Appeasement, Mediation, & Change Management

Never let this become a board chair vs board member situation. That's a failed strategy that inspires shenanigans at the next election /appointment. Instead, tighten the board's governance policies -- the policies that describe how the board operates -- to clearly articulate what's acceptable for a school board meeting. Then the board chair is simply enforcing the board's will through policy rather than their own will through edict.

Never let this become a board chair vs transparency situation! No amount of justifications can win back lost community trust from appearing anti-transparent. Instead, adopt a clear process for addressing any board member questions/requests that creates a non-privileged document. We recommend a time limit in policy for how much staff time such requests can absorb.

Never let this become a superintendent vs accountability situation. Once a board routinely appears to be following rather than leading, it probably is. Instead, be clear and public about the superintendent’s evaluation criteria during their annual evaluation. This should be public twelve months before the evaluation so it’s clear what and when the superintendent will be held accountable. Push back on the notion that random acts of adult inputs focus at a board meeting equates to accountability.

If the purpose is to help school board members become friends, get along better, like each other, or be kind to each other.

If either party has mentioned litigation, seriously or jokingly.

If there is confusion about arbitration (3rd party makes ruling that determines winners and losers among the parties) and mediation (3rd party holds space for both parties to hear and be heard).

If any of these things are true, skip mediation and focus on tightening the governing policies and rely on improved systems to nudge out poor behavior.

We'd recommend a coach provide mediation support only when:

Efficient business blocks: The board handled multiple motions with clear roll calls and kept action segments relatively tight.

Follow-up on staffing impacts: The sidebar + RIF rescission decisions were resolved decisively within the same meeting, reducing uncertainty for affected employees.

Transparent logistics for goal work: The board explicitly moved goal work to a special session, which — if executed as a focused monitoring meeting — can improve future Student Outcomes Focus.

Convert “Goals logistics” into actual Goal monitoring time. Bring the board’s adopted Goals (with lag/lead measures and targets) to the table and review current results, variances, and next steps. This is the single easiest way to raise Student Outcomes Focus above 50%.

Trade time from executive and general commentary into monitoring blocks. Pre-brief legal/negotiations items to shorten in-meeting transitions; cap public comment with a timer and reserve an explicit Goals monitoring agenda slot early in the meeting.

Adopt a standing Monitoring Calendar. Each regular meeting should include at least one Goal progress item (data review + interpretation + “if/then” commitments). When logistics/scheduling arise, park them to the end.

Use action templates. For each business item (policy, HR), attach the intended student impact (if any) and a check-back date to prevent drift toward adult-input time.