What is the Governance System with Ned Murray

Travis features Ned Murray, Founding President and consultant with NRM consulting; a group that is focused on helping nonprofit organizations by systematically creating solutions using the concept of “Governance”.

Conversation Highlights

[00:58] Ned describes the scope of his work with NRM consulting.
[01:40] The central Nervous system of any Nonprofit is the “Governance” system; not “Government”.
[02:22] Ned’s firm has a unique approach to helping nonprofit organizations achieve their goals by building resilience and trust in the governance team to unlock their full potential
[03:41] Takeaway #1: Consensus is not always the best outcome but often tends toward the average or the agreeable
[07:43] Takeaway #2: Be clear about what the purpose and work of your board is
[10:46]A story of two boat platoons from the book “Extreme Ownership” by Jocko Willink
[12:22] Ned believes that in the nonprofit world, we have overemphasized the importance of “that single leader”
[20:01]All this emphasis on a single leader creates “Fear-based pressure” which blocks growth.
[21:02] Takeaway #3: When you mess up, the most direct way out of your problem, is to take responsibility for the thing that got messed up
[22:53] There is a difference between being divergent and just being contentious
[23:27] So often we have Nonprofit boards with people by “default”.
[28:02] The 4-question metric or evaluation for those working with a current board
[38:02] Ned describes the most uncomfortable question he needs to ask as a consultant
[42:04]All of the judgment we make about people are based on signals that have nothing to do with the actual person.
[44:41] How to contact Ned

Full Conversation

Hey, welcome to the Nonprofit Architect. I’m sitting here with Ned Murray. Ned, how are you doing today?

I think I’m doing as well as anybody can be doing during these interesting times, but I’ve had a pretty good, productive day. I’m looking forward to having this conversation with you, Travis.

That’s fantastic. We’re gonna dive into everyone’s super favorite topic, which is governance. I don’t know why Ned is all about this, he just loves to talk about slicing through red tape and making things happen on an official level. And he does this with NRM consulting.

Ned, what do you do with NRM consulting? What is that?

It’s something I started. I’ve been an educator since I was, well, my whole life. I mean, I decided in fourth grade that I was going to be a teacher, and it had to do with building community, and empowering young people’s voices, and making a difference in the world. I was mesmerized by a magical teacher, and I decided to be a teacher. And I’ve never left that path.

But for whatever reason, early on in my career, I was invited to become an administrator and a leader in a school. And so I began to look at it more, and the system in your view just gets kind of bigger and bigger. And as a school head now for over 20 years, I’ve realized the central nervous system of at least an independent school, which is where I’ve spent most of my career.

And really any nonprofit is the governance system. Now, not government, but

governance, that is the board and the executive director. And if that central nervous system isn’t at full health and full efficiency, it’s going to impede the organization. And I really have come to believe that, in most nonprofits, anyway, a great deal of the struggles they face and the lack of ability to reach their full potential and full impact and fulfill their mission as fully as possible, is really rooted in the governance system. Rooted in the boardroom.

So my firm that I founded two and a half years ago is really dedicated to helping nonprofits and schools achieve their aspirations. But a particular specialty for us is building resilience and trust in the governance team to kind of unlock that potential.

Now I know being in the school system, there’s got to be times where you’ve been frustrated by bureaucracy or even mediocrity. What does that look like? What kind of triggers do you have when you hear mediocrity or bureaucracy in the school system?

You didn’t give me a trigger warning for those triggers, Travis! It’s rampant. It’s absolutely rampant. And then the thing is that it comes out of good intentions. But let’s just take a couple of concepts here. Consensus is often a goal in board conversations and in school leadership. I’ve been in workshops, where consultants have told me, get your team around, get your faculty around, get your board around, and hash these issues out and build consensus.

Well, I think consensus isn’t always the best outcome. Often consensus tends toward the average or the agreeable, or what we can get everybody fully on board with. And that’s very rarely going to be the bold, innovative vision. I think that’s often one of the huge mistakes I see. It’s one of the ways I see boards fall short of really being able to unlock the potential of themselves as a board.

There’s nothing wrong with there being dissenters in the boardroom. I want, always, on my board one or two divergent thinkers who are going to poke and prod and make us think a little differently about some things. Now I don’t want a majority of them, I don’t want 18 of them, but if we don’t have one or two, we’re gonna miss something. I think they make us better. And if we have a relationship of trust and openness and we process that divergence and disruption well, then it all results in a better outcome

So that’s just two examples of where I think the normal behavior often, of boards and nonprofits, tends towards a more safe approach in that boardroom, through consensus, or by avoiding divergent or disruptive thinking in there.

Well, I think you bring up a good point. We see this in nature all the time that you have to have some kind of physical stimulus to grow, right? The fledgling that falls out of the nest. You can’t help that fledgling, because if you do, it won’t learn how to use its own muscles, its own wings, and go out and fly. The same with a butterfly, breaking out of the chrysalis. You can’t open it for them, they have to force their way out. And just like a good board member, even CEO, leader or Executive Director, you have to have someone that’s willing to show you a different perspective, a different point of view, maybe even challenge the general thought in there.

Because if times like we’re looking at it right now, with COVID, who knows how far and how long this thing is gonna go, you have to have people willing to fight for change and fight for something different. I think that’s really one of those important parts of having a good board team and good governance team is having people that think differently.

It’s critical. I love that you use those nature analogies. A huge focus of my education piece is using the natural world. And in fact, your listeners can’t see this, but you might be able to see, one of the three frequent symbols or metaphors I use in my work is the butterfly. I got two butterflies behind me on my desk back there. Not live, of course.

But that’s a perfect analogy of the kind of discomfort and the letting go of something that is required to embrace an exciting, new, innovative future.

Absolutely. And I think that boards, whether you’re talking about a nonprofit board or a for profit board, if you’re not familiar with the people in those things, they’re just people. They’re not this thing on a pedestal in the Glass Palace or whatever, they’re part of the team.

How do you talk to different nonprofits and different boards about actually being part of the team and being involved?

That’s a great question. You know, it starts all the way back at square one, which is being clear about what the purpose and work of your board is. You need to be very, very clear about what you want, need, and expect that board to do as a whole, and then what every individual member’s role is.

One of the first things we do when we go into a school is look at the board makeup, look at the committees they have, we’ll read some of the committee minutes to see how they’re organized and operating, and 9 times out of 10, most of that has been in place for 50 years, or decades or a very long time, and there may be one or two new ones that were in response to some changing condition or emphasis or focus. It’s really what I call the patchwork approach or the finger in the dike approach to governance.

So we go right back to ground zero and say, “Right now, what is your mission? What is your strategic vision for this?” And “How do we organize the board in such a way to only help support and implement that. And anything else they’re doing that isn’t directly tied to your mission or your current strategic plan, let’s get rid of it, jettison it, it’s wasting people’s time.

Too often people sit on boards, and they’re just there to vote yes or to write a check, which isn’t a bad thing, but it shouldn’t be the only reason they’re there. So we start right with structure, purpose, job descriptions of the body, job descriptions for the individuals, link that to their mission, link that to their strategic plan, and get everybody meaningfully involved.

A lot of times the board, chair, and the executive director or the head of school, are the focus there. We like to broaden that circle a little bit. Who the other key players are, that’s very different in each culture. But now there’s two or three or four important key players, maybe it’s the next chair elect. If it’s a religious organization, maybe the pastor from the church or maybe the treasurer really has his finger on the pulse and you take that whole team so that it’s not just resting on the executive director or just the chair and the executive director and really build that out. So you share the load a little bit too.

I mean, there’s a high burnout rate in nonprofit executive directors and heads of schools. They either burn out or they run away from a dysfunctional board or they get chased away by a dysfunctional board. But none of those are good or healthy for the institution. So you really got to strengthen that system right there.

It’s interesting that you focus on the leaders specifically. I’m in the Navy, I just went over 20 years this weekend, praise be to God that I’ve gotten that far. But, you know, throughout my career in the Navy, I always see these headlines, “Commanding officer got fired for XYZ reason” “Removed for lack of confidence, in their view”.

I’m going through Extreme Ownership by Jocko Willink right now, and he just told the story of these boat platoons that they have. They have seven individuals running around with this rigid hull inflatable boat, and they’re having them do all these crazy things, and there was one team consistently coming in last place. The team was dysfunctional, and everyone’s pointing out each other’s mistakes, and no one’s really taking ownership of this. And one of the bystanders, one of the senior chiefs said, “All right, we’re gonna take the leader from the boat that keeps coming in first and we’re swapping with the leader of that boat that keeps coming last. We’re gonna see if it’s the leader of the boat.” And wouldn’t you know it, those two boats, instead of finishing first and last, finished first and second although the good leader from the first boat that had been finishing first got that same team that was weak, and running last, and dysfunctional, and got them over the hump. And they were finishing first every time.

Now that great leader from that first boat, again, coming in first, they got that team that was coming in last up to second place in a close second each and every time, just by swapping the leaders, only keeping the teams the same, because a leader is not just a figurehead, or just a smiling face, or just shaking hands and kissing babies, they actually have to lead and they have to maintain those high standards, and they have to provide encouragement and direction. And you know from your experience of 30 years in this arena that the leader has such an important role.

I’d rather get to the right place late than get to the wrong place on time.

Ned Murray Tweet

Here’s the problem with applying that story into the boardroom. Because it’s a great story, and there’s a lot of truth to that, but I actually think, in the nonprofit world in particular, very often in the corporate world, we have over emphasized the importance of that single leader. So much of what we do is we build cults of personality, and that abdicates the board’s responsibility. So they then stand on the sidelines, “We’ve picked a great leader, we did our job, we found a great leader, we think they’re exactly what we need, we’re 100% behind him, and we’re gonna sit here on the bench and see how they do.” At least that’s what we see in schools all the time, and leave them alone, they do fine, or they don’t do fine, but you get buffeted.

One of the things about schools is they’re highly political, they’re difficult, the market is challenging right now. And this is true with a lot of nonprofits scraping for viability, for impact, for survivability, and sustainability. And I think we rely on that personality of that leader way, way, way too much instead of sharing the burden with them.

So here’s where your analogy does work. Leadership mattered, but so did the team. There were six other people that had to carry that boat. And that’s what the military gets well that the nonprofit boardroom doesn’t get quite as well. We either don’t have them carrying that boat at all, or we have them carrying other things that aren’t about getting the boat there. Somebody over here is carrying the oar, and someone’s carrying the life jacket, someone’s holding on to a piece of rope because that’s their committee, but it’s not doing the heavy lifting. That’s all on the Executive Director’s shoulders. I probably overworked your analogy, but you see what I’m saying?

Yes. All right in line there. This has come up a few other times in my shows where people get off course. It’s not that they’re off course or saying yes to one little extra thing, it’s that over time, that small deviation ends up creating this big chasm between what you’re doing and where you tell the public that you’re going to be focusing on and all these little things on the fringes all of a sudden start getting attention, and you’re missing the mission completely.

Well, Travis, you and I haven’t talked about this but your listeners aren’t gonna believe this. I feel like you’ve been listening in or something over here. I told you I have a couple of symbols I use a lot and metaphors I use a lot right here on my desk. Your viewers can’t see I’m pointing there. Here’s the butterfly I mentioned a minute ago, do you know what that is right there? A compass.

I had a mentor when I was a young man in teaching who said “I don’t carry a watch,” and I thought it was a pocket watch, he had a little chain and a thing in his pocket. Every day when I saw him, I thought he carried a pocket watch. One day, I asked him about it, and he pulled it out. It’s just like this wood up here, see the chain on it? He said “I don’t carry a watch, I carry a compass in my pocket because I firmly believe that my direction is far more important than my pace.” He said, “I’d rather get to the right place late than get to the wrong place on time.” And this is essential in the boardroom.

And what you’re saying about navigating is exactly right. That’s how you get off course, a little bit at a time. You hear these dramatic stories of companies and organizations that just collapsed under their own way, but that didn’t happen in one big fell swoop, that leadership system weakened and weakened and weakened the institution because they weren’t really watching the direction and checking the settings.

I’m gonna go back to my nervous system analogy, the board being the nervous system of the institution. If the nervous system shuts down, the arms and legs might still be able to function for a while but there’s no head and eyes and ears. reading the environment and responding quickly.

So let’s just take that notion in the year 2020. If a dysfunctional board, or let’s just say an average, fine functioning sort of consensus focused, mediocre board with an outstanding institution and an outstanding leader. But if that mediocrity in the boardroom slows them down in their ability to respond, what’s the impact of that in the year 2020? I mean, the rate of change and the rapidity with which the environment changes, how quickly did we all have to pivot in March, when things started shutting down in this pandemic?

In my world, in schools, in about a period of one week, the wheat and the chaff were separated. We all had to pivot to distance learning. There were a few of us who were prepared and ready and delivered it and there is a vast number that is still trying to figure it out. And that’s years of accumulated lack of vision, lack of responsiveness and lack of nimbleness. Boards just have to get in that mindset.

Do you think it is complacency into an old system and just allowing that to perpetuate over generations?

That’s part of it, it’s probably not complacency with a startup. But certainly with a well established organization that’s been around a long time, has a pretty good name, brand recognition, there certainly can be complacency at the leadership level. It’s an awkward situation in the nonprofit world.

So let’s go back to this model, we have got to hire a great leader. But the structural reality is that the executive director, that great charismatic leader we’re relying on to take this institution to where we want to go, works for the board. One of the things in governance 101 everybody teaches is the board has one employee and one employee only, that’s the Executive Director. Now the reason that gets emphasized is to keep the board out of the weeds and not have to micromanage any other employees. But they forget what it means to manage that one employee.

And so it’s awkward in the nonprofit world. They’re not professionals in that industry. Usually, there’s rarely more than one educator in the room on the volunteer board other than the Executive Director in the staff. It’s true in arts boards, there’s one art professional in there, maybe some art lovers. So you have this weird awkwardness where the leader in that context is also the employee and has to lead that board in being a better board, but it’s not really their role. So there’s a built in, just awkwardness to it. And I think that that hampers their effectiveness until they name that, identify it, work through it, embrace it and build a different model. And then there’s fear in there.

Executive Directors hear your story about the rafts. One of the first things they hear is “So if we’re not coming in first what’s going to happen? We’re replacing the leader, right?” Executive Directors of nonprofits live with this whether it’s right in the forefront or the back of their mind. But all this emphasis on the single leader can’t help but create some fear based pressure. And we know that fear blocks growth, and is not healthy. But it’s there.

So now if I invite the board too deeply into my worries or my challenges, or the mess that I’m trying to clean up, now I might be exposed, my weaknesses might be exposed, I might come down off the pedestal, I’ll be looking for another job. So I gotta keep them at bay, that’s not healthy. So there’s a bunch of factors and dynamics that I think impede full effectiveness and growth there.

I definitely agree with you about the fear based leadership, that’s a terrible place to be in. I’ve been an educator of sorts, not at your level or your caliber, but I’ve had to instruct tours in the Navy. One as an enlisted and one as an officer. And one of the first lessons I teach, especially to the brand new guys, is when you mess up, the easiest, quickest, and most direct way out of your problem is to take responsibility for the thing that got messed up.

That’s the same thing that I’m talking about in Extreme Ownership, the same thing that works well on boards. And what it does is it shows that, A, you’re a little bit vulnerable, that you’re willing to say, “Hey, this is on me”, B, it says that you’re responsible, and that you have the courage to say what needs to be said and have that integrity. And that helps build the relationship between them and the Executive Director, like I have allowed some things, whatever they are, to get in the way, when I’m focused, I know what I did wrong, and here’s how I’m gonna do to fix it, here’s what I need from you moving forward.

It’s exactly right. And it feels like a vulnerability, but counter-intuitively it actually builds strength. The other thing is it signals those weaknesses or those issues that you see there.

You know, I’ve sat on boards and there’s nothing that sends my hackles up faster than an ED who was whitewashing stuff that we all know is there. If they can’t name it and acknowledge it, we can’t get anywhere. And then the board has to look at themselves and say, “Why is this” and then “let us step up into the board, and we’re going to name it.”

But it goes right back to having a challenging member or two on your board willing to call the baby ugly, willing to tell the emperor he’s got no clothes on, willing to say, “Hey, this isn’t right. This isn’t going to make sense for us. We need to move forward, we need to do this thing.” Then they have the idea or the seed planted of the idea for something in the future. But it takes outside the normal to get that thing going.

Fear blocks growth

Ned Murray Tweet

There is a difference between being divergent and just being contentious. I do know, we all fear that board member who just comes in with their own agenda, or you know, just likes to gripe and complain. And you know, that’s not helpful. So really a lot of what we’re talking about is how you build the board from the get go, we started to talk about that a little bit, that I think I got off on. Building the board as a group. But a huge piece of this is knowing what you have in your boardroom and what you need in your boardroom and going out and seeking and recruiting the right people.

So often we end up in our nonprofit boards, with people by default, you know? Alot of times the nominating process is, “Well, who do we think would say yes, if we ask them to serve on this board?” Now think about that. I don’t believe that’s how the army promotes people. I don’t think it’s how top performing corporations identify their talent, you know, “Who can we go get that will say yes to this task?” “What do we need on this board?” And “How do we create a role where they will have a meaningful opportunity to contribute to this? and Let me go out and find them and let’s get them.” And let’s make sure they’re not totally crazy, but have a background that brings a different perspective that might really inform what we’re doing. And then be honest with them and say, “Look I’ve loved getting to know you and the work that you’re in. Personally, I know that you see things a little bit differently, or a lot differently. I know you are creative. I know you’re not afraid of asking the tough questions. I want you on my team.” Now I’m going to be honest and tell you you’re not always going to get your way. In the end, we take a vote and make some decisions but I believe over the term of your service, your good questions and hard work will make every decision we make better and I want to have you on the team. What do I need to do to get you on? You have really got to build that team. You can’t just make that out of what you’re left with.

And again, it’s the thing we’re talking about the urgent versus the important. One of the most important jobs that a board and an Executive Director have is identifying, and cultivating and recruiting, and then onboarding, and then engaging trustees. It’s the kind of work that often gets pushed to the backburner because the urgency of the day carries over. And somebody knows somebody who loves the organization, and “I know they’re a great guy, and they were good on this board, and I’ll take him to lunch and get him to join up.” And then you’re left with that.

So what would you tell an organization, since this is largely a startup nonprofit podcast, what would you tell a startup organization that doesn’t have a board or even an Executive Director/Founder who’s been essentially doing all the jobs by themselves with kind of an absentee board that has about two years of operation? How would you tell these people A, where to find people? B, what kind of qualities are you looking for? And C, how do you make that happen?

Nine times out of 10, the hardest part is getting them to realize they need a board. Chances are that that founder, startup, Executive Director, CEO, whatever, probably when they lay their head down at night they know the books all say they need a board, but they probably see the board as just another group of people who have the potential to make their life difficult, and they’d rather just keep them out of their way.

Maybe I’m wrong about that, but I think the most common mindset is there’s just this whole other layer “I just want to get the work done.” And that’s why people start these things. They’re focused about the work, and they see governance as some kind of obligation, or even a sort of burden, or possibly a problem making entity.

So what I start with is “how would you like a trustworthy, reliable partner to help you take some of this work, and some of this weight, and some of this responsibility that you feel every night when you put your head on the pillow? It’s all on you, do you really want it that way?” I get you don’t want to give up control and hand your baby over, but look, parents like having a partner in parenting because it’s a lot of work.

I want to interject real quick, I just got back from Bahrain. If you’ve been listening to my show for a while this may be the fourth or fifth conversation you’ve heard me say this, but I had to come home and add a little extra parenting when I got back, my family stayed in the states, and trust me when I say my wife was happy for the reprieve.

Exactly, exactly. So you know, I think that’s where you start, you have got to really get in the mindset that you’re building a partnership. And we have a quick little four question metric we asked folks that are working with a current board. And it’s especially useful when you think about where we are right now. I can’t imagine there’s an entity in the country that hasn’t wrestled with major issues related to the COVID 19 pandemic, right? Big financial decisions, big legal and liability decisions, sustainability, survivability decisions. This has required some really big decisions on the part of institutions, and so we say, “Okay, where was your board in that?”

Here’s the four step evaluation. “Was your board adding pressure and expectations or confusion or fear? Were they contributing to the chaos and stress of that event, or were they staying out of your way and letting you take care of business? Were they pretty informed and supportive and appreciative of what you were doing? Were they aware and patted you on the back and told you you’re doing a good job, or were they a reliable, collaborative partner sharing the work and shouldering the burden?”

Most of the time, they’re somewhere in the first three. And if they’re at number three, “I’ve got an informed, supportive board.” the Executive Director is happy. But that’s the board on the sidelines cheering you on, and that’s not releasing the greatest potential and it’s really not sustainable. It means you’re carrying all that weight as the Executive Director.

So you have got to get that mindset first. Then how do you find these people and how do you engage them? That’s where it sort of becomes a little more specific to what the mission of the institution is but it really goes back to “What is our work?” “What are the pieces of this work that our board level?” “What is strategic?” “What is fiduciary?” “What is the vision work we need to do?” And for some part for the founding ED, what are the skills and backgrounds I don’t have? It’s acknowledging your shortcomings and going “Hi, I need somebody taking a closer look at the finances on a regular basis.” And, ” I want a group that’s working on innovation and vision and nimbleness.” “And how do I get some thinkers like that?”

So you have got to get the job descriptions first, and then you call everybody you know, and start asking them those questions. “Hey, who do you know that sounds like this?” Then you do the description of what you’re looking for. You’ll find them.

Who do you want on your board? You want smart, impactful, successful, people who work well with others. That’s what you’re looking for. Those kinds of people want to do good work, they want to serve their community, they want to serve good causes. They’re out there, and you want them, just line up your vision for them. So it isn’t always that they have to already know and love your institution, you just have to make a make a pitch of the vision and the way you’ll utilize them to the benefit of things that they’ll want to sign up and do. And they’re not hard to steal, because most of them sit on boards where they’re underutilized and undervalued.

Yeah, absolutely. I worked with a start up nonprofit last year and this gal was doing amazing things feeding the homeless, but she was also shopping and cooking and delivering and going out and getting donations, and she did a wonderful job doing it. I asked her the question, “Do the homeless people not get fed when you’re tired?” “Do they not get fed when you’re sick?” “Do they not get fed when you’ve got a doctor’s appointment?” “What happens when you’re unavailable for whatever reason?” And her answer at the time was they don’t get fed. Let’s find a team that can help you do this. Because it’s either about the mission or it’s about you and if you decide not to get a team, then I know it’s about you.

And that first person I would want on that board is a systems thinker. I don’t think you want to get a shopper on the board. I mean, it’s fine if the board wants to help shop, but that’s still not really a sustainable or really innovative model. What you want is a systems thinker.

So she’s got the knowledge and passion for homeless people and feeding them, somebody needs to help her figure out how you put together a system that doesn’t rely on her doing it all. So I’m just gonna say this, I don’t know you, maybe you edit this kind of stuff out, but I will say and this is not just, you know, I’m not the only one that can do this, but I do think if you have people listening here that are starting nonprofits or working in nonprofits, and you’re hearing things and going, “I probably have some work to do on my board” I would say this is an area where, let’s go back to the parenting model, where a third party may be very, very helpful.

It’s a lot harder for you to get parenting advice from your co-parent and vice versa, then from a third party professional who can look dispassionately at both of you and say, hey, what if we worked on some of these things in the household? You know what I’m saying? It’s not unlike relationship counseling to go from where you are to a new model of relationship and the board, having a dispassionate third party come and evaluate your systems and your culture and your bylaws. And all of that is worth a little bit of time and money invested in it.

It’s funny that you bring that up, because I think I’ve talked about that very topic. And each of the last three interviews that I’ve done, it’s hard to grow without this outside force, whether that be breaking through the chrysalis or someone coming in and being like, “Hey, have you looked at this, this or this?” “Did you know that your executive director over here doesn’t have any clothes on?” “Oh, no, he’s amazing.” “Are you sure? You didn’t see that he’s standing here buck naked because everyone else can see.” It’s so valuable. And the hard thing, especially with startup nonprofits, is it’s hard to look at the dollar amount that a consultant might charge and think that it’s worth it at the time.

It's either about the mission or it's about you.

Travis Johnson Tweet

It’s so true. No, it’s so true. And that goes back to the urgent and important, right. So she’s got to buy sandwiches, she’d go buy food to feed those folks, and there’s no money to build the system. But if your goal as you were saying is to build a healthy, sustainable organization that is going to really achieve its potential, you’ve got lots of potential in there. And so just imagine what could happen if you can unlock some of that potential.

But here’s the other thing, Travis, you know, when we started this, we hear this from schools that it’s costly. And we take a team approach to the team. So I’m bringing three people in to work with that leadership team over the course of a year often, because that’s what it takes. It’s not a one and done, in and out kind of thing. There’s no handbook on this, you’ve got to get down, roll your sleeves up and do that work.

So you know, now three people now one person seemed costly. And I kept saying, “Look, you don’t have to fly us there.” “Oh, no, you’ve got to meet us, you’ve got to see us you’ve got to walk around,” which is ideal, but I think in the last several months, people have gotten much more used to this format we’re all in right now, having a very real conversation, very productive. People get vulnerable now on Zoom. And with manageable size groups, a board is a little large, but a governance team, four, five, six, people, we can do a whole lot of good in 45 minutes or an hour a week. And that’s very cost-effective, you’d be amazed at what we can swarm in and do at really a very reasonable price if you’re willing to use this virtual route.

And we’re just happy that people are finally much more comfortable with it. Because we’ve been offering it for a long time. My team is all over the country. I don’t think there’s any two of us in the same city. We’re all over the country. Because I went after skillsets and mindsets, not proximity. So I think this kind of work can be a whole lot more cost-effective for the smaller nonprofits now.

It’s interesting, you talk about zoom, or whatever video portal you happen to use. I mean, I just started this podcast over in Bahrain, 7000 miles away from home, and have been able to have great conversations, have been able to connect with people, have been able to do coaching and consulting virtually.

The young lady I helped. She went up to 70 grand in her first year and got a team. And we were all able to do that virtually. I don’t have to be there to hug you or shake your hand or, you know, smack you up a little bit if you need it.

It’s been hard for some of these nonprofits to embrace that or has been because they’re so human connection oriented, you know? Schools are really about being in person, and then that is better 90% of the time. But when it comes down to how impactful can we be on something like this and save thousands of dollars and travel and time? I do think one of the good things that has come out of this time is there’s more and more people and organizations are realizing the potential you’re describing and embrace it.

What is the most uncomfortable question that you ask when you get called as a consultant to come in? What do you go in and ask that just really gets at the core of people, and they don’t want to answer?

Yeah. You know, I think where it most often gets uncomfortable is where people, particularly people, who have some form of relationship, so let’s say a board chair and a head of school, what’s my most common point of intersection there, and they’ve worked together for a few years and, you know, sort of know each other. And they each have an appraisal of the other person in their mind and an appraisal of their skills, their strengths, their weaknesses, their break points, they’ve, they’ve assessed them and sized them up in their minds. And they work off of that set of assumptions on that template. They’ve never talked about it with each other. And it’s probably very inaccurate in a number of ways, and probably accurate in other ways. But if that never gets unpacked, we can put all the blueprints we want in for the organization, but they’re going to work off of that template, you’re gonna work off of that set of assumptions, that then becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

So the shift for that team to shift to a different place and unleash their individual and their collective potential. You have to break into that somehow. And that’s very uncomfortable. They don’t want to talk about each other in that way. They don’t want to expose their own assessments in that way. And they’re afraid that that is the elephant in the room that breaks the magic. And the fact is, it’s the elephant in the room that unlocks the magic.

I can honestly say that I’ve seen exactly what you’re talking about. I’m on move number 50. Moving back from Bahrain was five zero for me, which means I’m always the new guy, right? I’m always showing up being the new guy in whatever organization, whatever room I’m in. And there’s a lot of positives for that. And there’s a lot of negatives from that. One of the negatives is I am more comfortable in that room than everybody else is.

Which means the real me is on full display. And they’re not ready to know the real Travis just yet, most of the time, most of the time they just want to do the niceties. And the “How are you doing?” you know, as they’re groomed, and they dress appropriately. And the you know, as long as you’re not rude, they’re like, “Oh, that’s, you know, whatever, guy’s a decent guy”

And I come in the room full Travis, and they are not sure what to think. If you’re listening to this, and you haven’t met me or haven’t had a conversation with me, just know that I’m not wild and crazy, I’m just more comfortable than you are at the moment. And I promise, it’s all love.

That’s the key. I love it, Travis.

But people have this, this picture of me, that is oftentimes far out to left field only because of the mismatch and comfortability. You know, there are a lot tentative meeting a new person and not sure what they’re gonna get. And I come in, and I’m always me, a lot of people are not okay with that. But once they do, if they invest a little bit of time and get to know the real me, they know that it’s all out of love. And they’re so much better for having known me. And I’m better for having known them, as long as you get over those initial bumps in the road.

So, you know, that gives me an interesting thought. I have not had this thought before. But I’ve been reading a lot in the last year about bias and how it works. And not just race or racial bias, all kinds of proven, research backed, biases that we operate with in situations, because that’s the only way our brain can deal with all the stimuli in the world. And it occurs to me that a lot of the judgments we create that, you know, there’s that whole first impression, right, you never get a second chance to make a first impression. So much of that is based on signals that have actually nothing to do with the real person, right? It’s physical characteristics, it’s the clothing they’re wearing, it’s sort of you know, there’s all these other signals that we pick up and create some assumptions about that person, that really has nothing to do with who they are.

And I’m wondering if a format like this zoom conversation you and I are having maybe actually, in some ways, helps make that dialogue and relationship connection be a little more authentic and a little less filtered through some of those biases, because we don’t have all of that environmental stimuli in there.

You know, I was working with somebody who wanted to work with me to build an education platform for distance learning, because the vast majority of American kids were left behind last year in this context. It’s hard for me because I’m a relation-based educator. And I think the relationship and the community is where the education comes from and where it needs a circle back to. And so this distance learning is challenging. And he said, you know, that I hear you, but do you understand that whatever it is, somewhere between 40 and 70% of marriages today are formed online, those relationships begin and are sustained online.

Now, obviously, marriage doesn’t stay online. But I haven’t really looked into that. But I do think there may be some, and I’ll be interested as my practice moves in this direction, and more and more schools embrace it, to see if we actually see some benefits that come from not having all those artificial environmental signals that we either send or receive. And maybe we get a little purer sense of each other initially.

But it’s interesting, you bring this up, because at any point that I disagree with you or get offended, or whatever the thing is, I don’t like our conversation, or you give me a dirty look, I can just shut off my camera. Or I can end the Zoom call. And immediately I’m in the comfort of my own home, and you’re nowhere to bug me. I’m immediately as far away from you as I possibly can be. We’re only having this conversation because we both agreed that we wanted to have it. And isn’t it great that we have a video system that can do that for us?

Yeah. It’s gonna be interesting. It’s gonna be a different world.

So Ned, why don’t you share with our audience just where they can get a hold of you.

I’m pretty easy to find. But the best way is email. I’ve got a couple of addresses ned@nrmconsulting.com. Those are my initials, I’m Ned Robert Murray. I’ve got a website at NRMconsulting.com. You can find me on Facebook. I’m not super active on Instagram, but I’m there. I’m on LinkedIn, on Twitter. I’ve been very active with the pandemic, I’m fully occupied trying to manage the chaos, just about 24/7 365. But if somebody needs to find me, I’d be happy for them to reach out and see if I can be helpful.

That’s great. We’ll have all those links in the show notes. Thank you so much for being on today, Ned.

It’s been a real pleasure, and I appreciate you geeking out on governance with me, it’s hard to find people to do that.

I think it’s important. I think that structure matters. I think accountability matters. And the higher our standards are, the better everyone is for it. And if you’re listening to this show, drop me an email at nonprofitarchitect@gmail.com And we’ll talk about getting your board up to speed. Thanks a lot, Ned for being on the show today.

Thanks for having me, Travis. It’s been a pleasure.

Dr Ned Murray Bio

Head of School, Episcopal Day School, Augusta, GA
Founding President and Senior Consultant NRM Consulting

With over 30 years in education leadership, Ned has been head of school and senior administrator in independent schools of all sizes–religious and non-religiously affiliated–as well as a for-profit school system. As the current Head of School of Episcopal Day School in Augusta, GA, Ned takes on only a few clients each year. His passion is assisting schools in pursuing their missions more effectively and efficiently for the betterment of the larger community.

Dedicated to research, collaboration, and innovation in education, he was a founding member of the Elementary Schools Research Collaborative (now part of INDEX) and ISA, a regional marketing collaborative. He has served on the Board of SAIS and led accreditation teams in several states. The time and energy he once focussed on those professional organizations, Ned now dedicates to NRM Consulting, which he finds is a more efficient and impactful use of his experience. His other community service endeavors have included serving on the Board of the Chattanooga Boys and Girls Club, the Center for Strategic and International Studies’ (CSIS) Education Advisory Council, Governor Sundquist’s Advisory Council on Education, and as Mentor to the 120 member Augusta Red Cross Youth Board.

Ned earned his B.A. in English from Sewanee: The University of the South, an M.Ed. in Education Leadership from UTC, and a D.Min. in Education Leadership from Virginia Theological Seminary. Other continuing education has included the Coalition of Essential Schools summer workshop at Brown University and two programs at Columbia University’s Klingenstein Institute. Ned knows independent schools as a student, teacher, administrator, and parent of two independent school graduates.

ned@nrmconsulting.com

nedrmurray@gmail.com