As we approach Anzac Day (25 April in Australia and New Zealand), we celebrate the lives of the brave service men and women who sacrificed so much for their countries.
Every year at this time I’m particularly aware of the battles of World War 1, characterised by trench warfare where two armies would launch attacks from deep trenches, sometimes only a short distance apart, separated by a “no man’s land” which came to signify an area where opposing forces would face mortal danger, unprotected from enemy fire.
Earlier this week I was reminded of the concept of trench warfare on my regular walk around my local neighbourhood. The manicured nature strip fronting two particular houses was very carefully divided, shown in the picture above. There was no discernible difference in the two sides of this no man’s land…same grass, same degree of maintenance. But the owners had very clearly defined each other’s separate space.
What had led to to this frankly nonsensical situation? What was the nature of the dispute which had led to it? Had a disagreement escalated to the point where each neighbour had decided it was safer to create this divide and stay in their own trenches?
In my work with family companies, I see a similar situation play out in a number of ways, such as:
- Directors in board meetings unable or unwilling to consider the alternate views of their fellow directors
- Boards and management opposing each other on strategic decisions
- Family member executives automatically expressing opposition to each other’s ideas
The opposing forces remain safe in their trenches. It can take great bravery to leave the safety of your trench and face enemy fire without protection. The peril of venturing into no man’s land is too great to contemplate.
Of course I would never suggest any similarity with the mortal peril faced by our honoured soldiers. Families involved in business together don’t (usually) face physical danger in stepping into their own version of no man’s land; their challenges are more likely to include:
- Criticism of their views which may lead to embarrassment
- A need to examine the motivation behind their position
- Desire to avoid conflict
- Lack of self awareness of the damage caused by ongoing and unresolved disagreement
Families in this situation can benefit from the involvement of an independent third party, who can work to dissolve the perceived danger of venturing into no man’s land, and remove the seemingly inevitably negative consequences of leaving your trench. This might include a facilitator to manage the conduct of board and family meetings, keeping the discussions focussed on the issues at hand, and creating a safe space where participants can express opposing views without fear of being shot down.
Robert Powell FCA GAICD is the founder and managing director of Family Boards Pty Limited, a specialist consultancy helping family companies achieve best practice in succession planning, wealth transition, board governance and risk management. He is a Chair of the business leader peer support group Leadership Think Tank Australia, an accredited specialist adviser member of the Family Business Association (AU), a Graduate of the Australian Institute of Company Directors, and a Fellow of Chartered Accountants Australia & New Zealand. He can be contacted at Robert@familyboards.com.au
