Nexus evaluation helps organisations use fair, equitable and inclusive values and practices for organisational development, evidence and strategy development. And naturally, we want to role model what we advocate for and support our clients to do.
For me, transparent and honest discussions about power dynamics are part of the journey. It means I need to be upfront about my role and what the company needs to make a profit. This thought experiment raised interesting questions as I hypothesised the outcome of a new business strategy and what it meant in practice. More specifically, I wondered whether fair, equitable and inclusive practice to governance and management ideally meant developing equal partnerships with equal decision-making and equal pay for all involved. It highlighted some business facts and limitations to such practice:
As the only director of the company, the lead of a project and someone that is subcontracting; it is not possible to do away with the responsibilities and power dynamics it generates. The fact is my company is publicly and professionally liable for the work that is delivered, and I have a responsibility for ensuring the business is successful. None of these responsibilities can be delegated nor equally shared with other independent consultants or subcontractors.
I think that fair, equitable and inclusive approaches towards governance and management are not about abolishing power dynamics and having all with the same roles and responsibilities; or about equal pay across different levels of responsibility. But a meaningful exploration of how power can be used in ways that are ethical, inclusive and respectful. It is also about balancing profit-making with caring for people, building trustworthy relationships and seeing the bigger picture. This means developing business arrangements that feel comfortable for either party (and make business sense) but also having the wisdom and courage to let go of opportunities to maintain a good working relationship if needed.
Similar challenges are echoed in an article promoted by the Systems Change Alliance “The Blind Spot in the Stewardship of Locally Led Systems Change Networks” by Pedro Portela and Bernadette Wesley[1]. The issue of governance and decision making comes up in their area of work, which is focused on systemic change through social networks. They recognise and advocate for governance structures and processes that enable transparency and accountability, while “balancing the tension between collective [or business] purpose and individual freedom”.
I particularly like the idea of using a sociocracy approach, also in that article. It is also known as dynamic governance, whose goal is to create safe environments and productive organisations. It is distinguished by the use of consent, rather than majority voting, whereby “decisions are made by consent instead of consensus, which usually results in endless debates among network members. By consenting to a decision, you are not necessarily agreeing with it, but you’re not objecting to it either; and this, as subtle as it may sound, makes a world of a difference.”
The main caveat is that it might only work well when there are three or more at the table. But something I will certainly be experimenting more with as I get to put together teams for various projects the business takes on and continue my leadership journey.
[1] Accessed on 24th January 2022. Available online at: https://systemschangealliance.org/the-blind-spot-in-the-stewardship-of-locally-led-systems-change-networks/
Nexus Evaluation LTD 
One thought on “A small business perspective on fair, equitable and inclusive approaches to governance and management”