Train Your Board for a Full Year at One Price

Train Your Entire Board in Governance in One Year at One Price – Including:

  • Governance Structure and Process – 50-page Governance Manual
  • Strategic Planning – 12-page plan designed for your organization
  • Training by the author of the Governance Matters books
  • Your Board will be able to function professionally and train future boards
  • 20 years of consulting in 24 countries on four continents
  • Private tutoring/training for Board Chair, CEO, Board
  • One year of personal training by phone, email, Skype from purchase
  • 480 minutes (8 hours) increments of 15, 30, or 60-minute meetings
  • An electronic copy of Governance Matters for 12 board members and your CEO
  • Only two boards per month, beginning in late 2017 and early 2018
  • USD $2,750 complete cost – Canadian boards at dollars at par till Dec.31
  • One low price – no extras or surprises – Order on line via PayPal

Contact: Dr. Les Stahlke –

Misunderstanding of “Trust”


We like to think that we should build our relationships on trust. We believe that trust is a value that we owe to one another and that others owe to us. Accountability seems like the opposite of trust. “Why do you want me to report to you? Don’t you trust me?” This misunderstanding of trust as something that we should give to one another without anything coming back is another sign that accountability systems are missing or aren’t working. Forgiveness is free, but trust is expensive. The price of trust is the performance and behavior which demonstrates trustworthiness. Accountability is simply the process that confirms the trustworthiness. Think of trust as a beautiful statue. Trustworthiness is the pedestal of performance upon which the stature rests. Fail to maintain the pedestal by ignoring accountability and watch how it weakens the relationship until trust is dashed to pieces. When I meet with a church board for the first time, the board members invest a certain amount of trust into my “trust account.” After all, I’ve been invited by their leaders, and come with some credentials and a recommendation from another church. During my presentation, however, they will make their own assessment. This is the normal and natural process of accountability. If what I say demonstrates my willingness to listen and my ability to meet their needs, they may deposit more trust into my account. A contract to work with them usually follows. But were I to make light of their situation, insult them and demonstrate no sensitivity to their real needs, their deposit of trust would soon be “spent.” The negative balance in my trust account would result in never being invited to return.

“pages 13-14, Church Governance Matters”

Governance at Baobab College, Lusaka, Zambia

Baobab College has been going through a period of rapid and exciting development. The most obvious signs of this are our new buildings but some of the most interesting innovations and perhaps most important are not visible at all. A good example of this is our new model of governance. Over the last 2 years our Board of Governors and staff have been undergoing training on a new relationship model of governance, for values-based not-for-profit organisations, which puts people and values ahead of power and profit. Please see below an explanation of this unique model of governance, which we have adopted in our school.
Introduction to the Relationship Model


People live and work within relationships. Relationships are the human operating system. In order to make our lives and our work successful and fulfilling, we need to apply the natural principles of relationships by establishing the values, structures and the processes of relationships throughout our organization.
In the Relationship Model, values, structure and processes form the basis of governance, leadership, management and service delivery. The roles of governance, leadership and management differ, but the principles that underlie them are the same. There is a continuity of design from an organization’s membership to the point where the clients receive the services.
A successful working environment is one in which there is a balance between the fulfilment of the individuals doing the work and the fulfilment of the people for whom the work is done.

Putting emphasis on healthy relationships means investing a great deal of attention on the values, the structures and the processes that make up relationships. We have all observed that healthy and fulfilled men and women are more productive than unhealthy, dysfunctional people.
Understanding how to build and maintain healthy working relationships is critical for successful management of human and financial resources. The basic design of relationships is disarmingly simple. Yet the application of these values, structures and processes is a lifelong experience, and a complex one at that. It is necessary to maintain a focus on the design of relationships in order to succeed at living out the Relationship Model.


VALUES (The Way we Use Power)

Our values determine our behaviour. In order to have an effective organization, all who work together must share the same values. When values are shared there is a built-in tendency to be able to work with the same operating system — within the same structure and with the same processes. There are many categories of values and many values in each category. The list of our values is as long as we want it to be. In the Relationship Model, we have identified three core relationship-oriented values. Together they form the foundation of successful working relationships.

  1. Affirmation
    Affirmation is fundamental to healthy and productive relationships. Affirmation is the most elemental of all values. It encourages, builds, enables, empowers and ensures the fulfilment of each individual in your organization. It encourages calculated risk. Affirmation enables mistakes to fuel a learning culture instead of a blame culture. Our affirmation of others and ourselves is the most significant factor influencing the structure and the processes of our relationships.
  2. Involvement
    Involvement means collaboration. It affirms the unique contribution of each individual in the organization. It means that people are involved in the decision-making process, especially in matters where they are personally affected. Involvement increases ownership and commitment, making individual fulfilment and organizational effectiveness more likely. It unlocks enormous potential through synergy, and allows organizations to make changes more effectively.
  1. Servant Leadership
    Servant leadership means lifting people up instead of putting them down. It’s a quality that characterizes those who are the source of authority to others in a relationship-oriented organization. Servant leadership includes such values as care, concern, valuing the worth of others, service and support. Servant leadership can be demonstrated by anyone who is in a position of authority in an organization. In any organization everyone has some authority. We often think of authority in a “top-down” manner. Our organizational charts, which place the “highest” level of authority at the “top”, suggest the opposite of the kind of authority that supports those above. A better organizational “chart” is the image of the tree where those with the most authority support those above.


1. Authority
Authority includes authorization, resources (human and financial resources, information and time) and competencies. As in a tree where nutrients rise to nourish the entire tree and its fruit, authority flows upwards to the top of your organization to empower its people to produce services for the clients. Authority at any level in your organization is always limited by the person or group who is delegating authority to others.
2.Limitations of Authority
Limitations are the elements of a relationship that define the boundaries of authority and therefore the extent of our freedom in fulfilling our responsibility. Limitations are normally expressed in negative terms. In an organization defining limitations of authority eliminates the need for returning to the source of authority repeatedly for permission to act. Limitations may be adjusted to maintain a balance between authority and responsibility.
Responsibility is the broad description of the purpose for a position within your organization. It is usually contained in the relationship description of an individual or a group. Healthy relationships always balance authority and responsibility. Responsibility is further defined by the expectations of the responsibility.

  1. Expectations of Responsibility
    Expectations are the adjusting components of responsibility. In a relationship-oriented organization expectations are negotiated, not imposed, in order to achieve a balance with the authorization and resources that are available. They are usually expressed in the form of goals, standards and specific tasks. Goals may be strategic or tactical. Standards may range from the minimum quality we expect of one another to the quality to which we aspire.

Accountability is the monitoring and measuring component of a relationship. The first role of accountability is to monitor the balance of authority and responsibility in each relationship and to monitor compliance with limitations and expectations. The second role is to measure strategic and tactical results. The annual relationship review is the primary opportunity for accountability. Often given a negative connotation, accountability in The Relationship Model™ gives an opportunity for recognition and learning as well as correction. Accountability is a neutral process. It’s the gift we too often fail to each to one another.

Process is critical to the success of any group. The six core processes of governance are:
• Communication
• Conflict Resolution
• Decision-Making
• Strategic Planning
• Delegating Authority and Responsibility
• Monitoring and Measuring (Accountability)
The Relationship Model™ offers the most natural means of giving an effective design to your organization. No major paradigm shift is required. At the same time we will realize how important it is to use the conceptual framework that this model offers when we build a governance structure and when we process information.
Structure is the vehicle. Process is the journey. The way we use power reflects the quality of our driving.
The combination of values, structure and process may be synthesized into ten basic principles that define The Relationship Model. Using these principles as a checklist can help a Board to verify that the values, structures and processes used within an organization are consistent with the Relationship Model. The checklist can also assist a Board to identify weaknesses and to give guidance toward making adjustments that will improve relationships and productivity.


1 The organisation seeks a balance between the fulfilment of the needs of the clients and the personal fulfilment of the staff and volunteers.
2 The affirmation, involvement and servant leadership of every individual and group at every level in your organization are vital to the success of your organization.
3 Authority, responsibility and accountability are the primary components of all relationships. Limitations of authority and expectations of responsibility are the secondary components.
4 Circles of authority and responsibility are defined clearly and are maintained equal in size by negotiating limitations of authority or expectations of responsibility.
5 The Board of Directors, acting on information from all stakeholders, is responsible for strategic planning: defining beneficiaries, services/needs, vision, mission and priorities, monitoring performance and measuring results.
6 The CEO is responsible for managing the delivery of services to the clients in accord with Board-stated priorities and for achieving the strategic goals within the limitations of the authorization and resources available.
7 Each individual has a share in responsibility for creating, owning, understanding and implementing the mission of your organization.
8 Decision-making proceeds from shared values, vision and mission, not unilaterally from the Board or the CEO. Decisions are made as close as possible to where they are implemented.
9 The organization is results oriented. Indicators of results are identified. Strategic and tactical goals are set in balance with available resources. Results are measured.
10 Accountability is mutual. The source of authority is accountable to the recipient for providing adequate authorization and resources. The recipient is accountable to the source for achieving negotiated results. Accountability is a neutral process.

How to Select the Right Pastor: Part 1

Role of a Pastor Church Governance Relationship Model

Congregations are free within the authority that God gives to select the pastor that will be most likely to meet the unique needs of a unique congregation.  In fact congregations also have the responsibility, not merely the freedom, to make a careful selection.  The notion that God calls a pastor to a specific congregation, apart from the will and action of the congregation itself, misunderstands the authority that God delegates to congregation to participate in the selection or “call” process.

Congregations in various denominations and cultures follow many different processes in making the selection of a pastor.  Sometimes the bishop makes the selection, and sometimes a bishop will make recommendations by providing a list of candidates whom the bishop thinks might be successful.  In some denominations the congregations interviews at the same time as the prospective pastor preaches a “trial sermon.”  Of course, preaching is just one of the necessary functions that the successful pastor will be required to provide.  (Prospective pastors don’t seem to be invited to make trial hospital calls or conduct trial counselling sessions.)

But just what are the competencies required of a successful pastor?  Well, that varies with the congregation and with the number of other members of the professional pastoral staff.  The more pastors the congregations have, the more specialized are the competencies required of the individual pastor. Read more