How one organization worked through valuing access AND participation
Our planning group hit a wall.
I could feel the frustration around our virtual meeting table. We hadn’t even gotten to talking through the retreat agenda yet…and we were already stuck.
I opened the conversation with the question I often use at this moment, “Has anything changed since we last met that would impact our planning?”
Ana (not her real name), the Executive Director, spoke up.
There was a problem. Before we even got to talking about what we would do when we gathered, we had to figure out how we would actually gather!
To share some background: In July, the Design Team (a subset of board and staff members) came together to begin planning the board retreat for this mid-sized social service nonprofit. Given health and safety concerns at that time, we agreed that an outdoor meeting among this group, all of whom were vaccinated, would be comfortable and safe for all.
Board members committed to attending an in-person retreat.
Ana reserved an outdoor meeting space allowing for large group conversations and small-group breakouts.
A highlight of the meeting would be in-person interaction. The group, a number of whom had joined the board during the past year and had not yet met each other in person, needed time to build community and connect with their purpose and goals.
But now with the rise of the Delta variant, at least one board member no longer felt comfortable attending an outdoor in-person meeting, even if all group members were wearing masks.
I know that I felt disappointed. After conducting a board assessment survey and interviews, I had suggestions of conversations that would build cohesion and energy among the group, assuming we could meet in person.
Ana asked whether we could potentially hold a hybrid meeting, so that a few board members could attend virtually if they felt more comfortable.
And that’s when the room went silent.
“No!” I thought to myself.
I have participated in recent hybrid meetings. They have been, in a word, terrible.
What I observed was that a group of people in the physical room were having a conversation about an important topic. Those of us who participated virtually were excited to share our insights: What we had observed, our opinions, our thoughts, about what the group should do next.
But something happened that we didn’t expect:
We were trying to participate in the conversation. But we couldn’t – because we couldn’t hear what people were saying! We could (faintly) see that people’s mouths were moving, and know that sounds are coming out. We just didn’t know what the words were.
It was frustrating to say the least.
But before I could speak up, Kevin, one of the board members, raised his hand and said the same thing. He had been in a hybrid meeting all day. The word he used was, “miserable.” Another board member, who had a similar experience, spoke up and said she agreed.
I encouraged the group to think about the larger values that would come through in whatever choice they made.
The group was hoping for full board participation in the retreat. But they didn’t have the technology setup to create a conversation in which in-person and virtual participants would be able to effectively participate and interact. As it turned out, selecting an outdoor venue made virtual participation more difficult.
Being mindful of participation for all is valuing access. The Center for Excellence in Nonprofits (CEN) use the framework of IDEAL (Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, Access, and Liberation) to guide their training and consulting work. CEN describes Access (or accessibility) as, “the equitable right, engagement, or entry for everyone, regardless of human ability and experience. For organizations, it refers to how they encompass and celebrate characteristics and talents that each individual brings. It is about representation for all.”
In the end, the group decided there was no “great choice” – just a few imperfect ones. Given the work that had already been done, board members decided to hold the retreat as planned and to hold a special debrief meeting afterwards for those who could not attend in person.
As leaders, many of us are hitting some hard choices now with no clear answers. It is worth spending the time to consider how these decisions express the values of our teams and organizations. Establishing a collaborative approach and setting well-defined expectations will allow members to make the best decisions for themselves while setting the tone for everyone.
Try this:
Discuss: what values are coming out in the way that you are gathering now?
In what ways does the structure of your meetings make it more difficult for certain individuals or groups to participate?
Are there ways to put policies or procedure in place that will increase access for all?
Further resources:
https://hbr.org/2021/06/what-it-takes-to-run-a-great-hybrid-meeting
https://bethkanter.org/8-tips-for-facilitating-hybrid-meetings/