Ah. Boards. Conflict. Collective sighs all round, as so many of you reading this will have different perspectives, experiences and stories to tell. However, at the outset, it might be useful to pose the question: Is there more conflict on a board when everyone has a similar mindset and so the devil is in the detail (or the executive team’s frustration), or is conflict caused because of a lack of diversity in its truest sense, not just in reference to protected characteristics? Could we limit conflict if we had more people who were closer to the work, from those communities affected, or simply not the stereotypical trustee, who is older, white, a “professional” and yes, usually a man?

Now, I’m not decrying the volunteering spirit of middle-aged white men, in fact some of my best trustees would describe themselves as I have just done. It’s rather more the system of governance by boards itself, which has tended to privilege those who have spare time, and the lack of willingness or capacity of the sector to give comprehensive training to those who would make excellent trustees, if they only had the support. This is changing slowly, especially in organisations which are really putting the effort in to provide an “equity path” to give new trustees a chance to learn and develop the skills required.