To channel a bit of Tolstoy:
All happy boards are alike; each unhappy board is unhappy in its own way.
There are the board meetings that often go way over the time they are scheduled. There are those where forty minutes is spent on the location of the spring gala, but there doesn’t seem to be time to explore why the attrition rate for full pay families is up again this year. Then there are boards where on the surface things seem pleasant and civil, yet, under the surface something is festering in the relationship between the head of school and the trustees, or between trustees themselves. There is the board where everyone appears to be doing what they should be doing: there is a strategic plan, committees are meeting, there are goals, and nonetheless, there is a lack of confidence that governance is truly as healthy as it could be.
In the last few weeks I’ve had deep conversations with board chairs and executive committees. A theme wended its way through each conversation: confidence with reservation (sometimes deep reservation) about their work. As the complexity of running schools continues to intensify – navigating financial pressures, demographic shifts, changing family expectations, and evolving educational landscape – the role of governance has become exponentially more challenging. Yet most boards are trying to figure it out alone, often with frustrating results.
The Governance Gap
Just as schools have come to recognize the value of executive coaching for heads of school, there's a growing recognition that boards themselves need more guidance to function effectively. The parallel is striking: both heads and boards operate in high-stakes environments where the variables are complex and the learning curve is steep.
What do we expect of volunteer board members? They must understand financial statements while staying out of operational details. They need to hold heads accountable while providing support. They should engage with the community while maintaining appropriate boundaries. They must think strategically while responding to immediate crises. Most arrive with expertise in their professional fields but little experience in the unique dynamics of independent school governance.
The result is often what many have called "well-intentioned dysfunction” – boards that care deeply about their schools but struggle to govern effectively, creating stress for everyone involved and often hindering the very mission they're trying to serve.
The Altitude Problem
The fundamental challenge facing most boards is the altitude problem. Boards are meant to operate at 30,000 feet – setting direction and policy, providing strategic oversight, ensuring mission alignment – while heads manage operations at ground level. But without clear systems and understanding of their proper role, boards often find themselves ping-ponging between being too hands-off (missing real problems) and too hands-on (micromanaging operations).
This altitude problem manifests in several ways:
Information avalanche: Boards may receive large packets of information for board meetings but lack frameworks for determining what actually requires board attention versus what should be handled operationally. Information is not presented in a way that is easy to understand.
Information drought: There are critical data gaps because there's no shared understanding of what information should be systematically collected and reported. This can leave heads to share data sporadically while key metrics on faculty satisfaction, parent engagement, attrition drivers, and competitive benchmarks remain unmeasured or unreported.
Strategic drift: Without clear processes for strategic thinking, board meetings become operational briefings punctuated by crisis management, leaving little time for the forward-looking work that is the board's unique contribution.
Accountability confusion: Boards struggle to differentiate between holding the head accountable for results versus trying to control methods, leading to either ineffective oversight or inappropriate interference.
Meeting dysfunction: Board meetings become exercises in endurance rather than forums for meaningful governance work, frustrating everyone and accomplishing little.
Community disconnect: Many boards operate in isolation from their school communities, missing crucial perspectives and losing opportunities to build support for institutional priorities.
Narrative misalignment: Boards often struggle with developing and refining the authentic story they want to tell about their school. Heads, boards, and marketing may each hold different versions of what makes their school special, but without rigorous examination, these stories can be aspirational rather than truthful. The board's unique vantage point – removed from daily operations yet deeply invested in long-term success – positions them to ask the hard questions: Does our stated mission reflect our actual priorities? Are we delivering on the promises we make to families? Is the story we're telling one that we can authentically stand behind, or have we drifted into marketing speak that doesn't match the lived experience of our community? When narrative and reality diverge, even the best strategic plans become exercises in wishful thinking rather than roadmaps for genuine institutional advancement.
Why Board Coaches Make the Difference
Enter the board coach; an outside advisor who understands both the intricacies of independent school operations and the dynamics of effective governance. Unlike consultants who come in to solve specific problems, board coaches work alongside boards to build their capacity for ongoing effective governance.
Here's why external coaching works where internal fixes often fail:
Objective perspective: A coach can name dysfunctions that insiders either can't see or can't address without taking sides. They can point out when a board is micromanaging or when a head isn't providing appropriate information without being seen as having an agenda.
Systems thinking: Experienced coaches understand that governance problems are rarely about individual personalities but about unclear roles, poor processes, or misaligned expectations. They help boards create systems that work regardless of who's in the room.
Future orientation: While boards often get trapped in reactive mode, coaches help maintain focus on long-term health and strategic direction, ensuring that immediate pressures don't derail longer-term thinking.
Institutional knowledge: Coaches who specialize in schools understand the unique pressures heads face, the seasonal rhythms of school life, and the particular challenges of governing educational institutions. This context matters enormously.
Accelerated learning: Rather than spending years figuring out governance through trial and error, boards can adopt proven practices and avoid common pitfalls, reaching effectiveness much more quickly.
Implementing Board Coaching: A Cultural Investment
Engaging a board coach represents more than hiring a consultant – it's making an investment in governance culture. Initially, there may be resistance from board members who question whether they need outside help or worry about additional costs. The most effective boards, however, are those that approach governance as a skill to be developed rather than an instinct to be trusted. (And a note on the cost front: a board operating suboptimally is a drag on an institution. While a board operating in a cloud of well intended dysfunction is a heavy tax on a school, a tax that seriously undermines a school’s future.)
Here are key considerations for boards exploring coaching:
Start with commitment: Coaching works only when the full board, especially leadership, is committed to the process. Half-hearted engagement produces half-hearted results.
Think long-term: Most governance challenges develop over years and won't be resolved in a few sessions. Effective board coaching typically involves 12-18 months of regular engagement. Once on a clear path, periodic coaching “tune ups” or health checks can keep things heading in the right direction.
Embrace discomfort: Good coaches will surface uncomfortable truths about board functioning. The boards that benefit most are those willing to examine their own practices honestly.
Focus on systems, not personalities: The goal isn't to fix difficult board members but to create structures that channel everyone's contributions productively.
Measure what matters: Track meeting effectiveness, strategic progress, and board member satisfaction, not just financial metrics.
Navigate the dual relationship carefully: The head of school occupies a unique position – simultaneously serving as an ex-officio board member while being the board's sole employee. This creates inherent tension that requires careful management in any coaching engagement.
Establish clear boundaries and confidentiality protocols: Before coaching begins, define explicitly what information will be shared between the coach, board, and head of school. The coach must be able to maintain appropriate confidentiality while still being effective. Consider whether certain sessions should include the head of school, exclude them, or operate under different confidentiality agreements.
Prioritize coaches with educational leadership experience: Look for coaches who understand the distinctive governance dynamics of schools, including the head of school's dual role. They should grasp how academic leadership differs from corporate management. This specialized knowledge helps build trust and credibility with both parties.
Address trust-building proactively: The head of school needs assurance that coaching won't undermine their leadership or create additional oversight burdens. Simultaneously, board members need confidence that the coach won't become overly aligned with the head's perspective. Successful coaches in this context are skilled at maintaining neutrality while building rapport with both constituencies.
Consider the selection process itself: Include the head of school meaningfully in coach selection, even if the board retains final decision-making authority. This involvement helps ensure compatibility and demonstrates respect for the head's position. However, be clear that the coaching engagement serves the entire governance system, not just one party's interests.
Plan for power dynamic shifts: Effective board coaching may alter the balance between board oversight and head of school autonomy. A trusted coach can help both parties navigate these changes constructively, ensuring that improved governance strengthens rather than threatens the partnership between board and head.
The Leadership Imperative
For heads of school reading this, advocating for board coaching isn't about getting an ally in your corner – it's about strengthening the institution you serve. Effective boards make your job easier and more impactful. They provide the strategic thinking, community connections, and institutional support that allow heads to focus on educational leadership rather than constantly managing governance relationships.
For board chairs and members, engaging a coach isn't an admission of failure, it's recognition that governance is complex work that deserves serious attention. The most successful businesses invest heavily in leadership development. Why should school governance be any different?
Making Governance an Asset
The reality facing independent schools is that governance can no longer be an afterthought. In an increasingly complex educational landscape, schools need boards that are genuine strategic assets rather than well-meaning obstacles. This requires intentional development of governance capacity, clear role definition, and systems that allow boards to operate at the altitude where they add the most value.
Board coaching provides a pathway for this development that's faster, more systematic, and ultimately more effective than hoping governance will improve through good intentions alone. Like cost accounting, it represents a shift toward transparency and intentionality that strengthens rather than diminishes mission commitment.
The schools that will thrive in the coming decades are those that recognize governance as a core institutional capability requiring the same attention and investment as academic programming, financial management, or facilities maintenance. A board coach can help ensure that investment pays dividends for years to come.