, when it is replaced with equal enthusiasm and a better font.

Nobody in the room is unhappy. Nobody outside the room is protected.

What It Actually Costs

Here is where the generous board’s tab comes due, and it is not a small tab.

An organization without meaningful board oversight is an organization where the only check on strategic miscalculation is the CEO’s own good judgment. That is a lot of faith to put in any single human being. Great CEOs, notably, do not want this. Great CEOs actively want a board that challenges them, because they have enough professional self-awareness to know that unchallenged assumptions are where strategy goes to die quietly, expensively, and in ways that eventually end up in trade press.

What the generous board produces instead is an environment where risk accumulates unexamined, the CEO’s blind spots go unaddressed because nobody in the room has developed the habit of addressing them, and strategic drift is mistaken for strategic stability because everything looks calm from a altitude of zero feet, which is also the altitude at which you cannot see the cliff.

And when something eventually goes wrong — when the loan portfolio develops an interesting texture, or the membership numbers head quietly south, or the competitive threat that management has been privately anxious about for eighteen months finally arrives with luggage — the generous board will discover that support is not, in fact, a hedge against consequences.

The members whose assets they were elected to protect will discover this at roughly the same time. Probably through a letter.

Accountability Is Not the Opposite of Support

This is the part where some directors shift uncomfortably in their chairs, so let’s be precise.

Holding your CEO accountable does not mean distrusting them. It does not mean interrogating their expenses, auditing their calendar, or approaching board meetings with the energy of someone who has watched too many courtroom dramas and has always wanted a turn.

It means agreeing, in advance, on what success looks like — and then actually checking whether that’s what’s happening. It means asking the questions that are uncomfortable precisely because they matter. It means understanding that the highest form of support you can offer a capable CEO is a board serious enough to provide genuine oversight, because genuine oversight is what separates a well-governed institution from one that is one bad quarter away from a very difficult conversation with its regulator.

A board that never challenges anything isn’t kind. It’s decorative.

The members of your credit union did not elect you to be the CEO’s most reliable fan. They elected you to be the institution’s last line of defense. Those roles occasionally overlap. They are not the same job. Confusing them is not a culture. It’s a liability.

The break room chairs were never the point.

The point is whether your board is actually governing — or whether it has decided that unanimous votes, prompt adjournments, and the warm collegial glow of a room where nobody ever disagrees constitutes a governance program.

It does not. It constitutes a very pleasant way to let an institution drift.

Generous boards sleep well. Whether the members they serve can say the same is, interestingly, a question nobody at the board table ever thinks to ask.

[*Yes, all of these images were created with AI. All the cool kids are doing it. Don’t @ me, bro!]

#boardgovernance #boardeffectiveness #creditunionboards #accountability #CEOoversight #fiduciaryduty #boardeducation #governancematters

The 600-Dollar Question: When Board Oversight Becomes Death by Interrogation

/0 Comments/in /by

There is a moment that happens in credit union boardrooms across America. It is the moment when a well-meaning director leans forward, adjusts their reading glasses, and asks the CEO: “Why did we spend six hundred dollars on those new break room chairs?”

by That One Consultant You Hired and Then Ignored 

The CEO—who has spent the past week negotiating a $40 million loan participation, managing a core system migration, and quietly talking the compliance officer off a ledge—takes a breath. A long breath. The kind that has a legal team and a therapist on speed dial baked into it.

This is not governance. This is archaeology. And unfortunately, it is extremely common.

The Oversight Paradox

Here’s the dirty secret about board oversight: done poorly, it doesn’t protect the organization. It quietly suffocates it.

Oversight exists for excellent reasons. Boards are the stewards of member assets, the guardrails of institutional integrity, and the last line of defense against the kind of strategic disasters that end up as case studies in graduate school. Good oversight is invaluable. Necessary. Even heroic, on a good day.

But there is a version of oversight that has drifted—slowly, with the best of intentions—from “strategic accountability” into “interrogating the invoice for printer toner.” And that version is doing real damage.

The paradox is this: boards that ask too many small questions are usually avoiding the big ones. It’s easier to audit the break room chairs than to have a difficult conversation about whether the five-year strategic plan reflects anything resembling current market reality.

*To dig in further on why we do this, revisit our blog on “Bikeshedding and Boards.” It’s our brain’s fault.

A Field Guide to Interrogation Styles

For identification purposes, here are the most common species of oversight-gone-wrong, observed in their natural habitat:

  • The Archaeologist. Asks detailed questions about decisions made six to eighteen months ago. Loves phrases like “Wait, when did we approve this?” Finds comfort in relitigating the past, possibly because the past is safer than the present.

 

  • The Micromanager in Disguise. Frames operational questions as governance concerns. “I’m just asking” is their signature opener. Recently wanted to know why the CEO chose FedEx over UPS for a document shipment. (True story. Or close enough to be true.)

  • The Second-Guesser. Waits until a strategic decision has been made, implemented, and is showing early results—then raises concerns about it. Thrives in hindsight. Has strong opinions about the road not taken, mostly because they don’t have to drive it.

 

  • The Gotcha Questioner. Doesn’t actually want an answer. Wants to demonstrate that they spotted something everyone else missed. Questions arrive pre-loaded with implied conclusions. “Isn’t it true that…” is a preamble, not a question.

None of these directors are villains. They are, almost without exception, people who care deeply about the credit union and are expressing that care in the wrong direction. The problem is that their questions consume the room’s oxygen—time that could be spent on strategy, member impact, or the seven other agenda items patiently waiting their turn.

What This Actually Costs

Let’s talk about the real price tag, because it’s considerably higher than six hundred dollars.

When boards slide into interrogation mode, several things happen. First, the CEO and senior leadership start preparing for board meetings the way defendants prepare for depositions. Every decision generates a paper trail not because it’s strategically useful, but because someone will ask. Defensive management is expensive, time-consuming, and demoralizing. It is also, in a tragic irony, the least strategic thing a leadership team can do.

Second, risk appetite shrinks. If every initiative is subject to retroactive cross-examination, smart leaders learn to propose only what’s safe. Bold moves get quietly shelved not because they’re wrong, but because they’re hard to defend under fluorescent lights to an audience with a prepared list of skeptical questions.

Third—and this one is genuinely painful to watch—good CEOs leave. Not dramatically, not all at once, but gradually. They stop bringing their best ideas to the board because the board has trained them not to. Eventually they bring their ideas somewhere else. Often, that’s a different credit union.

The Question Behind the Questions

Here is something worth sitting with: when a board asks too many operational questions, it is almost never really about the operations.

It’s about trust. Or the absence of it.

When a board genuinely trusts its CEO—when there is transparency, consistent communication, and a shared strategic framework—operational minutiae stops being interesting. The chairs cost six hundred dollars? Fine. The CEO made a call, the call was reasonable, let’s talk about the loan-to-share ratio.

But when trust is thin, everything becomes a data point. Every expense is a clue. Every decision is potential evidence of something. The interrogation is really a trust deficit wearing a governance costume.

If your board is regularly diving into operational weeds, the most useful question isn’t “Why did we buy those chairs?” It’s “Why don’t we trust the person we hired to make that call?” That conversation is harder. It is also the only one that actually fixes anything.

What Good Oversight Actually Looks Like

Good oversight asks hard questions—at the right altitude. It is the difference between “Why this vendor?” and “Does our vendor management policy reflect current risk exposure?” One is a transaction. The other is governance.

A few principles worth adopting:

  1. Ask about policy, not purchases. Your job is to ensure the right frameworks exist—not to audit individual decisions made within those frameworks. If the CEO has spending authority up to $25,000, don’t ask about the $600 chairs. Ask whether the spending policy itself is still fit for purpose.
  2. Interrogate strategy, not symptoms. The second-guessing instinct usually points to a real concern buried under an unhelpful question. Surface the real concern. “I’m worried our operating expenses are drifting” is a governance conversation. “Why does the coffee machine cost this much?” is not.
  3. Distinguish accountability from hostility. Accountability means holding leadership to agreed-upon standards, with transparency and fairness. Hostility means treating every board meeting like a deposition. One builds a stronger organization. The other builds a stronger résumé for the CEO’s recruiter.
  4. Build the trust infrastructure. Regular CEO evaluations, transparent dashboards, clear strategic KPIs, and an open-door culture for candid conversation—these reduce the need for interrogation because they replace anxiety with information.

Closing Thoughts: The Right Questions Are Hard

There is a version of your board that asks fewer questions and governs more effectively. That board has done the hard work of building trust, aligning on strategy, and distinguishing its role from management’s. Its questions are rarer, sharper, and more consequential. Its CEO sleeps better. Its members are better served.

And yes, it probably has nicer break room chairs. Because someone made a reasonable call and nobody needed to schedule a follow-up to discuss it.

The goal of governance isn’t to catch the CEO doing something wrong. It’s to make sure the institution does something right.

Those are very different jobs. It’s time more boards knew which one they showed up to do.

The Hidden Cost of Board Inaction: What Happens When Strategic Gaps Go Unaddressed

/0 Comments/in /by

You’ve probably heard the saying, “Sometimes the best action is no action.” It’s a comforting thought—especially for anyone who’s ever survived a particularly long board meeting. But at the credit union board level, that phrase should come with a warning label:

“Prolonged inaction may cause strategic decay, leadership paralysis, and an allergic reaction to innovation.”

By Kevin Smith

It’s time to talk about the hidden costs of doing nothing. Not the obvious “we missed an opportunity” kind of nothing, but the board-level governance variety—where everyone nods thoughtfully, agrees to “revisit it next quarter,” and quietly moves on to more comfortable topics, like parking lot repairs or the staff picnic.

Because in the real world, those “small delays” accumulate. They stack up like unread board packets, until one day you realize the credit union is three strategic cycles behind, your best staff have migrated elsewhere, and your members are wondering why their “friendly local credit union” still makes them fill out paper forms.

Let’s take a sober, slightly sarcastic look at what happens when boards let strategic gaps sit around too long—like leftovers in the breakroom fridge that no one wants to claim.

  1. The Opportunity Gap: Blink and It’s Gone

Inaction has a cost, even if it doesn’t show up on the balance sheet. Every time your board delays a strategic decision—whether it’s a new branch, a technology investment, or a leadership development initiative—someone else takes the opening.

Banks, fintechs, and the occasional “nontraditional competitor” (translation: everyone from PayPal to a grocery store app) are all out there moving fast. They don’t have to wait for the next board meeting to authorize a new product pilot.

When your credit union spends nine months “evaluating digital transformation options”, the fintechs spend that same time transforming digitally.

The hidden cost here is lost momentum—and once it’s gone, you can’t just vote it back into existence.

 

  1. The Leadership Gap: When “Succession Planning” Means Hoping Someone Sticks Around

Many boards have a touching faith in longevity. “Our CEO’s been here 25 years,” someone says proudly. “She’s not going anywhere.”

Of course, one day, she does go somewhere—like retirement, or an offer from an organization that seems slightly more future-oriented.

Cue the awkward silence.

The leadership gap is one of the most expensive forms of board inaction, because it doesn’t look like a problem—until it suddenly is.

Failing to plan for leadership transition isn’t just about losing one person. It’s about losing organizational knowledge, stability, and the ability to think beyond this year’s budget. It’s about scrambling to hire an interim CEO and realizing you don’t have anyone ready internally because “we were waiting to see how things developed.”

Spoiler alert: things developed.

  1. The Cultural Gap: When Nobody Wants to Be the First to Say Something

In some boardrooms, the most dangerous phrase is “Let’s not rush into this.” It sounds prudent. Mature. Governance-y. But sometimes, it’s just code for “I don’t want to start an argument.”

Board culture is often the silent killer of progress.

A culture that avoids hard conversations creates a slow leak in effectiveness. The risk discussions become shallow. Strategic plans become vague. Everyone becomes fluent in a language of polite noncommittal phrases:

  • “We’ll keep that on our radar.”
  • “It’s definitely something to think about.”
  • “Let’s revisit that once we have more information.”

This linguistic tap dance lets everyone feel productive while achieving precisely nothing.

Over time, the cost is organizational drift—a slow, polite slide away from relevance.

  1. The Risk Gap: When Complacency Looks Like Stability

Boards are supposed to be the guardians of risk management. But sometimes, that responsibility morphs into a collective game of “Don’t rock the boat.”

The problem is, boats that never move eventually sink from lack of maintenance.

When boards avoid taking calculated risks—because the last one made people nervous, or because “things seem fine”—they stop managing risk and start preserving comfort.

The hidden cost?

  • Missed chances for growth.
  • No innovation pipeline.
  • A staff culture that learns the safest way to survive is to stop suggesting new ideas.

By the time the external environment forces a change—like new technology requirements, regulatory shifts, or competitive disruptions—the credit union’s risk tolerance has atrophied.

It’s a bit like going to the gym for the first time in five years and realizing that “strategic agility” requires muscle you no longer have.

  1. The Accountability Gap: When Everyone’s Responsible, Nobody Is

Ah yes, the classic governance paradox: the board is collectively responsible for oversight, which means that individually… well, nobody actually owns anything.

This is how important follow-ups fall through the cracks. Strategic goals blur into “action items,” and “action items” into “discussion points.”

Eventually, someone notices that half of last year’s priorities are still listed as “ongoing.”

Boards that fail to assign accountability not only lose track of execution—they erode trust between governance and management. Staff start to assume that board requests don’t really matter because they’re never revisited. The board, meanwhile, assumes management is ignoring direction.

Everyone’s frustrated, but no one remembers where the breakdown started. (Hint: it started when no one took notes after the motion to “revisit this next time.”)

  1. The Member Gap: The Ultimate Cost of Doing Nothing

Every governance failure ultimately lands on one doorstep: the member’s.

Members don’t see the internal debates, the deferred decisions, or the noble intentions. They just see whether their credit union is responsive, accessible, and relevant.

When strategic gaps linger, members pay the price—in slower service, outdated technology, and products that no longer fit their needs.

And once they decide to move their business elsewhere, no amount of nostalgic community branding will bring them back.

  1. How to Close the Gaps (Without Losing Your Sense of Humor)

So, what’s a well-meaning board to do when faced with the creeping symptoms of inaction? Fortunately, the cure doesn’t require heroics—just a few practical habits:

1. Put expiration dates on decisions.

If something hasn’t moved in three meetings, either act on it or kill it. (Yes, you can always resurrect it later.)

2. Create visible accountability.

Assign names, not groups. “The Governance Committee will handle it” is code for “No one will.”

3. Build in external pressure.

Schedule outside reviews, peer benchmarking, or facilitator check-ins. Nothing motivates like knowing someone else will ask how it went.

4. Celebrate movement, not perfection.

A small step forward beats a perfect plan stuck in limbo.

5. Keep humor on the agenda.

It’s easier to confront tough truths when you can laugh about them.

Final Thought

Boards don’t fail because they’re careless. They fail because it’s surprisingly easy to confuse discussion with progress, and caution with wisdom.

But the hidden costs of inaction are real. They compound quietly, like interest on a loan you forgot you took out.

So at your next meeting, when someone says, “Let’s not rush into this,” pause and ask:

“Are we being prudent—or are we just procrastinating in a very professional way?”

If you can answer that question honestly, you’re already ahead of the game.

Credit Risk Oversight (2025 Trends): A Board Member’s Survival Guide


/0 Comments/in /by

Credit risk: the phrase alone is enough to make some board members grip their coffee cups just a little tighter. It’s not glamorous, it’s not fun, and it will never trend on TikTok. But in 2025, with examiners sharpening their pencils and loan portfolios groaning under the weight of rising delinquencies, it’s the one topic you can’t afford to snooze on (though, let’s be honest, some still will).

Why Credit Risk is Back on the Front Burner

Remember when everyone thought loan losses were a relic of the 2008 era? Good times. Unfortunately, rising consumer debt, high interest rates, and the eternal optimism of borrowers who believe their 2012 Honda Civic will last forever have put us squarely back in the land of credit risk headaches.

The National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) has politely informed boards that 2025 supervisory priorities will focus heavily on—surprise—credit risk. Translation: examiners are ready to ask uncomfortable questions like, “What is your board doing to make sure you’re not funding someone’s third jet ski purchase?”

The Big Trouble Spots

  1. Auto Loans
 – Used auto values are wobbling, and borrowers are stretching repayment terms longer than the average Marvel movie franchise. When you’re still making payments on a vehicle that’s been recycled into a washing machine, risk creeps in.
  2. Credit Cards
 – Household debt is up, and delinquencies are following suit. Apparently, people cannot pay off that Vegas trip charged three years ago. Who knew?
  3. Real Estate Lending
 – Higher interest rates mean fewer refis, tighter affordability, and more stress on members’ budgets. The phrase “house poor” was coined for a reason.
  4. Member Business Loans
 – Every third cousin with a food truck idea is back, and suddenly the board packet has a 50-page loan proposal for “organic, free-range burrito delivery.” Sound lending principles still apply, even if the salsa is really good.

What Boards Should Be Asking (Without Putting Anyone to Sleep)

A board doesn’t have to be full of credit risk experts, but it does need to prove it has a clue. Here are the questions that say, “We’re paying attention,” without requiring you to go back for a master’s in finance:

  • What are delinquency and charge-off trends telling us? Hint: “They’re fine” is not a satisfying answer.
  • How are loan loss reserves being adjusted? Think of reserves as the rainy-day fund, except it’s already drizzling.
  • What’s management’s stress testing showing? If the only stress test is your CEO’s Fitbit during budget season, that’s a problem.
  • Do our loan policies reflect current realities? Policies written in 2017 may not account for today’s 84-month auto loans and the return of avocado-toast inflation.

How Boards Accidentally Make Things Worse

Let’s be real: sometimes boards, in their enthusiasm to “help,” manage to stir the pot unnecessarily. Common mistakes include:

  • Chasing Yield: Saying, “We need more loan growth!” without asking, “At what risk?” is like demanding dessert without checking if the oven’s on fire.
  • Micromanaging Underwriting: If you find yourself debating whether a member’s side hustle counts as “reliable income,” you’ve crossed into staff territory.
  • Ignoring Early Warning Signs: That polite uptick in 30-day delinquencies is the financial equivalent of your car making a funny noise. Ignoring it doesn’t make it go away.

Best Practices That Don’t Require a Finance PhD

  • Regular Credit Risk Reports: Ask for reports that show trends over time, not just numbers in isolation. One bad month is noise. Six bad months is a pattern.
  • Board Education: A few hours of training beats three years of pretending you understand risk-weighted assets.
  • Healthy Tension: Challenge management’s assumptions. If projections look suspiciously rosy, ask what happens when the economy sneezes.
  • Diversification: Encourage lending across member segments. If all your loans are in used pickup trucks, you’re one diesel price spike away from heartburn.

Humor Meets Reality: The Jet Ski Test

Here’s a simple litmus test for any lending decision: Would this loan still look good if it were for a second-hand jet ski? If the answer is no, it’s worth asking more questions. The jet ski is the universal symbol of overextended credit and questionable judgment. Keep it in mind during your next board meeting.

The Exam Room: What to Expect in 2025

Examiners are not out to get you (probably). But they will want to see:

  • Evidence the board understands its loan portfolio risks.
  • Minutes that show you asked real questions (not just, “Who brought the donuts?”).
  • Policies that match current lending conditions.
  • Proof that you’re not rubber-stamping every growth idea that comes your way.

In other words, they want you to act like you’ve read this blog post.

Final Thoughts: Boredom is Not an Excuse

Credit risk oversight will never win “most exciting board duty.” But it is one of the most important. Think of it like flossing: nobody loves doing it, but skipping it can lead to painful consequences and awkward conversations with professionals.

Boards that stay curious, ask good questions, and keep a skeptical eye on lending trends will come through 2025 stronger. Boards that don’t? Well, they might just end up as a case study in an examiner’s PowerPoint. And nobody wants that.

At TEAM Resources, we know board work isn’t about glamour. It’s about diligence, accountability, and sometimes resisting the urge to approve the next jet ski loan. Here’s to smart oversight in 2025.

Strategic Scenario Planning in Uncertain Times: Because Nostradamus Retired Early

/0 Comments/in /by

If you’re serving on a credit union board, congratulations. You’re a volunteer who willingly signed up to guide an institution in a world that looks like a badly written dystopian novel. Pandemics, inflation, talent shortages, tech disruption, AI deciding it wants your job—these are the plot twists. And, spoiler alert, you don’t get to close the book and walk away.

That’s why “strategic scenario planning” has become the new hot buzzword in board governance circles. Don’t worry: this isn’t another corporate fad, like “synergizing our holistic mindfulness KPIs.” Scenario planning is simply what happens when you admit you don’t actually know what the future holds (and yes, your strategic plan still pretends otherwise). It’s about creating structured “what ifs” so that when life happens—and it will—you’re not left blinking into the boardroom’s fluorescent lights saying, “Well, nobody could’ve seen this coming.”

Let’s break this down for the credit union world, with equal parts practicality and deadpan honesty.

Why Scenario Planning Exists (a.k.a. Reality Hurts)

Boards love certainty. You want to know the capital ratio target, the branch count, the CEO’s bonus structure. Certainty is neat and tidy. Unfortunately, the economy, your members, and the regulators didn’t read your neat little plan.

Consider recent history:

  • The pandemic. Everyone’s “five-year growth strategy” didn’t include “shutting down branches, scrambling for PPP loans, and buying webcams by the pallet.”
  • Inflation and interest rates. Those 30-year fixed mortgages you thought were your golden ticket? Suddenly members aren’t so eager to borrow when the rate is north of “ouch.”
  • Technology. Remember when mobile deposit was cutting-edge? Now your members want real-time everything. And if you don’t have it, they’ll gladly let a fintech handle their money while you argue about whether the minutes were approved correctly.

Scenario planning doesn’t pretend to predict the future—it just forces you to admit you’re not in control and to make a menu of reasonable responses. That humility is your new superpower.

The Basic Ingredients of Scenario Planning

Think of it like cooking, except the dish is “your credit union’s survival.”

  1. Pick the Critical Variables

What are the three to five forces most likely to mess with your strategic plan? For credit unions, these might include:

  • Interest rate volatility
  • Technology disruption (a.k.a. fintechs eating your lunch)
  • Talent shortages
  • Regulatory shifts (new compliance acronyms you haven’t even met yet)
  • Member behavior (spoiler: they’re fickle)
  1. Develop the “What If” Scenarios

These are not “wild fantasies” like winning the lottery. These are grounded, plausible futures. Example:

  • Best case: Rates stabilize, members return to borrowing, and your fintech investments pay off.
  • Middle case: Growth is flat, but manageable. You scrape by.
  • Worst case: Rates keep swinging, the regulator drops new capital requirements, and members defect because your mobile app looks like it was designed in 2009.
  1. Play Out the Implications

For each scenario, ask:

  • What happens to our balance sheet?
  • How does this impact member service?
  • Which sacred cows do we need to barbecue?
  1. Decide on Triggers

Scenario planning is only useful if you know when to pivot. Agree on what signs will tell you, “Yep, we’re in Scenario B now. Time to adjust.”

  1. Create Contingency Plays

Write down—in advance—the actions you’ll take. This is critical, because when things get ugly, boards tend to freeze. (It’s not personal; humans are just wired that way. Ask any deer in headlights.)

Example: Interest Rates Gone Wild

Let’s take an issue boards love to obsess over: interest rates.

  • Scenario A: Rates stabilize at moderate levels. Great, your ALM reports look less like a heart monitor. You can focus on growth.
  • Scenario B: Rates drop significantly. Good luck managing margin compression. Members refinance everything, your loan income shrinks, and you’re suddenly “creatively rethinking” your expense structure.
  • Scenario C: Rates climb higher than your blood pressure. Lending slows, members hoard deposits, and your branch staff gets daily questions like, “Why does my HELOC cost as much as a Tesla lease?”

With each scenario, you should have pre-agreed strategies. Otherwise, the conversation just goes in circles: “Should we cut expenses?” “Should we merge?” “Should we wait and see?” And by the time you’ve “waited and seen,” the opportunity window has closed.

Common Mistakes Boards Make in Scenario Planning

Let’s be honest: your board may already be doing scenario planning… poorly. Here’s how it usually goes off the rails:

 

  1. Confusing Wishful Thinking with Planning. Saying “the economy will probably bounce back by Q3” is not a plan. It’s optimism wearing a suit.
  2. Too Many Scenarios. Ten different futures? Forget it. You’ll drown in possibilities. Stick to three or four that actually matter.
  3. Treating it Like a One-Time Exercise. Scenario planning isn’t something you do once a year at the board retreat in a hotel conference room with stale muffins. It needs to be refreshed regularly.
  4. Failing to Link to Action. If your plan doesn’t identify specific triggers and responses, you’ve just written a choose-your-own-adventure novel.

Why This Matters for Credit Union Boards

So, here’s the punchline: scenario planning isn’t about accuracy, it’s about agility.

Your members don’t care that you “correctly” predicted the future. They care that you respond quickly and thoughtfully to whatever the world throws at them. If you’re nimble, you can turn uncertainty into opportunity:

  • Members anxious about rates? Provide education and reassurance before they defect to Google Bank.
  • Fintech competitors circling? Partner with them before they eat your lunch.
  • Staff stretched thin? Build contingency plans that prioritize member experience over vanity projects.

Boards that embrace scenario planning position themselves as strategic assets rather than ceremonial rubber stamps. And let’s face it: if you wanted to be ceremonial, you could’ve joined the local Rotary Club.

Final Thoughts: Embrace Your Inner Control Freak (But Be Flexible)

Credit union boards are not Nostradamus. You’re not here to predict the future with eerie accuracy. You’re here to prepare your institution so that no matter what happens, you don’t get blindsided into irrelevance.

So, do the unglamorous work:

  • Pick the big variables.
  • Sketch the futures.
  • Decide on triggers.
  • Practice making decisions in advance.

Because when the next big disruption arrives (and it will), you want your board to say, “We planned for this. Let’s execute.” Instead of, “Well, nobody could’ve seen this coming.”

And if nothing else, scenario planning at least makes board meetings more interesting than rehashing the treasurer’s report. Which, admit it, is a limbo-level, low bar.

 

Fake Work at the Board Level: Are We Really Doing Governance or Just Looking Busy?

/0 Comments/in /by

A Brief Inquiry Into the Boardroom Equivalent of Shuffling Papers

Let’s start with a pop quiz:

At your last board meeting, did you…

  • Spend 20 minutes debating the font size in the board packet?
  • Nod solemnly while reading a report you didn’t understand but didn’t want to ask about?
  • Re-review last month’s minutes like they were sacred text?
  • Approve the CEO’s strategic plan without a single question, but raise hell over the coffee budget?

If you answered “yes” to any of these—or worse, all of these—congratulations: you might be doing fake work.

And if your meetings consistently feel long but unproductive, filled with movement but little actual momentum, your board might be suffering from a terminal case of Performative Governance.

What Is Fake Work?

“Fake work” is not work that looks fake. It’s work that feels real, consumes time, and creates the illusion of value—without actually moving anything forward.

In corporate settings, fake work includes things like:

  • Meetings about meetings.
  • Email threads that could have been a shrug.
  • Slide decks built to impress no one in particular.

At the credit union board level, fake work shows up wearing a suit, clutching a binder, and usually saying something like, “We’ve always done it this way.”

How to Spot Fake Work at the Board Level

Like a chameleon, fake work blends in. It feels important. It’s often accompanied by furrowed brows and phrases like:

“Let’s table that for next month.”
“I just want to make sure we’ve thoroughly discussed it.”
“This isn’t in our bylaws, but…”

But here are a few dead giveaways:

  1. Endless Operational Noodling

Spending time reviewing which credit union branches need new carpet? That’s not governance. That’s facilities micromanagement disguised as fiduciary oversight.

Unless your strategic plan includes “neutral tones in all locations,” this is fake work.

  1. Performative Questions

You know these:

  • “I just want to be sure we’re asking the tough questions.” (Then proceeds to ask a very soft one.)
  • “Could you walk me through this, even though it was covered last meeting?”
    These aren’t questions. They’re boardroom kabuki theater.
  1. Reports No One Reads (But Everyone Pretends To)

Here’s a fun exercise: randomly insert a line in the middle of a 40-page committee report that says, “If you read this, bring me a cookie.” See how many cookies you get.
Spoiler: not many.

  1. Approval as a Reflex

If the board’s approach to governance is “whatever staff recommends,” congratulations, you’re doing the governance equivalent of clicking “Accept All Cookies” on a website. It’s quick, it’s easy, and it usually leads to regret.

  1. Dashboard Addiction Without Interpretation

Boards love dashboards. They’re colorful. They have arrows. They give the illusion of insight.
But if no one is asking, “What story is this data telling us?” or “How does this trend align with our strategic priorities?” — you’re just admiring bar charts in a vacuum.

Why Fake Work Happens

We’re not calling anyone lazy or malicious. Most fake work is born out of good intentions, outdated habits, and a deeply ingrained culture of looking like we’re doing something important.

Here’s why it happens:

  1. Fear of Looking Ignorant

Asking, “What exactly does this mean?” in a board meeting feels risky. So, we don’t ask. We nod. We move on. We fake it.

  1. Avoidance of the Hard Stuff

It’s easier to debate whether the board retreat should be two days or one-and-a-half than to have a conversation about whether your current leadership team is aligned with your strategic vision.

  1. Boredom + Duty = Overreach

Governance is about oversight, not involvement in every operational lever. But bored board members often reach for relevance in the only place they can: operational trivia.

The Cost of Fake Governance

Let’s be blunt: fake work is not harmless. It’s expensive. It’s distracting. And over time, it erodes your board’s credibility, wastes staff time, and causes strategic drift.

It also makes the CEO wonder whether you understand what governance is—or whether you just like the sandwiches.

What Real Governance Looks Like

To be clear, real governance isn’t about being smarter, more experienced, or louder. It’s about being focused, curious, and disciplined.

Here’s what it includes:

✅ 1. Strategy First, Strategy Always

Every conversation should map back to the strategic plan. Not sometimes. Always.
If it doesn’t, you’re not governing—you’re tinkering.

✅ 2. Data With Meaning

Don’t just review the numbers. Ask what they’re telling you. Ask how they connect to goals. Ask why they’re improving—or not.

If the numbers aren’t changing, and you don’t know why, you’re watching a dashboard like it’s Netflix.

✅ 3. Brave Questions

Be the board member who says, “I don’t understand this—can someone explain?” That’s not weakness. That’s leadership.
And chances are, four other directors had the same question and were too proud to ask.

✅ 4. Committee Reports That Matter

Every committee report should answer:

  • What decision are we being asked to make?
  • How does this tie to the strategic plan?
  • What risks or opportunities are we surfacing?

If a report doesn’t help with those, it can go in the archive bin with your 2003 marketing plan.

✅ 5. Time Discipline

If your board meeting consistently goes over three hours and you haven’t solved the succession plan, tackled a major risk, or reinvented your governance model—you might not be “collaborating.” You might just be loitering with paperwork.

How to Cut the Fluff (Without Cutting Each Other)

1. Board Agenda Audits

Go back through the last three meeting agendas. Highlight anything that wasn’t:

  • A strategic discussion
  • A key decision
  • An oversight function

Now count the rest. That’s your fluff ratio.

2. Consent Agendas Are Your Friend

Use them. Ruthlessly. Put everything informational or routine in a consent agenda and reclaim your meeting time for actual governance.

3. Board Self-Assessments

Want a mirror that doesn’t lie? Conduct an annual self-assessment. Fake work often thrives in boards that avoid honest reflection.

Final Thought: Busy ≠ Effective

Credit union board service is a privilege. It’s also a responsibility. That means showing up with intention, asking real questions, making tough calls—and resisting the urge to fill the room with noise just to feel like you’ve earned the sandwiches.

 

 

In other words:

If your board work feels like work but accomplishes nothing, it might not be work. It might just be well-dressed loitering.

Need help distinguishing real governance from well-meaning fluff? Call TEAM Resources. We’ll help you streamline your board practices—and maybe even help you get those meetings down to something resembling human time.

 

The Board That Wouldn’t Let Go: When Legacy Directors Stall Progress

/1 Comment/in /by

How to Navigate Board Turnover, Term Limits, and the Gentle Art of Moving On

It started subtly: A well-meaning board member added “Emeritus” to their LinkedIn title. No one questioned it. Then they started showing up to committee meetings they weren’t assigned to. They brought donuts. They smiled knowingly during strategic planning. No one had the heart to say it out loud, but everyone was thinking it:

“Is this person ever going to leave?”

The Eternal Director

Every credit union board has—or has had—the Eternal Director. The one who’s been around since the invention of the fax machine and insists it still has strategic relevance. The one who’s forgotten more about your credit union’s history than most staff ever knew…but also seems to have forgotten how debit cards work.

They’re good people. They helped build the place. And now? They are also gently slowing it down to a strategic crawl.

The problem isn’t loyalty. The problem is inertia—wrapped in good intentions and reinforced with homemade cookies at every board meeting.

Why Boards Struggle to Let Go

Let’s start by acknowledging something uncomfortable: for many legacy board members, leaving the board feels like leaving the family—or worse, stepping off the only meaningful leadership stage they’ve known in 30 years.

And for the rest of the board? It’s just awkward. We don’t like conflict. We’re a movement of cooperatives. We talk about financial inclusion and shared values, not forced retirements.

So instead, we quietly tolerate the late arrivals, the inability to log into the board portal, and the occasional off-topic comment about “how we used to do things back in the Reagan years.”

The Strategic Cost of Stagnation

Eww! Stagnant pond muck.

All jokes aside, here’s the cost of keeping legacy board members on well past their sell-by date:

  • Innovation stalls. New ideas get quashed by “That’s not how we do things.”
  • CEO frustration grows. They can’t lead a credit union built for 2030 with a board stuck in 1998.
  • Recruitment suffers. Younger, more diverse candidates don’t see a place for themselves.
  • Risk increases. Governance lapses are more likely when directors don’t understand evolving compliance and fintech trends.

Your credit union may be growing, but your board is aging in place.

The Gentle Art of Moving On

Here’s the good news: succession doesn’t have to be a blood sport. You can encourage graceful exits, celebrate contributions, and build a board that’s ready for the future.

Consider Term Limits. Actually Use Them.

You should know by now that at TEAM Resources we have struggled with term limits. They get rid of good and bad board members indiscriminately. And when it’s difficult to recruit, this feels like shooting your board in its collective foot. (So look carefully at the paragraph below about writing a “real” succession plan.)

But the concept of term limits isn’t controversial in any sector outside credit unions. Set limits. Stick to them. Rotate people off the board. It’s not exile—it’s governance. And this can work well when you have high standards and an effective pipeline.

Bonus tip: Don’t call it a “mandatory departure.” Call it a “celebratory director emeritus transition.” PR matters.

Create an Offboarding Ritual

Throw a dinner. Give a plaque (or a donation to their favorite cause). Let them make a five-minute speech about their “incredible journey.” Clap politely. Then hand them a thank-you card and remind them that they are now a valued member, not a decision-maker.

Write a Real Succession Plan

A succession plan is not “We’ll figure it out when Jerry finally retires or forgets where the boardroom is.” It’s a written document. It includes:

  • Desired future board competencies
  • Outreach and recruitment timelines
  • Term expirations
  • Mentorship pairings between current and future directors

Use Board Self-Assessments

You know what big fans we are of this process. When the participants are actually engaging with the assessment honestly, there’s nothing quite like a well-designed, anonymous board evaluation to say what everyone’s too polite to say out loud. You know, things like:

  • “Some directors are not fully engaged in strategic conversations.”
  • “We need more technology expertise on the board.”
  • “Please stop telling the same story about the 1992 ATM rollout.”

If you conduct assessments annually, you’ll notice patterns. And patterns are harder to ignore than one-off frustrations. 

Bring in Outside Facilitators

Sometimes, the best way to get Jerry to see it’s time to go is to have someone else tell Jerry it’s time to go. A third-party facilitator ( hi, that’s us) can deliver feedback, coach transitions, and help manage tension so you don’t have to.

But What If They Refuse to Leave?

Ah yes. The “boardroom barnacle.” No term limits. No shame. A deeply held belief that their “institutional memory” is too important to ever unplug.

This is when you need the most radical tool in your governance toolbox: a hard conversation.

  • Start with facts: declining engagement, outdated knowledge, missed meetings.
  • Frame it in terms of organizational mission and fiduciary responsibility.
  • Offer a continued role as a mentor or special advisor—without a vote.

And if they still won’t budge?

Governance requires courage. And the board’s primary duty is not to any individual director’s feelings—it’s to the credit union’s long-term health.

Closing Thoughts (and a Nudge)

Credit union boards are known for their stability, integrity, and community focus. Those are strengths. But when stability turns into stagnation, and when institutional loyalty turns into institutional delay, it’s time to revisit what service and stewardship really mean.

Letting go isn’t disloyalty. It’s leadership.

So if your board has a Jerry (or a Jane) who just… won’t… let go – take a breath. Start the conversation. And maybe bring donuts. You’re going to need them.

Want help crafting a board succession plan? Need an outsider to tell Jerry what you can’t? That’s what TEAM Resources does. We don’t bring donuts, but as I’m from Wisconsin I can be talked into bringing cheese curds. Usually.

The Fine Art of Going Along to Get Along: A Credit Union Board Tradition

/2 Comments/in /by

By Kevin Smith

Credit union boards of directors have a well-documented, time-honored tradition of “going along to get along.” It’s an elegant, time-saving approach that ensures board meetings remain as peaceful and predictable as a slow-moving game of bingo at the senior center. No rocking the boat, no uncomfortable questions, and certainly no unpleasant confrontations. It’s a strategy built on the idea that if everyone agrees, then everything must be working just fine.

But, of course, that’s not always the case. This unspoken rule of unanimous harmony, while convenient, has a few tiny flaws—like, say, the potential to undermine the very purpose of the board itself. Let’s take a closer look at how we got here, why it’s a problem, and how to (gasp) fix it.

How We Ended Up in This Situation

The evolution of “go along to get along” governance is simple. It starts with a group of well-meaning individuals who join the board because they believe in the credit union movement. They’re here to make a difference! They’re here to help their members! And then they attend their first meeting.

What they find is an environment where disagreement is as welcome as a skunk at a garden party. They quickly learn that difficult questions result in awkward silence, darting glances, and, if things get particularly out of hand, a long-winded response that doesn’t answer the question but does ensure that no one will ever ask it again.

Soon enough, new board members realize that life is easier when they nod along, approve the agenda, and save their concerns for private grumbling sessions later. And just like that, another cog in the “go along to get along” machine is installed.

The Problem with Passive Boards

While group harmony sounds lovely in theory, it’s not exactly the hallmark of effective governance. Boards exist to provide oversight, challenge assumptions, and ensure the organization is actually serving its members—not just rubber-stamping the CEO’s latest PowerPoint presentation.

When boards avoid conflict at all costs, several unfortunate things happen:

  1. Lack of Accountability: If the board refuses to question leadership decisions, then no one is holding management accountable. Over time, this can lead to poor financial decisions, ineffective strategies, and policies that favor the credit union’s executives over its members.

  2. Missed Opportunities: Good ideas rarely come from an echo chamber. If everyone on the board is simply agreeing with each other (or staying silent to avoid disagreement), then creative solutions, innovative strategies, and potential improvements never see the light of day.

  3. Complacency Creeps In: A passive board creates an environment where stagnation flourishes. If no one challenges the status quo, then the status quo reigns supreme—whether it’s working or not.

  4. Risk Increases: The financial industry is full of risks, and credit unions are not immune. If the board isn’t actively engaged in evaluating potential threats, then they’re setting the credit union up for some unpleasant surprises.

Breaking the Cycle: How to Fix It

So, what’s the solution? How do we cure the boardroom malaise and encourage actual engagement without triggering a full-scale rebellion? Fortunately, there are a few ways to do just that and some of these should be familiar if you’ve been reading this blog for any length of time. 

1. Encourage Constructive Dissent

The first step to fixing a passive board is to make it clear that disagreement isn’t a personal attack—it’s a necessary part of good governance. One way to encourage this is to assign someone the role of “devil’s advocate” in discussions. (Many of you have heard me bring this one up before … repeatedly. It works!) If every proposal has at least one person assigned to poke holes in it, then dissent becomes part of the process rather than an act of defiance.

2. Change the Meeting Format

Most credit union board meetings follow a predictable (read: dull) structure. Reports are read, motions are made, votes are cast, and everyone goes home without a single bead of sweat forming. To shake things up, consider introducing strategic discussions as a standing agenda item and at the beginning of the meeting, rather than the end. Instead of only reviewing past performance, dedicate time to debating future opportunities and risks.

3. Board Education & Training

Many credit union board members come from backgrounds that have nothing to do with finance, risk management, or governance. That’s not necessarily a problem—diversity of thought is a good thing—but it does mean that ongoing education is essential. If board members don’t feel confident in their ability to challenge decisions, they won’t. Regular training sessions on financial oversight, regulatory requirements, and strategic planning can give board members the confidence they need to ask the right questions.

4. Rotate Committee Assignments

If the same board members serve on the same committees for years, they risk becoming too comfortable (or too cozy) with management. By regularly rotating committee assignments, credit unions can prevent stagnation and encourage fresh perspectives.

5. Recruit for Independence

Credit unions often struggle to find new board members, which leads them to recruit from within their existing circles. The result? A board that’s a little too familiar, a little too friendly, and a little too hesitant to challenge the status quo. Instead, credit unions should actively seek out independent thinkers—people with diverse backgrounds who aren’t afraid to ask uncomfortable questions. This should be part of your recruiting discussion from the get-go. 

6. Evaluate the Board’s Effectiveness

Finally, the board should regularly evaluate its own performance. Are members actively engaging in discussions? Are difficult issues being addressed? Or is everyone just nodding along, waiting for the meeting to end? Conducting anonymous self-assessments can help board members reflect on their own level of engagement and identify areas for improvement. You know very well that this is a hobby horse issue at TEAM Resources. 

A Little Discomfort is a Good Thing

Credit union boards don’t need to be battlefields, but they shouldn’t be tranquil meditation retreats either. The best boards strike a balance—encouraging open debate while maintaining mutual respect.

Yes, challenging leadership decisions can be uncomfortable. Yes, asking tough questions might make a few people squirm. But discomfort is not a sign that something is wrong—it’s a sign that something is being done right. Because at the end of the day, the credit union’s mission isn’t to make board members comfortable—it’s to serve its members. And that requires a board that’s willing to do more than just go along to get along.

Navigating VUCA: A Survival Guide for Credit Union Board Members

/0 Comments/in /by

The whole world is facing the need to deal with increasing VUCA. Volatility. Uncertainty. Complexity. Ambiguity. Credit unions and their boards included. Directors must flex this muscle and practice dealing with all of these to bring their organizations into a future where they can continue to make a difference in their members’ lives.

By Kevin Smith, a full set of Encyclopedia Britannica and the full interwebs.

Being a credit union board member in today’s financial landscape is a bit like being the captain of a ship caught in a hurricane – except the hurricane never ends, the maps are outdated, and the crew occasionally votes to change course mid-storm. Welcome to the world of VUCA: Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity, and Ambiguity.

If you were hoping for a stable, predictable environment where the hardest decision is approving the annual picnic budget, you may want to reconsider your life choices. But since you’re already here, let’s talk about how to steer your credit union through the financial chaos with grace, strategy, and perhaps a little gallows humor.

VOLATILITY: When Things Change Faster Than Your Meeting Agenda

Volatility in the financial services industry is as predictable as an overambitious budget proposal – inevitable and usually requiring last-minute adjustments. Interest rates swing, inflation rises and falls, fintech disruptors appear out of nowhere, and regulators seem to enjoy changing the rules just when you’ve finally understood the old ones.

How to deal with it:

1. Stay agile, not reactive. If you jump at every headline about the economy, you’ll exhaust yourself and confuse everyone around you. Instead, focus on long-term trends and build flexibility into your strategic plans.

2. Think in scenarios. When planning, don’t assume a single future. Have multiple game plans: “If rates go up, we do X. If they go down, we do Y. If the regulators invent a new acronym that changes everything, we call an emergency board meeting.”

3. Make peace with volatility. Just like how no one really knows what the stock market will do tomorrow, no one can promise you a smooth ride in the credit union world. Accept it. Adapt. And maybe invest in stress balls for your next meeting.

UNCERTAINTY: Otherwise Known as “Why Is This Happening?”

The financial world has a habit of delivering surprises. Maybe it’s a global event that upends the economy (again), or a new competitor that suddenly offers zero-fee everything. Maybe it’s just that nobody knows what younger generations actually want from a financial institution anymore.

Uncertainty is like being blindfolded and asked to hit a pinata except the pinata is moving, and you’re not sure it even exists.

How to deal with it:

1. Gather intelligence. No, you don’t need a spy network (although that would be fun). Just make sure your board is regularly reviewing industry reports, talking to experts, and keeping an eye on economic indicators. The more informed you are, the better your guesses will be.

2. Invest in adaptability. Uncertainty isn’t going away, so structure your credit union to handle surprises. Can you quickly shift resources if a new opportunity arises? Can your leadership team pivot if regulations change? If not, start building that muscle now.

3. Communicate with confidence (even if you’re guessing). Members and employees don’t want to hear, “We have no idea what’s happening.” Instead, try, “We are carefully evaluating multiple scenarios and will act in our members’ best interests.” It sounds better and prevents unnecessary panic.

COMPLEXITY: Where Everything is Connected, and Nothing is Simple

Remember when running a credit union just meant collecting deposits, making loans, and sending out newsletters with smiling stock photos? Those were the good old days.

Now, complexity rules. Regulatory requirements are labyrinthine, cybersecurity threats lurk in every corner, and technological advancements demand constant upgrades. And let’s not forget the delightful complexity of member expectations, which range from “I want personalized financial advice” to “Why can’t you just be an app on my phone?”

How to deal with it:

1. Don’t try to be an expert in everything. You’re a board member, not an omniscient being. Surround yourself with specialists – whether it’s compliance experts, cybersecurity professionals, or fintech advisors. Your job is to ask the right questions, not to have all the answers.

2. Simplify where you can. Complexity is inevitable, but unnecessary complexity is a choice. Look for ways to streamline governance, decision-making, and member services. If your processes resemble a Rube Goldberg machine, it might be time for a redesign.

3. Leverage technology wisely. Yes, AI, automation, and digital banking are important. No, you don’t need to invest in every shiny new tool that crosses your path. Be strategic – what actually benefits your members and makes operations more efficient? If the answer isn’t clear, it’s probably not worth the investment.

AMBIGUITY: The Art of Making Decisions with Half the Information

Ambiguity is what happens when the rules aren’t clear, the outcomes aren’t predictable, and no one agrees on what’s happening in the first place. It’s like trying to play chess when half the pieces are missing and the other half are actually checkers.

Maybe the government is discussing new regulations, but nobody knows what the final version will look like. Maybe your competitors are testing a new product, but it’s unclear if it’s a brilliant innovation or a financial disaster in the making.

How to deal with it:

1. Get comfortable with discomfort. If you need perfect clarity before making a decision, you’ll never make one. Ambiguity is part of leadership. Accept that some decisions will be made with incomplete data.

2. Lean on principles, not just policies. Policies tell you what to do when the situation is clear. Principles guide you when it’s not. If your board has a strong mission and clear values, those can be your North Star when ambiguity clouds everything else.

3. Be willing to course-correct. No decision is final. If new information comes in that changes the situation, don’t cling to a bad choice just to save face. Adapt, adjust, and move forward.

Final Thoughts: Thriving in VUCA

If you’ve made it this far without resigning from your board seat in frustration, congratulations. The truth is, VUCA isn’t going anywhere. Volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity are just the price of doing business in modern financial services.

But here’s the good news: credit unions are uniquely positioned to handle this chaos. Unlike big banks driven by shareholder profits, credit unions are built on community, trust, and adaptability. If you can embrace change, make informed decisions, and stay focused on your members, you’ll not only survive in a VUCA world – you might even thrive.

And if all else fails, there’s always coffee. Lots and lots of coffee. If you’ve met me, you know that this is my go-to strategy. :-) 

Should Paid Directors Be Held to a Higher Standard?

/2 Comments/in /by

More credit union boards are moving to or considering payment for service. This means that boards need to reconsider their standards of engagement and director performance. It will be important for boards making this change to re-calibrate expectations.

By Kevin Smith

Ten to fifteen years ago there were two topics sure to get credit union board members riled up and talkative at credit union conferences and training: term limits and paid directors. But I have to say that these discussions instigate far fewer sparks and consternation than they used to. When I was facilitating board roundtable discussions, I used to love to throw those two hand grenade topics and run to watch the smoke fly. It’s generally not a bad thing when people are passionate about things and care about them enough to get animated in their discussion.

Recently, I’ve been involved with a few discussions about the payment of directors. While the overall idea of it has become less polarizing, what I’m noticing is that, as usual, the devil is in the details, and there are quite a few nuances to the application of this idea that can still heat up the room. Primarily, the issue is whether paid directors should be held to a higher standard.

Some of the circumstances to consider:

How large is the payment? For some it’s a nominal stipend. A couple thousand dollars a year. For others it’s low to mid five figures. For some this difference matters a great deal when talking about raised expectations for the role.

Does paying directors have regulatory implications? Does this affect how lawmakers perceive who credit unions are in the market? Lobbyist for our industry are careful to dance around this one, as one of their primary talking points when hiking the hill is the not-for-profit model run by volunteer directors.

One director told me flat out – “we’ve been doing a lot of work for a lot of years already. We’re just now getting paid for that work. So, no, the expectations should go up. I’m already earning that money.”

Naturally there are those who take the opposite stance. The addition of remuneration to a formerly volunteer position changes the tone of the position dramatically.

What’s the Goal

There are also nuances to how boards come to the decision to pay their director members. (And sometimes there are differences within the same board as to these reasons!) Payment can simply be an acknowledgement of the work. But regularly this discussion is about efforts to recruit candidates (and higher quality ones) for a job that has become far more complex and time consuming. We hear a lot of worries in the industry about how difficult it can be to get new, and younger directors to join the movement as part of the board. Payment is the carrot/incentive to make this worthwhile to candidates.

My View

Over the years, I’ve softened to the idea of paying directors. I know just how much work there is and how important it is to have the right people in those seats. With the right understanding of the membership and evolved strategic thinking skills. A salary or stipend just might help in recruiting. But then I worry that people are attracted to the role for the dollars rather than the mission. At the basic level, the mission and purpose should be what attracts the potential board member. This is what we’ve done for a century now – get people to drink the credit union Kool-Aid and see what people-helping-people can do for the world.

So, they paycheck doesn’t change the job, but it does change the perception of it. Because there is such a long history of volunteer board members in this movement, I do believe that the just the perceptual change of adding pay is significant, to the members, the regulators, the general public, etc. And that change suggests to me that there also needs to be change in the performance of the board. I think that is a reasonable expectation as a sharp contrast to the history of the voluntary position. We hope that increased costs to the credit union come with increased value.

Be Careful What You Wish For

There are other sticky wickets to watch out for in this territory. Plenty of credit union boards count on (i.e. hope) that tenured directors will self-select out of their roles when they are no longer “high performing.” (This tees up that other incendiary topic of term limits.) Of course, this doesn’t happen nearly enough. As Tim Harrington says, “If you think some of your directors are sticking around too long, start paying them and see what happens!” 

Our Vantage Point

Tim and I encourage already boards to raise their standards and performance expectations all the time, whether there’s pay or not. So maybe we’re not the two people to weigh in on whether to do it. But we do believe that it changes perceptions. There is a lot to talk through and consider on the issue. Don’t take it lightly. It can be awfully easy to agree to a new paycheck for work you’re already doing. Do it of the right reasons.

Dedicated to YOUR Success . . .

Join our Newsletter

Sign up now to receive Tim’s blog, our newsletter and occasional updates.

Sign Up Now

The TR Blog

Contact Us

TEAM Resources
2665 N. Indian Ridge Dr.
Tucson, AZ 85715
Phone: 520.290.5721

Email Us

Return Info

© Copyright 2022 - Site design by Sprout Studio in Madison, WI