Think for a minute about this nightmare board member: They have been at the table for years. They have opinions (so, so many opinions) about every little thing: strategy, fundraising, operations, and the performance of specific employees. They’re immersed in their phone during meetings and presentations. They repeatedly ask for explanations they have already received multiple times. They disparage the organization after they've left the boardroom. They know nothing about the org’s finances, yet they’re quick to evaluate the ED. They have a contact list that could fund the endowment three times over, yet they have no intention of sharing their contacts. And when the annual fundraiser comes up, they want to know why the organization has never been able to get an A-list celebrity to support the cause. Plus the tablecloths are the wrong color.
How did they end up on the board? Almost certainly because nobody treated the interview like a real interview.
The Sales Pitch Problem
Here is the uncomfortable truth about most board candidate interviews: they are not interviews. They are sales pitches. The organization sells. The candidate listens. And somewhere in that process, the purpose of figuring out whether this person is the right fit for the board gets lost entirely.
If any of the following have been said in a board candidate meeting, the interview has already gone off the rails:
- "The time commitment is really minimal.”
- “Committees don't meet that often and you can usually call in."
- "You're going to love the other board members."
- “We have so much fun at our board meetings.”
- "There is a fundraising commitment, but…"
That last one deserves special attention. A counselor's observation worth borrowing: insert the word "but" into a sentence and it invalidates everything that came before it. "I love you, but..." or "We'd love to have you, but..." The word signals to the listener that what follows is the real message. And in a board interview, what follows "there is a fundraising commitment, but" is usually a minimization that will haunt the organization for the entire length of that person's term.
The problems with the sales-pitch approach are straightforward: In the end, the organization learns almost nothing about the candidate. The organization sounds desperate. And the obligations of board service are obscured at exactly the moment they should be made clearest.
Board service is a privilege. Treating the interview as a courtesy call rather than a genuine vetting process does a disservice to the organization, to the existing board, and ultimately to the candidate, who may end up in a role they were never right for.
Questions Nobody Actually Asks (But Everyone Wishes They Could)
Before getting to the questions that should be asked, let's briefly acknowledge questions that cannot be asked, but that every board governance chair has thought about at least once:
- Are you an asshole?
- Do you need to be in control of everything?
- Is there anything you don’t have an opinion about?
- How hard can you roll your eyes?
- If you can’t put up, can you at least shut up?
- Does the idea of asking someone for money give you hives?
- How often do you join a conference call, hit mute, and play games on your phone?
These terrible questions are (of course) not interview questions. They are the unspoken pre-screening criteria that most organizations apply only after it is too late. The good news is that a well-designed interview can surface the answers to most of them without asking these questions directly.
The Questions That Should Actually Be Asked
A rigorous board interview is not an interrogation. It is a conversation with a clear purpose: understanding who the candidate is, what they bring, and whether board service is genuinely the right fit for both parties. The following questions, asked with genuine curiosity and appropriate follow-up, go a long way toward that purpose.
What do you know about our organization, and what draws you to committing your time and energy here? This is the baseline. A candidate who cannot articulate why this organization, and why they’re interested now, is a candidate who has not done the homework. Or that their interest may be more social than substantive.
What do you think makes a great board member? The answer is revealing in both directions. Candidates who describe the qualities of an engaged, accountable fiduciary are signaling something different than candidates who describe a comfortable advisory role with good dinner conversation.
What skills, connections, and expertise do you bring to the table, and are you willing to deploy them on behalf of the organization? The willingness question matters as much as the what. A contact list is only valuable if the person holding it is prepared to open it. Press gently here. Who is in the network? How close are those relationships? What does "willing to make introductions" actually look like in practice?
Fundraising is a significant obligation of board service. Our give/get expectation is… [state it clearly]. Can you tell us about your experience with fundraising? This is where many interviews go soft, and where they should not. Helping a child sell cookies for a school fundraiser is not a fundraising experience. Signing a check is not the same as making an ask. Dig into what the candidate's actual fundraising history looks like, and whether they have ever sat across from someone and asked for a major gift. A useful follow-up: Would you be willing to attend a donor lunch with the executive director where the goal is to make a major ask? The answer, and how quickly it comes, is instructive.
What are your prior board experiences, and what did you learn from them? Prior board service is not a prerequisite, but the reflection on it is. A candidate who has served on other boards and can speak specifically about what worked, what did not, and what they contributed is a candidate who has thought about the role. A candidate who lists boards the way they list LinkedIn credentials may have a different relationship with governance than the organization needs.
What do you hope to gain personally from board service? This is not a trick question. Board members who have a clear sense of what they are getting from service alongside what they are giving tend to be more engaged and more honest about their limits. The answer also surfaces potential conflicts or misalignments early.
What kind of autonomy do you have over your calendar? Board service involves more than scheduled meetings. There are committee gatherings, donor events, occasional urgent asks, and the informal work that happens between formal sessions. A candidate whose schedule is genuinely inflexible, or who has not thought about what they are actually committing to, is worth understanding before the appointment is made.
Do you have any concerns or reservations about joining the board? This one often goes unasked, and it should not. A candidate with genuine concerns who voices them in the interview is a candidate worth having a real conversation with. A candidate with concerns who does not voice them until six months into board service is a problem waiting to happen.
What the Candidate Should Be Asking
A strong board candidate will come with questions of their own. And their questions are as revealing as their answers. An organization should be prepared to respond honestly to all of the following, and should be mildly concerned about a candidate who asks none of them.
- Who is currently on the board, and how did they come to serve?
- How long are board terms? What constitutes a quorum?
- What committees exist, who serves on them, and are they active?
- What do the financial statements look like? What is the operating budget, the revenue mix, the largest expense categories? Is there a deficit? Has the organization had consistent clean audits? Are there any outstanding legal matters?
- What are the specific responsibilities of board members, and is there existing leadership ready to step into officer roles?
A candidate who asks about financial health, governance structure, and organizational stability is a candidate who understands what they are signing up for. That is a good sign.
Try Before You Buy
Even the most rigorous interview process will occasionally produce a board member who turns out not to be the right fit. It happens. One way to reduce that risk is to build structured on-ramps that allow both parties to evaluate the relationship before a formal appointment is made.
Committee service is one of the best of these. An individual who joins a standing or ad hoc committee before joining the board gets real experience with the organization's work and culture. The organization gets real information about the individual's engagement, follow-through, and temperament. Both parties get to try the relationship on before committing to it.
The traditional "advisory board" has served a version of this function for years, providing a place for high-profile names who are not ready or willing to take on full board responsibilities. In practice, however, advisory boards tend to become parking lots: names on a letterhead, occasional annual reports, minimal actual engagement. Organizations are better served by being more intentional. A leadership council, for example, in which members commit to an annual financial contribution and to bringing a defined number of new people into contact with the organization's work, can generate real value rather than nominal association.
The goal is genuine engagement, not the appearance of it. A board built from candidates who were genuinely vetted, honestly informed, and thoughtfully onboarded is a board that can actually govern. That is, after all, the point.
The Board Interview Is An Interview
Board service is a privilege. It is an opportunity to contribute to something that matters, alongside people who share that commitment. Organizations that treat the interview as a mere formality, or as a sales call, are underselling the role and overexposing themselves to the consequences.
The nightmare board member did not appear out of nowhere. They were invited in, usually by a process that never asked the right questions. The good news is that the right questions are not complicated. They just require the willingness to ask them and to take the answers seriously.
Nonprofit Snapshot publishes perspectives from across the nonprofit sector. Views expressed are illustrative of common organizational dynamics and do not represent any single organization or individual.