A Devil’s Advocate on the Board?
Wouldn’t it be wonderful if nonprofit boards could foresee the obstacles ahead — in time to make the right decisions?
Article Highlights:
Wouldn’t it be wonderful if boards could foresee the obstacles ahead — in time to make the right decisions?
Absent a few sprinkles of fairy dust, using the devil’s advocate technique might assist you in identifying such obstacles. A devil’s advocate (DA) is someone who takes an opposing view to test an idea or project the board is considering.
The DA’s job is to ask questions and make the best case possible against the proposal. By responding to the questions and challenges, the board is forced into healthy debate as it considers arguments it might never have thought of had it not been someone’s specific task to challenge the board’s thinking.
Here’s how it works. Select one board member and place an index card marked DA or devil’s advocate in front of that person. Throughout the meeting, this person should ask questions to test the soundness of the decisions the organization is considering.
A services center averts disaster
For example, a small suburban nonprofit that provides services to elder adults was considering expanding services to include another age group. At the insistence of one very vocal board member, this 25-year-old agency was wondering if it should use its expertise in day services to assist young people.
After the first meeting using this technique, the board began to pass the DA card around the table, giving more people the opportunity to offer challenges to the proposal on the table – all under the cloak of security the DA card offered.
Through the tough and sometimes tense discussions, board members decided that their goal was “increased” service, not necessarily “expanded” service. By using the DA card over the course of several meetings, the board realized that the additional licensure, insurance, and expertise that the organization would need to offer youth services outweighed the potential benefits.
The agency then looked for ways to make it easier to access their offerings, such as providing transportation from a nearby bus depot.
Don’t forget to be nice
Use this technique every meeting or only when an important issue is up for discussion. A couple of caveats: holding the DA card does not give this board member the ability to block or hold decisions from a vote, nor should the board hold it against the designated DA for asking tough questions.
You shouldn’t be annoyed with someone whose “job” it is to question the wisdom of an idea… right?
You might also like:
- A Nonprofit Partnership: How One Board Member Connected Two Organizations and Boosted Both
- Innovative Leadership — Culture Doesn’t Have to Eat Strategy: Tending to Human Factors During Strategic Planning
- Insider Newsletters: An Easy Way to Keep Your Board in the Loop and Engaged
- Board Horror Stories: How to Reduce Board Resignations
- Five Years and Growing: How One Nonprofit Built a Sustainable, Collaborative Mission
You made it to the end! Please share this article!
Let’s help other nonprofit leaders succeed! Consider sharing this article with your friends and colleagues via email or social media.
About the Author
Elizabeth C. Vibber is a consultant with Bucks County Center for Nonprofit Management, a consulting affiliate to nonprofits of Bee, Bergvall & Co., a CPA firm in suburban Philadelphia.
Articles on Blue Avocado do not provide legal representation or legal advice and should not be used as a substitute for advice or legal counsel. Blue Avocado provides space for the nonprofit sector to express new ideas. The opinions and views expressed in this article are solely those of the authors. They do not purport to reflect or imply the opinions or views of Blue Avocado, its publisher, or affiliated organizations. Blue Avocado, its publisher, and affiliated organizations are not liable for website visitors’ use of the content on Blue Avocado nor for visitors’ decisions about using the Blue Avocado website.
Heh. I can imagine alternative interpretations of "DA": Designated Agitator; Disparager of Anything; Damned A**hole; etc.
I love the idea of instituting a designated Devil’s Advocate role. In many group situations, there are often people who hold alternative/helpful views, but who are unfortunately cowed into silence by their peers and groupthink.
Another way to do this is just to ask the group to list all the "pro’s" and "cons" they can think of that pertain to the situation.
I have used this many times to work through difficult decisions and have had very good luck. Not all of it turned out the way I expected it to because the wisdom of the group tend to be more than the sum of its parts.
I often use the term "curmudgeon" for this role
Cathy Hartle
No matter which technique (or DA interpretation) you choose to use, one of the healthiest activities for a board is to engage in thoughtful discussion rather than careless consent. Some boards are very sophisticated and are able to do this well, others need some sort of permission to question. As usual, there is no ‘one-size fits all’, just another tool in the toolbox to use when the time is right. Liz (Vibber)
No matter which technique (or DA interpretation) you choose to use, one of the healthiest activities for a board is to engage in thoughtful discussion rather than careless consent. Some boards are very sophisticated and are able to do this well, others need some sort of permission to question. As usual, there is no ‘one-size fits all’, just another tool in the toolbox to use when the time is right. Liz (Vibber)
And this is why people have always turned to you for sage advice and fresh ideas. I hope your students are taking copious notes.
And this is why people have always turned to you for sage advice and fresh ideas. I hope your students are taking copious notes.
Devil’s Advocate can looked at as a QA type of function. The QA objective is to make certain things work while making reasonably certain that making one thing work does not break something else. No one person or group is going to ferret all the possible ins and outs of a situation, but a reasonable effort is often well worth the work. (Defining "reasonable" can be a significant challenge on its own but that is outside this discussion.)
A Devil’s Advocate can be whatever the group allows it to be. It can be a tool to help make a plan the best it can possibly be. It can be a veiled opportunity to spew venom, even misinformation. The group or someone in it should have some control over this. Perhaps the identification of a common objective before a discussion could minimize the challenge. In your case, realizing that "increased" and "expanded" meant very different things redirected everyone to the same path.
The description of a Devil’s Advocate" has long been established. Perhaps someone can coin a term encompassing the distasteful alternative definitions people have assigned to it. Its reputation has suffered by the mudslinging that happens around it. A Devil’s Advocate deserves a much more respect than some people will allow.
Devil’s Advocate can looked at as a QA type of function. The QA objective is to make certain things work while making reasonably certain that making one thing work does not break something else. No one person or group is going to ferret all the possible ins and outs of a situation, but a reasonable effort is often well worth the work. (Defining "reasonable" can be a significant challenge on its own but that is outside this discussion.)
A Devil’s Advocate can be whatever the group allows it to be. It can be a tool to help make a plan the best it can possibly be. It can be a veiled opportunity to spew venom, even misinformation. The group or someone in it should have some control over this. Perhaps the identification of a common objective before a discussion could minimize the challenge. In your case, realizing that "increased" and "expanded" meant very different things redirected everyone to the same path.
The description of a Devil’s Advocate" has long been established. Perhaps someone can coin a term encompassing the distasteful alternative definitions people have assigned to it. Its reputation has suffered by the mudslinging that happens around it. A Devil’s Advocate deserves a much more respect than some people will allow.
I like the idea, but I just can’t see it. In my (many years) of nonprofit experience, most nonprofits boards I’ve had contact with are much more comfortable with groupthink. Boards seem to find it difficult to tolerate anyone with different perspectives. Even when someone is assigned to think differently, they get pummeled. It’s discouraging – and it makes it hard for organizations to change when they need to move forward.
I’ve found there is little need for a designated DA. There’s always someone willing to play the role for real.
I was removed from a volunteer “managers” position of a non-profit organization.
With serious things said about me that was not true. I would like the record set straight. How do I go about doing this. They have damaged my reputation.
any help would be appreciated.
I was removed from a volunteer “managers” position of a non-profit organization.
With serious things said about me that was not true. I would like the record set straight. How do I go about doing this. They have damaged my reputation.
any help would be appreciated.