Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
Practical governance for volunteer committees and not-for-profit organisations. Hosted by governance consultants Kate Hartwig and Kate McPhee, each episode tackles one topic — clearly, honestly, and without the jargon. Short enough to finish before your coffee goes cold.
The Committee has been discussing the same issue for three months. Every meeting, same topic, no resolution. Someone suggests leaving it until after the upcoming AGM for the next committee to decide. Well, somebody else says the committee should table it until there's more information, even though there are already two reports and a consultant's recommendation sitting on the already crowded committee table.
Kate M:The staff are frustrated. The members are confused. The sponsors are asking questions, and the committee is stuck in an endless loop that leads nowhere. Deferring a decision is a decision too, and it's usually the worst one available. Welcome to The Committee Room.
Kate H:Welcome back to The Committee Room. I'm Kate Hartwig, Kate one.
Kate M:And I'm Kate McPhee, Kate two. We help small, time poor, volunteer led committees run better meetings, make better decisions, build stronger structures, and have better systems with less stress and less mess.
Kate H:We are now in our Smarter Meeting series. Last episode, we covered running the committee room and the mechanics of making a proper decision. Today, we're going deeper into why committees sometimes avoid making decisions at all and how to make good ones when you finally get there. Two related problems with the same solution.
Kate M:And a quick note before we start, this podcast is for general information on best practice governance for small to medium associations. It is not legal advice. Okay. Let's get cracking. Let's start with something that sounds almost too obvious to say.
Kate M:The first rule of decision making is to actually make decisions.
Kate H:And yet committees all over Australia are sitting in meetings right now discussing the same issues they discussed last month and the month before. Not because they don't have information, not because they need more time, not because the answer isn't obvious. They're having the same discussion over and over because nobody wants to be the one to call it.
Kate M:So if the first rule of decision making is to actually make decisions, why do we see this all the time? Well, usually, it's because people want consensus. They want everyone to agree on the same thing. They want everyone to be happy. They don't want conflict.
Kate H:So committees keep discussing. They keep deferring. They keep hoping that eventually everyone will come around to the same position. But here's the reality. You can't always make everyone happy, and that's fine. That's part of good governance. You want a range of views around that table.
Kate H:I mean, we just spent two earlier episodes talking about why diversity is a strength, and different views sometimes mean a decision won't be unanimous. That's what voting is for.
Kate M:Majority rules is how democracy works at every level, Kate, from parliament to the Tuesday night committee meeting. Your role as a committee is to make decisions in the best interests of the association and its members. So decision making has a beginning, a middle, and with or without consensus, a time to end.
Kate H:You know, Kate, I worked earlier this year with a sporting club that needed to increase membership fees. Their facilities had deteriorated, and they couldn't afford some very much needed repairs. But their fees, a bit like their committee, hadn't moved in five years. They thought increasing the fees would make them unpopular, so the committee kept on putting it off.
Kate M:Yep. Yep. We've heard that, haven't we? Let's wait till next year. Let's see if we can find some other funding first. Let's make do for another season. Let's look for small sponsors.
Kate H:Meanwhile, the facilities kept deteriorating until a ceiling panel fell down during the celebrations after the grand final. Luckily, no one was hurt, but it was the wake up call that they needed.
Kate H:So they did their homework, got quotes for essential repairs, worked out the minimum fee increase required, and made the decision. Not everyone was happy, but the facilities got fixed.
Kate M:And that's governing. You know, you're elected to make the hard or the complex or the unpopular decisions, not to keep putting them off.
Kate H:Now there's a legitimate reason for deferral, and it's worth distinguishing it from avoidance. If you genuinely need more information before you can make an informed and responsible decision, well, that's reasonable. But be specific. What information do you need? Who's getting it? And when will it be ready?
Kate M:So it's not, I will come back to this later. It's we need a cost analysis from Chris so we can make this decision at next month's meeting. So you're still moving towards the decision. You've got a deadline. You've got an owner of an action and a commitment.
Kate H:So that's different from parking it in the hope that the issue just goes away. Because I'll tell you what, Kate, the issue never goes away. It just gets bigger and bigger and harder and harder to deal with the longer that you leave it.
Kate M:Right. So once you're ready to make a decision, how do you make a good one? Well, there are five principles every committee member should know. They're really the practical application of the legal duties we covered in episode four. If you can answer yes to all five, then you've made an informed, responsible, defensible decision even if it doesn't turn out the way you hoped.
Kate H:So principle one, did you take reasonable care? You read the papers. You considered the issue properly. You didn't just take somebody else's word for it. I didn't read the contract. I assumed it was fine. It does not meet this standard. That's a failure of the duty of care, full stop.
Kate M:Principle two. Did you act in good faith and for a proper purpose? So if you acted honestly in the association's interests, not for personal gain or hidden motives, then you've done the right thing. Here's a classic example. If you're pushing for a particular contractor and you have an undisclosed relationship with that company, you know, even if they're the best option, that's not you acting in good faith. You need to declare the conflict, leave the room, and let the rest of the committee decide.
Kate H:Principle three, did you avoid being influenced by personal interests? Now this is closely related to principle two, but it's a bit more subtle. It's not just about financial conflicts. It's about consistently advocating for things that benefit your particular area, your family, your interest group, rather than the whole organization. If that's driving your position, the association's interests as a whole aren't coming first.
Kate M:So principle four, did you make reasonable inquiry? So the bigger the decision, the more thorough the inquiry needs to be. So for example, a major building renovation needs proper quotes, full costings, permits to be checked, and the cash flow confirmed before you can make a reasonable decision. And as we've seen so often in recent times in our work, one quote and a vague wish for better facilities is not due diligence. This is where the questions culture that we talked about in episode six really comes into its own. Asking what could go wrong here and what are we missing is exactly what's needed.
Kate H:Whereas the decision between ICEDVOVOs and Tim Tams for your committee meeting probably doesn't require that level of inquiry.
Kate M:I don't know. If you're really hungry, it might.
Kate H:Yeah. Well, I guess you're right there. Okay. So principle five of good decision making is when you ask, did you rationally believe that the decision was in the best interest of the association? Not did you guarantee the outcome. You you can't guarantee outcomes. What matters is that at the time, based on what you knew, you genuinely believed it was the right call.
Kate M:That's important because you make decisions with the information you have, not the information you'll have later. As much as we would love them to, decisions don't come with a crystal ball. If a decision turns out badly, the committee's not automatically liable. What matters is whether you followed a proper process at the time, which is why the reasonable person test we covered in episode four is so reassuring. No one can expect perfection of your committee, but they should be able to expect reasonableness.
Kate H:Now there's one other situation that I want to make particular note of. There are plenty of people who get on the board of a federation or a league or a peak body, and they are expected to, air quotes, represent their home committee. The problem is that when you're sitting around any committee table, your responsibility is to the one that you are with. You mean the committee table you're sitting around at at that exact moment?
Kate M:Absolutely.
Kate H:You have to dance with the one who brung you. So you can't actually be directed by your home committee about how you vote. You have to make your decisions in the best interest of the peak body that you're with at the time. Now you can put your case. You can advocate on behalf of the position that has been decided by your home committee. But when it comes to voting, you have to apply those five rules, and you have to vote in the best interest of that association, not the one you came from.
Kate M:Hear. Hear. So, Kate, here's a question that I'm often asked. How do you protect yourself as a committee member when a decision goes wrong?
Kate H:Well, Kate, it's less about protecting yourself and more about protecting the committee. Put all five principles together, and they point to one thing. Document your decision making. I'll say that again. Document your decision making.
Kate H:Record the information you considered, the alternatives you discussed, the reason for your decision. A good set of minutes, as we'll be discussing next episode, will include a solid summary of your discussion along with any supporting documentation. If something is questioned later, you and every other committee member can point to a robust, responsible process. A good process and good records are your protection, not a perfect outcome.
Kate M:And I'm just gonna throw in another hear, hear, there. That's an excellent summary. Thank you. So let's summarize all of this, Kate. Deferring is a decision, and it's rarely the right one.
Kate M:If you need more information, pin down exactly what, who, and when. Commit to a deadline. Make the call and get on with it.
Kate H:When you do make the call, reasonable care, good faith, no personal interest, reasonable inquiry, rational belief in the association's best interests. Five principles, document the process. In a worst case scenario, a dispute, complaint, a legal challenge. The question won't be whether the decision was right. It will be whether the process was sound.
Kate H:That's what makes a decision defensible. Even when things don't go according to plan, and we all know that things don't go according to plan from time to time.
Kate M:So, dear listener, here is your challenge this week. Ask yourself, is there a decision your committee keeps finding reasons not to make that it keeps dancing around? So name that decision. At your next committee meeting, put the issue on the agenda with a specific commitment. Either we decide at this meeting or we set a deadline, and we name who's responsible for getting the information we need.
Kate H:No more kicking that thorny issue down the road.
Kate M:And next time you're about to vote on something significant, run it through the five principles first. We've put a decision making checklist in the show notes from the committee companion. Five questions, one page. Keep it handy at your meetings.
Kate H:Use it to run your decision making through a quick check to make sure you're doing the right thing by yourself and by the members who elected you.
Kate M:And if your committee's been workshopping the same decision since forever, Kate and I can help. You can go to the show notes, or you can go online to freshallsorts.com.au.
Kate H:If you've got a governance question you'd like us to tackle on the show, just use the contact form at the podcast website, thecommitteeroom.com.au. Someone else will be glad you asked.
Kate M:So you know the drill. Subscribe wherever you get your podcasts and share us with someone on your committee or another committee. The show notes and the downloadable decision making checklist are at thecommitteeroom.com.au. And we'd love a review. It really does help us to share the committee love.
Kate H:So what's coming up? Well, you've made that big decision. Yay. Now you need to record it properly. We'll discuss what goes in the minutes and what doesn't, why the minute book is a legal record, and why "the committee discussed the matter" is never good enough.
Kate M:Until then, I'm Kate McPhee, Kate two,
Kate H:and I'm Kate Hartwig, Kate one. And this
Kate M:has been The Committee Room.
Kate H:And remember, you don't need good luck if you've got good governance.