by Michael J. Berens
Keeping board members on track is never easy, but what do you do when your board falls prey to misinformation — in particular, misinformation of their own making?
I have seen it happen over and over again. One member may make a comment, ask a leading question or convey a recent conversation with a member or stakeholder that contains inaccurate information. Before someone knowledgeable can respond, another member has repeated and reinforced that inaccurate information, which is taken up by yet another member.
In short order, the entire board is engaged in debating a story that is riddled with error and unfounded assumptions about a situation that does not, in fact, exist.
Stories are one of the most powerful communications tools associations have. Stories about achievements, legislative victories, leadership and volunteerism do more than convey information and context, they also embody values and culture and provide the human connection that makes associations tick.
In addition, while facts and figures soon become jumbled or forgotten, stories are memorable. For the same reasons, stories that contain misinformation can potentially undermine your efforts if left unchecked. It is important, therefore, that any misperceptions held by the board be addressed as quickly as possible and the record set straight, to avoid them from spreading or morphing into rumor later on.
Correcting a board member’s “faulty memory” requires no small about of tact. The key to rectifying the situation is to focus on the information, not on the board member or members who introduced it.
Do not question the board member’s credibility or integrity, or that of their source. Instead, neutralize any possibility of controversy or conflict by disengaging the information from the story and re-examining it objectively.
Restate what you heard the board member say and ask him or her to verify if the restatement is accurate. Once the board member’s remark is clearly understood by everyone in the room, then proceed to provide whatever clarification or additional information is needed to correct the misperception or misstatement.
Try not to sound defensive or retaliatory. Use neutral language, such as, “That is not entirely accurate,” “Let me try to clarify that,” “I can see why one might think that,” or “That is certainly one point of view, but there are others.” In doing so, you are shifting the conversation to safer ground where egos or authority will not appear to be threatened.
Ultimately, the only way to combat one story is to provide a better one. After you have provided additional information or details to correct the misinformation, you need to retell the story in your own words to reinforce the new understanding you have just introduced. And for good measure, check with the members to determine if there is any lingering doubt or confusion before moving on to the next bit of business.
It may take a bit of time, but better to manage a bad story within the boardroom than to risk letting it go viral later.
