It's a blur. Essentially you process each issue sequentially. First step is to make it to the runway (wasn't sure I was going to do that) second step is to breath a sigh of relief as you see the runway. Smile as you land, then the OMG moment as you realize the cockpit is 90 degrees to the direction of the runway. Immediately (without thinking) you hit the left reverse thruster and take the right one out of reverse thrust. You're pumping the brakes but sliding (hydroplaning) so nothing happens. You pass the half way point going like a bat of hell and working the throttles asymmetrically to get the aircraft straight. Finally a big smile when you're now lined up on the runway. Next, another OMG moment as you realize that with 1,000 feet to go you're still going like a bat out of hell. You say to the co-pilot, brace and off the end you go. Finally a big sigh of relief as you come to a halt with the props screaming their heads off, lights flashing, and air traffic screaming at you.

You smile to the copilot – all in a days work, and ask ATC for a bus to get the passengers off. You then thank the “Man Upstairs” profusely for saving not only your bacon but the others onboard including a recent newborn.

But I digress. Back to the envelop. I think it's an important metaphor for a lot of things. We each have our own “operating envelop”. Good mentor/parents act as “bumper pads” allowing us to experiment as we learn the corners of our own envelops. We catch them as they get a little to close to the edge (if you want to see what happens for a plane do a search for “coffin corner and learjet”).

Once you've determined the edges of your envelop I then look for others who can bring in new envelops to help expand and grow “within safe boundaries” mine. This goes back to the other discussion on Boards and adding people who illuminate areas of the Board table that you can't.

I've found that the best way to get the “envelops” to interact is to remove your own ego as much as possible. Focus on winning the war and not the battle(s) and people rise to the occasion. To grow we have to focus on the bigger problem and look for others to help us on our journey.

First off, I just flew there and back to somewhere and could not get the image of your skidding plane on the runway from my head. Not in a fearful way, more in a “what's happening in the cockpit” way. That, and “Outliers” cockpit politesse, have served to recently change my view of flying (and my family has had some fliers in it).

Back to your comment. I like the image of the performance envelope. It reminded me in part of the process of applying to private schools with my daughter. In dealing with the director of the outgoing school, we met to discuss what we thought of the schools we applied to, and I described the schools in terms of the “box”, and I strove to find the best fit for my daughter via this analogy.

One school wanted you (the student) to stay in the box and took pains to delineate the box. A second assumed you knew the box and its dimensions and felt it was too small, and so encouraged stretching the box creatively. A third thought there were many boxes, and I found this quite obvious and vague, a sort of dangerous shifting target which became more about the discussion of “boxes” than the education. A fourth showed you the box and handed you a hammer to break it, and assumed you would remake it, somehow, and they were there to help you do so. A fifth felt there was a box somewhere, if you cared to find it, but they were not very concerned with it, felt it was irrelevant almost. We decided to go for the sixth which felt the box was there, and so were you, and the outcome was not predetermined because life was not predetermined – they would simply see what happened to “you”, to the box, and where that led. It was an all girl's schools by the way.

I liked revisiting your performance envelope as a set of ideals, if you will, afterwards with the perspective of the “box” as an education model. A sort of rubber meets the road of putting ideas in practice, of teaching thinkers, of learning ways to adhere to a core yet absorb the fringe. It seemed to get back to the “approach” with time and the weather ruling how one made informed choices.

Perhaps I have stretched the idea of the “envelope” too far here, and if so my apologies. I wondered, however, whether education styles somehow informed with how you responded to the varied board member's approaches to your performance envelope. Many thinking styles are needed to make anything run, but getting those styles to work together is an art, and the larger the group the harder the task.

Everybody hates unpleasant surprises. Boards like smooth sailing. The occasional “ripple” makes things a little interesting but nothing upsets them more than expectations gone awry.

As I've mentioned before the CEO's job is simple (grin) Engage – Explain – Set & Manage Expectations. Think of these in terms of constant minute course corrections. Little tweaks here and there that on their own amount to very little yet over time keep the ship clearly on course. When the CEO fails to do his/her job the Board's job is to give him/her the necessary guidance to get the ship back on course.

I hear you on the envelope and the predictability. I've thought of it as a “structure' and a 'rhythm', but I think it's the same thing. Put in the right structure (roles, expectations, goals, timing, etc.) and if it's robust, then you flow the content through it. And the focus of everyone's time together should be on the content and not the envelope.

Mark Suster, in his blog, has talked about board meetings, and has said that key decisions shouldn't be made at the meetings, but rather, they should be pre-sold so they are a procedurial vote at the meeting. I think this is a good goal. Though I also recognize there are only so many hours in a day. But better to manage your board so they are no substantive surprises. Otherwise they start not trusting you. And that's not ever a good thing.

From my consulting days, I facilitated a ton of meetings. One of the questions I was taught to always ask is, what are the unique topics and accomplishments that can be made with these people together in the same room at the same time. Basically, stuff that's collaborative; the important discussion that takes it to the next level.

Things that are 'broadcast', such as report-backs, should be pre-sent and discussed on an exception or issue basis. No one likes to sit and listen to a talking head. They want to be engaged.

Anyway I highly recommend Mark's entry, if you haven't read it. Here it is: http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2010/02/12/r…

As a start, I know i'm going to start using the term “sculpting fog”.

But what I think you do have here is Pete's Manifesto. You really should consolidate it into one place because it will be valuable for you and the people that work with you. Seriously.

I always give everyone two choices – either you leave or I leave. In the case of someone else's Board, I leave. In the case of my own – I don't. Not anymore. I did before and the shareholders suffered because of it.

I've now modified my emotional behavior to be more consistent with a predictable operating envelope. (Love mixing these metaphors).

Still occasionally I love to fly a little higher, but the times I do, I make sure I don't subject others to those risks.

Jerry – I hope this hasn't got too off topic. The Board really is the operating envelop for the Company. A poorly defined Board that lacks focus and criteria for success will not succeed in creating stakeholder value.

Defining the criteria up front has been hardest thing and yet the most rewarding. It gives me a clear boundary for operation. In flying terms we call this the performance envelop. Basically you can fly a plane anywhere inside the envelop. Get near the edge and strange things can happen if you're not very careful.

When I started my latest company, I started with the envelop. I wrote for the Board (Criteria), I wrote for the Customers (Our Beliefs) I wrote for the employees (Roles and Responsibilities) and I wrote it for myself (Core Values).

The Core Values help everyone know Who we are and What we stand for. It's my performance envelope for the company and myself. Here are the core values.

Embracing the following values enables us to focus and execute on a common plan:

Respect – Transparency is the key to mutual respect
Honesty – Tell the truth even if in doubt
Integrity – What we say, and how we present ourselves, need to be in alignment and authentic
Objectivity – The ability to listen and remain objective enables us to learn and grow
Adaptability – Confront reality as it is, not as you want it to be
Responsibility – Accountability, Loyalty, and Visibility to all stakeholders

For people who follow this blog and read my comments you now know me. I’ve attempted to add clarity and predictability to who I am and how I operate. For a pilot, the first thing we want to know is how the plane flies. Being a test pilot is not a great occupation – it’s very risky because you have to determine the envelop. Being on a Board of a company that isn’t run with some “predictability” is risky.

My job as a CEO is to provide those that need it with clarity and predictability – this gets them from A to B in safety.

However sometimes I need to be a test pilot and fly something new. I’ve done this four times now. It’s scary, as I’ve said before you’re sculpting fog, you have no idea of the envelop. It doesn’t exist – and yet you’re compelled to see if you can create something rewarding. My latest venture has been the most scary of the four. I’ve had to risk everything to do something that I believe in.

I could never have done it without the performance envelop. It allowed me a place of sanctuary to return after flying something at the edge and then crashing back down again. When you truly find the right envelop it all suddenly makes sense. All the hard work, all the lonely nights, all the arguments – what materializes is something that is so simple, so elegant that you sit back and smile.

You then wait for others to discover your creation and take it flying.

But there's a difference between authority and power; power is when the Chair tells you to do something and you do it. Only the board as a whole has power over the CEO. Individual members do not. That's the only way shareholders across classes of shares can get fair representation.

I've had board members screaming at me over the phone to take the deal, take the deal, the sky is falling so take the fucking deal. Yes, I hear you, board member. Thank you for your input. I'm sure we'll vote on the deal at the next board meeting.

This is some very basic, maybe even simplistic advice: help them define what their interests are. They usually express them in terms of positions, but what's really important are their interests. You can serve their interests with a number of different solutions, but you have very little room to balance everyone's interests if you accept their narrow, self-serving positions. (poorly cribbed from “getting past no”)

The one reason I haven't raised money for my new venture? Ya gotta serve somebody. It might be the board member, it might be the lord but ya gotta serve somebody… (forgive me mr. zimmerman)

Clear criteria and roles & responsibilities. It's hard to have the discipline to define these up-front, but makes such a big difference.

And 'woman' is not a criteria. What you listed above are great criteria. I just want more in the pipeline, evaluated against those criteria.

I wasn't really intending it as an example, but a dynamic that plays in. I know there is no one-size-fits-all answer to this. And your lesson is clear — we all need to behave appropriately and with sensitivity no matter the gender.

For sure, there are badly-behaving women out there. And I hope, really hope, that I have not been one of them. I take your suggestions above to heart. And Jerry, you have a million times more experience than I do on this one.

But the example you wrote about — rounds of funding, and the ensuing posturing — seemed very specific to for-profits.

It struck a nerve with me because I cannot conceive a scenario in which I'd be at that table. Unless it was a company I'd created myself. And the guys are these tables are ones I sat next to at Wharton, and in some cases managed. It is very frustrating.

That shortage of entry paths is my own cross to bear, and I'm in fact working really hard within the prevailing system we are given to figure my way around and through that, so I can get what I yearn for and do what I know I can do.

My personal experience vis-a-vis boards has been limited to not-for-profits. Not salary-paying professional not-for-profits (which my impression is one generally gets onto the board related to a large donation — and I'm OK with that — I get it — but cannot afford that myself), but a whole lot of volunteer-run NFPs. Usually all-female. And in that context, for sure, I've seen a lot of bad behavior and dysfunction, and a handful of successes. Also a huge amount of valuable time and skill burned over low-value topics (e.g. how to spend that $23?) .

I'm not sure if it's the NFP part, the volunteer part, the all-female part, the uneven skills sets or just plain chemistry. Or maybe it's just me. Quite consistently, the mission is not crisp and clear and there is not a steward of that mission. I feel it's a brew of all these things.

I decided a few years ago, based on a particularly frustrating time-suck, that I am not a not-for-profit gal. I can accomplish considerably more, do a lot more good and employ my skills far better while making big profits, and then channeling my own money to causes I care about. And then control how it's spent and managed. When people don't pay me, they do not value my time or my skills. It really drags me down in all aspects of my life.

When I was pregnant with each of my daughters, one of my criteria for picking their names was could it be taken seriously if she were running a corporate board meeting (i.e. not “Bunny — will you call this meeting to order?”). I'm not projecting my dream on them, but they deserve the option if they want it.

Having had my own career slowed down by bleeding-edge 'sandwich generation' issues, I anticipate that with our country's generational demographics, this will get worse not better. But that's a comment for another post. Or perhaps my own.

Thanks for indulging me in this venting session. Cathartic.

Now I focus on meeting the criteria as close as I can. I don't care what gender, all I care about is the Customers, Employees and Shareholders.