Lincoln University of Missouri … [+] (https://www.lincolnu.edu/about-lincoln/human-resource-services/employment-opportunities.html)
The recent events at Lincoln University, where a former senior administrator’s suicide has raised serious questions about internal leadership dynamics, are a stark reminder of a Board’s critical role in organizational oversight. This incident isn’t just a tragedy; it’s a wake-up call to Boards everywhere about the risks of neglecting critical areas of governance, in particular leadership, culture, and organizational health.
Dr. John B. Moseley, Lincoln University president, has volunteered to be placed on paid administrative leave while the Board conducts a review of the tragic situation.
“As a Board, we are committed to make certain the mental health of Lincoln University employees is a priority and that every employee is always treated with dignity and respect,” said Board President Victor Pasley in a statement. Apparently, the review is an “important part of the Board’s commitment to listening and addressing important issues,” which presupposes they know there are problems already at play.
The Lincoln University case underscores the necessity of monitoring a top leader’s relationship with their direct reports. When these relationships are strained or dysfunctional, it can lead to significant operational disruptions, the loss of key talent, and a decline in employee morale. The worst case is, of course, self-harm of any sort. Boards must ensure they clearly understand these potential negative dynamics to prevent such breakdowns, which can have lasting impacts on organizational performance and reputation.
A toxic culture can silently erode an organization’s effectiveness, as potentially evidenced in the Lincoln University scenario. Imagine what it will feel like to be a professor or administrator on Monday at the University, let alone the students. For Boards, failing to keep a pulse on organizational culture means risking employee disengagement, decreased productivity, client dissatisfaction, and potential conflicts that can disrupt operations. The Board’s monitoring of organizational culture is crucial to maintaining a healthy, productive work environment that aligns with the organization’s strategic objectives.
The overall health of an organization, including the mental and physical well-being of its team members, directly impacts its operational efficiency and success. The tragedy at Lincoln University highlights the severe consequences of neglecting this aspect, which will have a certain negative impact in the coming weeks. Boards need to ensure that organizational health is not an afterthought but a key component of their strategic oversight, as it directly influences the organization’s ability to innovate, compete, and thrive.
Recommendations
I recommend three fundamental changes that should be considered for Boards in the future:
CEO-Direct Report Relationship Reviews
Boards should introduce some form of “Leadership Relationship Index (LRI),” which can act as a comprehensive tool designed to quantitatively and qualitatively assess the dynamics between the CEO or President and their direct reports. This index would involve regular, structured evaluations, incorporating self-assessments and feedback from direct reports about their CEO or President. The LRI should measure factors such as communication effectiveness, mutual respect, alignment on strategic goals, and overall relationship status.
The Board should review the results bi-annually to identify areas of concern or improvement. This proactive approach allows the Board to intervene when necessary, offering coaching or mediation to prevent the escalation of conflicts and ensure a cohesive leadership team. The LRI serves as a diagnostic tool and a framework for continuous improvement in leadership relations, which is crucial for organizational stability and success. It also keeps the CEO or President honest, knowing that their direct reports have a communication channel with the Board.
Organizational Culture Insight
Boards should mandate an annual, in-depth analysis of the organization’s culture. It should go beyond surface-level metrics, delving into employee sentiment, values alignment, diversity and inclusion, etc. An outside company with expertise in organizational culture would carry out the assessment, ensuring objectivity and competence. (Sidebar: I conduct this sort of work for several organizations, so I have firsthand experience of its benefits.)
The findings should provide a comprehensive picture of the organizational culture, highlighting strengths to be leveraged and areas of concern to be addressed. Based on these insights, the Board, in collaboration with the CEO or President, should develop and implement a targeted action plan, if required. The goal is to foster a culture that aligns with the organization’s values and objectives and promotes a positive, productive work environment.
Organizational Health Assessment
Some sort of annual health assessment conducted by an independent third party—like the organizational culture assessment—should evaluate various dimensions of team member health, including well-being, mental/social/physical wellness, and psychological safety. The evaluation should incorporate team member interviews and analysis of relevant data such as turnover rates, absenteeism, health and wellness metrics, etc.
The assessment aims to identify immediate health concerns and underlying factors that may impact long-term sustainability. By regularly conducting such an annual assessment, the Board can ensure that the organization addresses current team member health challenges and proactively works towards creating a healthier, more robust workplace.
In Conclusion
In conclusion, the Board’s role in overseeing leadership dynamics, organizational culture, and health must become a fundamental aspect of corporate governance if the Board’s by-laws have not been updated to reflect such an evolution.
The situation at Lincoln University is a harsh reminder of the potential risks and consequences when these areas are disregarded. By proactively engaging in these aspects of governance, Boards can not only prevent adverse outcomes but also drive positive (and harmless) growth for their organizations.
My thoughts go out to the administrator’s family. Their correspondence to a friend, highlighting emails they sent to the University President, suggests a very deleterious situation that should have been fully avoided.
_______
Order my new book, Work-Life Bloom: How to Nurture a Team That Flourishes, (You won’t want to miss digging in. After all, employee engagement and work-life balance are corporate myths.)
