Shared vs. Classical Leadership & Challenges in Governance
Shared leadership is what credit union board members should practice but it’s rarely an idea that individuals coming into board service have a strong history with or understanding of. Intentionally opening up this as a discussion and reviewing expectations can be a tremendous asset towards effectiveness.
By Kevin Smith
Recently, as part of my regular nerdy reading, I came across this distinction between Shared and ClassicalLeadership as drawn out by Nemerowicz and Rosi, in Education for Leadership and Social Responsibility (1997). I came of age really only knowing the classical definition of leadership as they’re presented here.
It was in the context of Herbert Thompson’s dissertation, Governance as Stewardship (2015), that the significance of this distinction for credit union board members became more apparent to me. Thompson notes, “In many cases, new board members, come to their first nonprofit governance experience with only a classical leadership understanding and cursory practice with operational/administrative boards” (43). Thinking back over my years of working with boards, this idea (of shared leadership) has been floating under the surface, and been mostly presumed but unsaid. This is a concept that is important to note and should be called out, brought to the surface and addressed more matter-of-factly.