When considering the key features of its myriad boards and committees, you’d be hard-pressed to find a school or academy trust unwilling to place ‘diversity’ somewhere near the top of the list of priorities.
It’d be easy to spend time re-banging that drum. Reasserting the known and accepted truth that diverse boards are better boards. They reflect communities. They bring new perspectives. They ‘disrupt’ established patterns of thought. They introduce positive tension, to ensure challenge and properly accountable structures of governance. They avoid groupthink. They don’t make assumptions. You get it. We get it.
But how, as a sector, are we achieving that ambition of diversity around the table, whether at local level or within the trust and member levels of governance? How are we avoiding lip-service? How are we guarding against box-ticking and quotas?
Here’s a spoiler: we don’t have the answer for you. At least not right here, right now.
But we have been in the business of education governance recruitment for over a quarter of a century. In that time, we’ve helped to recruit and place nearly 40,000 volunteers for governance roles across England and Wales. We’ve got a proven record of success. We know what qualities a good trustee, member, local chair or governor needs to deliver effective governance. We can help you identify the priority characteristics required to balance the skills on your board.
Recent research by the National Council for Voluntary Organisations (NCVO) highlights that nearly two-thirds of charities and voluntary organisations see age, and under-representation of young people, as a challenge to their effectiveness. Previous research further suggests that most trustees – when compared to the volunteer force as a whole – tend to be over the age of 55. Against this backdrop, it’s noteworthy that over a third of all volunteers supported into role by Governors for Schools since April 2020 have been in the ‘under 35’ category. Specifically of 8,970 appointments, 37.3% are aged under 35.
So, in the first piece of a series considering how we might reimagine the make-up of trusts’ boards, we’re going to consider how we can do more to address the balance in relation to age demography.
Let’s redefine experience
It’s an oft-assumed principle that the 30-year veteran of the corporate boardroom, with their industry qualifications and battle-honed skillset, is the (undisputed) vanguard of the trustee and governor fleet. But this feels like an increasingly one-dimensional mindset, completely ignoring the many benefits of less experienced, but prospectively brilliant, candidates.
By willingly rowing back on requirements that may traditionally bulk out a CV – decades’ long experience, a hard-won route to ‘the top’, a clear and demonstrable career trajectory – we make room for qualities that can bring freshness and challenge. Vision. Creativity. Disruption. Progressiveness. Less ‘career CEO’ and more ‘tomorrow’s CEO’, less ‘this is how it’s done’ and more ‘why can’t it be done…?’. It’s not about youth for youth’s sake, but rather harnessing the impact that perspective can bring.
Build your own pipeline
If we accept the premise that youth, or at least relative inexperience, and all the potential benefits therein, is often desirable and can be beneficial in the boardroom, it only remains to be asked: how can schools and trusts find good people? Certainly, services like those provided by Governors for Schools are a great place to start. After all, we exist to take some of the heavy-lifting away from the shoulders of time- and resource-limited governance managers and clerks. But this isn’t the only way.
Trusts can look within and adopt effective methods to draw on skills and vision, while retaining some of the more desirable features of familiarity. Consider these options:
- Shadow boards: the creation of internal advisory structures, stocked and populated with prospective trustees or committee members, given a clear remit to generate links between the existing board/s and other parts of the organisation. This initiative offers the chance to develop invaluable lines of communication; fresh strategic viewpoints; and a pipeline of future governors, trustees and committee members, widening the knowledge base for decision-making. Crucially, this shouldn’t be lip service or tokenistic formation of an ineffectual body. Input should be sought and meaningful relationships generated to maximise the potential of this structure.
- Board Associates: perhaps directly linked to the concept of the shadow board, trusts may consider the idea of a ‘halfway house’ by creating associate roles in their governance. While official guidance precludes ‘associates’ from joining the boards of academy trusts, there is nothing to stop such a role existing in an informal way, potentially in conjunction with, or part of, a shadow board or local committee. This could be considered a valuable staging post, allowing individuals the chance to be exposed to strategic governance, contributing to internal policy or informing decision-making as part of a succession plan. A key consideration within this, of course, is ensuring the appropriate independence of would-be associates and how boards might source these fresh perspectives outside of existing networks and relationships.
- Student body or alumni advisory committees: inviting input from alumni, current workforce in the 18-30 age demographic, and/or appropriate members of the student body. They have existing knowledge and buy-in, they can potentially see pitfalls and hold a unique understanding of challenges and opportunities. While likely to be considered less independent, this is arguably balanced by the inclusion of a differing perspective that can challenge from a position of familiarity.
- Pathway to Governance: we must accept that a vital element is in the creation of a fresh wave of skilled volunteers. It’s important to ensure all newly recruited, independent trustees or governors have a solid grounding in good governance. Yes, they bring the benefits of a diverse perspective, but younger volunteers/board associates must also be able and willing to bring genuine challenge and independence to trust governance.
To wit, initiatives such as Pathway to Governance and Pathway to Trusteeship aim to upskill younger people who may not otherwise consider becoming an academy trustee or school governor and expose them to key principles of good governance. It demystifies the role and helps build confidence, steadily growing a burgeoning volunteer force of young people ready, able, willing and equipped to take on roles. By investing in these programmes – and using them in tandem with the strategies above – we’re investing in the future.
Shifting the dial
So – shifting the dial on a trust board requires more than just finding the right person ‘who ticks the box’ – it requires an openness to rethink what makes an ideal trustee. As a sector, we urgently need to invest in processes that nurture new voices and reshape the face of trust governance. Once we have that fresh perspective, we might not need to have this conversation at all.
But, in the meantime, we want to know: What do you think? How else can we begin, or continue, this conversation? What does innovation look like? Are we, collectively, being brave enough?