Lori wrote: "...does anyone have any experience working with a Board of Directors..."

Lori,

My gut reaction to your situation is that the organisation is heading for a major confrontation, either between management and the board, or the board and the organisation's owners - irrespective of the constructive nature of your process to date. After some 25 years of planning in client environments, I firmly believe that organisations exist to satisfy their owners and that everything that the organisation does, must enhance, one way or another, those outcomes (and before someone jumps on me, not all outcomes are profit; nor does "satisfy owners" mean "shaft everyone else"). In order for that to happen, it is imperative that owner objectives are clearly defined in quantifiable terms (in other words, you need to be able to tell when you have achieved the desired outcomes - that is, when enough is enough). The board has a responsibility to define those outcomes and to ensure that the organisation is focused and resourced in a manner that will deliver those outcomes. Therefore, for an organisation to be building a strategy (irrespective of how well-meaning the intent) without the involvement of the board is truly problematic.

It sounds that management have spend a lot of time building harmony and common direction within your organisation only to find that the board members "aren't up to it". If this is because of the skill and competency level of the board members, then you have a legitimate concern. However they way I have overcome this problem is to clearly state what management believes are the organisation's deliverables (in quantified terms) and the strategy they wish to use to deliver those outcomes. The board is then asked to sign off on that plan, and in so doing, takes the responsibility from management.

On the other hand if the board "isn't up to it" because they don't share the vision and strategies developed by staff then that is a different matter. After all, the board is there to represent the owner interests (among other responsibilities) so if their objections are because they don't think that management's proposed outcomes are suitable, then management MUST listen and adapt to what is being suggested. You must establish the basis of any concerns held by board members. As an example, if they are giving the developed plan a hard time:

- because of the outcomes - ask them to define in quantifiable terms the outcomes they require for and on behalf of owners and then rework your plan;

- because of the process - have two or more members of the board become involved in the planning process (its easier to then sell to the board if their representatives are part of the process);

- because they don't understand the logic of the plan - restate and clarify all assumptions upon which the plan is based;

- because of the timelines - restructure the plan in their time frame but advise them of the cost and resource implications;

If you would like a more detailed discussion of the planning process, can I suggest that you look at my web site at www.jacobyconsulting.com.au for a step-by-step planning process that overcomes these problems (when in the site, go to Knowledge/Business Plans. Also look at articles under publications for a detailed discussion of the theory behind this process)