Using a Charter to Improve Communication

 

Whenever I work with organizations or survey employees, the subject of communications always comes up.  In answer to the questions like, what one thing could we do to improve our company, or what are the barriers to our success?  I always get answers like:

                “The problem around here is lack of communication.”

                “Communication, Communication, Communication!”

                “Improve communication.”

 

In actuality, people mean many things with these answers.  They might mean they don’t feel in the know – things are going on that they don’t know about.  People are not talking straight with them.  They are not told everything they need to know to get the job done.  Communications is all one way – generally top down.

 

Over the years I have developed one simple but powerful document that helps immensely with one type of communication – when you are giving a job to someone or a team to do.  It is called a charter. It is like a mini contract, and it derives its power form the fact that:

·         The person initiating and giving the charter has to think very carefully about several things before approaching the other person or group,

·         There is clear and specific communication required at the time of the charter transfer, and

·         The person or group accepting the charter has everything they need in the way of communication to satisfactorily do the job and to know when they are finished.

 

Each charter includes the following elements.

 

DATE:
NUMBER:	(You will need this when you have several Charters)
CHARTER:	(Name of the Charter)
TO:	(Person or Team)
FROM:	(Sponsor)
PURPOSE:	What is the purpose or mission of the assignment?
PRODUCT/EXPECTED RESULTS:	Describe the specific outcomes that are desired.  Note this is not directions on how to do something.  This is starting with the successful end in mind.
AUTHORITIES:	Use this area to describe or list authority that is being delegated for carrying out this project – money, time, space, contacts, travel, etc.
LIMITATIONS or BOUNDARIES:	List worries or actions that are unacceptable in carrying out this project.  By listing means or actions that are unacceptable, it frees the person or team to use any other methods or approaches to get the job done.  Some typical high level concepts that are generally included in this section are: Do not conduct yourselves or your business in an unlawful, imprudent, or unethical manner. Do not make decisions in disagreement with our mission, vision, and values.
MONITORING OR REPORTIING:	Describe when, how often, in what form, and to whom reports or communication should be made about progress.  Often this section lists the date or dates when things must be completed.  Many times the phrase, “or whenever the terms of the charter are violated” is used in this section.

 

The way this works is a supervisor (person writing the charter) knows that a specific job needs to be done.  This could be an on going job or a one time task.  The supervisor begins by thinking about and filling in the items in the charter.  Initially this “up front” time may seem wasteful, but there is great payback in the end.   At first glance completing the charter may seem trivial.  However after writing many charters, I can tell you it is anything but trivial.  Writing the charter forces you to think very carefully exactly what you want accomplished – nothing more nothing less.  Considering at the beginning what authority the person or team can have is also very clarifying for both parties.

 

The section of the charter that sometimes gives people a problem is the section on Limitations or Boundaries.  This is a concept borrowed from John Carver in his book, Boards that Make a Difference.  He maintains that:

 

“Most means are justified by the ends because producing re­sults is what justifies means. Some means, however, are not justifiable regardless of how effective they are. If this were not so, a board would need no test of executive means except their effectiveness. Focusing on which means are not approv­able, rather than on those that are, simplifies the task and makes it less onerous on management as well.  

A board that wishes to ensure that the organization’s actions are prudent and ethical must delineate ahead of time exactly what is imprudent and unethical. Any staff action that does not violate the board’s standards, then, is automati­cally approvable. Note that the board’s standards are negative or limiting rather than positive or prescriptive. The board has neither the time nor the expertise to state everything that should be done. It does have the sense of values necessary to recognize what should not be done. The principle is simple and, perhaps more than any other principle, enables excel­lence in governing:  Although the board speaks to Ends prescriptively, with regard to executive means the board should remain silent except to state clearly what it will not put up with.”

Put simply if the charter states what is unacceptable, the person or team knows that they can do anything else to get the job done.  Not to belabor this issue, but I can tell you from experience that much waste and disappointment has resulted when a person or team, after much work,  has come up with a plan that is unacceptable to the boss – all of which could have been avoided if the boss would have stated what was unacceptable before hand.

 

Once the charter is written the supervisor meets with the person or team receiving the charter.  At this time they go over the charter in some detail and answer any questions that come to mind.  Occasionally there is some negotiation involved, and sometimes the charter is actually revised to everyone’s satisfaction.  Again this may at first glance seem like overkill, but it isn’t.  Any minutes spent here will save hours and days later if there is clear communication up front.

 

Once the charter is successfully transferred, the supervisor can get on with the rest of his/her job without worrying about this assignment.  It will be done and done well unless he/she hears from the person or team that they are having trouble and need help.

 

The person or team on the other hand knows exactly what is expected.  They know what authority they have, they know what they can’t violate, and they know their reporting timetable.  They are empowered.  What could be better?

 

Folks this really works.  I hope you will give it a try.