Episode 2 Transcript
Summary:
Kate Hartwig and Kate McPhee host a podcast series on governance for small volunteer-led organizations. They discuss the importance of having the right people on committees, considering representative and skills-based models, or a hybrid approach. They emphasize the need for diversity in perspectives and opinions for better decision-making. The ideal committee size is 7 to 9 members, with staggered terms for continuity. They warn against creating an executive committee within a larger one and stress the value of genuine diversity beyond ticking boxes. They challenge listeners to assess their committee's composition and identify any missing perspectives or skills. 
KATE H: You're sitting in a committee meeting, right next to the person who's been on that committee for 25 years and still starts every sentence with, well, we tried that in 2013, and it didn't work then. KATE M: I know that person, a card carrying member of the 100 ways to kill good ideas club. Then there's the new member who's been waiting three long months to get a copy of the constitution, and the secretary frantically trying to take minutes while also chairing because the president couldn't make it again. KATE H: If any of that sounds familiar, you're in exactly the right place. Welcome to the committee room. Welcome back to the committee room. I'm Kate Hartwig, Kate One, KATE M: and I'm Kate McPhee, Kate Two. We help volunteer board and committee members of small volunteer-led organizations who feel overwhelmed, frustrated, or just plain bogged down to get their organization back on track, meet their legal and compliance obligations, and work better together. And a quick note before we start, this podcast is the general information on best practice governance for small to medium clubs and associations. It is not legal advice. Let's get into it. KATE H: This is the first episode in our Great People, Great Committee series. And like the song Do Re Mi, [SINGS] let's start at the very beginning. Did you like that? KATE M:I love that. KATE H: [SINGS] A very good place to start. Of course, this is not a variety program. It's a podcast on governance. And before you can govern well, you need the right people around the table. So today, we're going to talk about who should be in the room, how many people you need, and why getting the right people around the table matters more than most committees realize. KATE M: If you get that right, the right people around your committee table, then everything else, the meetings, the finances, the planning, becomes so much easier. If you get it wrong, the best agenda in the world won't save you. So let's start with the question most committees never ask. Why does our committee look like it does? KATE H: And the honest answer most committees would give is either, that's what the Constitution says, or that's how it's always been done. Neither of those is a particularly good reason. The question you should be asking is, who or what do we need? KATE M: That's right. Historically, there have been two main models. The representative committee, where the committee members are elected from the membership, that's number one. For example, the Plumbers Association has a committee of plumbers. The sporting club has a committee of parents or players. The great strength of the representative committee is the connection to why the club exists. These are the people who know the organisation from the inside. KATE H: The weakness of this model can be that everyone around the table has a very similar background. I've worked with more than one professional association where the whole committee were brilliant experts in their field, but when it came to financial strategy, marketing, governance, crickets. KATE M: And this is where the second model, the skills-based committee comes in, where you recruit specifically for what people bring to the table, legal expertise or financial skills, marketing experience and so on. The potential downside of the skills-based model though, is that the experts might not have the same connection to the members or have the same kind of feel for what the organisation is really about, the why the organisation exists. KATE H: So increasingly, we're seeing a hybrid. The majority of committee positions are elected from the membership, giving it that connection, with a few spots reserved for people with specific skills the organisation needs right now. I'm working with a community arts organisation at the moment. It has six elected positions and three appointed positions. They specifically brought in a marketing professional, someone who knows about sponsorship and someone who has links to government. This gives them their community connection plus that specialist expertise and that's a powerful combination. KATE M: If you're a broad community organisation like a sporting club or a social club, those skills might already be sitting within your membership. The trick is finding the people with the skills you need and convincing them to put their hand up to go on the committee. KATE H: Now that is always the challenge. One thing to know, moving to a hybrid structure usually requires a constitutional amendment. Now we're going to cover constitutions in a few weeks' time, but it's worth knowing the option exists for you to design a committee that combines commitment to what the organisation stands for and specific skills in certain areas. KATE M: Now, Kate, size. How many people should be sitting around your committee table? KATE H: Well, size really doesn't matter, Kate. Yes. Research on group dynamics consistently shows that six to 12 is the effective range for decision making. Below six and you can struggle to get a quorum if even a couple of people are unavailable. KATE M: And above 12, it stops being a governing body and starts feeling like a town hall meeting. 15 people around a table means the meetings run for hours or some people just don't get a chance to speak. I always recommend aiming for an odd number to minimise tied votes. So seven to nine committee members, that's about the sweet spot for most small associations. KATE H: I'd always say closer to seven, supported by strong subcommittees doing the operational work. A lean, focused committee with good structures underneath that is much more effective at both the governing work and the operational work than a big committee trying to do everything by itself. KATE M: Indeedy. Let's talk about terms of office. In my world, staggered two-year terms is ideal where part of the committee is up for election each year rather than all of the positions being declared vacant at the same time. It means you've got continuity because you don't want all of the club's organisational memory walking out the door at the same time. That's something we'll cover when we go much deeper into elections in a future episode. I think it's about episode five. KATE H: Another thing that tends to happen, Kate, if committees are too big is that they recognise that they can't actually function particularly well at that size. So they put together an executive committee and that executive committee makes all of the decisions and does all of the work. So that begs the question, why have the rest of them? KATE M: And generally, having an executive committee just creates another whole set of problems. You've tried to solve one problem but instead you've created another. You're better off having a nice, lean, fit-for-purpose committee that's going to do the job properly. KATE H: And then there's diversity. Now let's talk about that because it's an idea that makes some people nervous when it really shouldn't. KATE M: So we're not talking about just ticking boxes for the sake of it. We're not talking about just gender diversity or cultural diversity, although of course both of these really matter. We're talking about diversity of perspective, diversity of experience and super importantly, diversity of opinion. Because a committee where everyone thinks the same way and comes from the same background will always develop blind spots, the dreaded groupthink. I worked a year or so ago with a rural sporting club, lovely people, deeply committed to the club, some of them for many decades. But the committee was entirely men, mostly retired from paid work. And it had been the same group for many years, I don't know, many, many years. They genuinely couldn't work out why the club was struggling to attract younger families. KATE H: Well, of course it was because there was nobody at the table who represented that demographic. KATE M: Exactly. They had the hard skills the club needed, financial management, risk management, that kind of stuff. But they didn't have the diversity of perspective. Once they brought in some younger members, including some women, the conversation changed completely. Suddenly they were talking about childcare arrangements at their games, flexible membership options, family-friendly events, that kind of thing. Their membership grew, I think it was just over 30% in two years. KATE H: 30%? And that's just from having the right people in the room? KATE M: Yep. And that's because diversity isn't about the optics. It's not just ticking boxes to keep a funding body happy. It's about making better decisions. You want variety in the backgrounds of the people in your committee room, some with formal qualifications, variety in ethnicity, gender, age, education, and variety in the experiences that people have had. All the things which bring a diversity of thought, because that in turn leads to better discussions, and better discussions lead to better decisions. So, Kate, here's the test I apply. If nobody around the committee table ever disagrees with anything, that's not harmony. That's a warning sign that the committee is lacking diversity. KATE H: It is indeed, Kate. And I think, too, there is no one-size-fits-all solution. Not everybody needs the same types of diversity around their table. You need to decide for yourself what works best for your committee, your community, and the things that you're trying to achieve. So, three things to think about when it comes to who's in the room. The model, representative, skills-based, or hybrid. Choose what serves your organisation, not what you've always done. And size, seven to nine. Odd numbers if you can manage it with staggered terms for continuity. KATE M: And diversity. You want genuine diversity of perspectives and opinions, not just as a box to tick, but something that suits your club's purpose, because that's where better decisions come from. So, this week's challenge. Look around your committee table. What mix do you see? What's missing? Who's missing? Is there a skill set the committee's never had? Is there a perspective that's never been represented? Now, you don't need to fill the gap today, but identifying the gap and talking about it around your committee table is the first step to getting a balanced committee. KATE H: Have that conversation. It might be more interesting than you expect. KATE M: If you thought today's episode was useful, please make sure you subscribe wherever you get your podcasts and please share with someone else on your committee. The show notes are at thecommitteeroom.com.au. KATE H: Next episode, once you've got the right people in the room, what's expected of them? We're going to look at the three dimensions of committee responsibility and why understanding your role is the foundation for everything else. We're also going to have a template for you to download and use for your committee. KATE M: Template, template, tomato, tomato, tomato, template, template. KATE H: I don't think it matters, Kate. That's diversity in action. That's right. It is indeed. KATE M: Excellent. So, until then, I'm Kate McPhee, Kate 2. KATE H: And I'm Kate Hartwig, Kate 1. KATE M: And this has been The Committee Room. Remember, KATE H: you don't mean good luck if you've got good governance.