I worked with a nonprofit board when one member made an exciting suggestion.
They had grown up with someone who later became a national celebrity.
And they were still in touch.
“Why don’t we recruit them to the board?”
There was just one problem.
The celebrity wasn’t known for supporting the organization’s cause—or even being particularly connected to it.
But they were famous.
And the assumption was almost automatic:
Their name would attract attention.
Their followers would become supporters.
Donors would take meetings.
Doors would open.
Surely, having them on the board would help the organization grow.
You know the conversation:
“Imagine if we could get them on our board.”
They’re well-known.
Respected.
Connected.
It feels like a recruiting win before anyone asks two much more important questions:
Do they care enough about the mission to do the work?
And…
Will they actually have time to do it?
Sometimes, the answer to both is yes.
And when it is, a well-connected community leader or celebrity can be an extraordinary addition to a board.
But too often, boards confuse visibility with contribution.
High-profile individuals can bring:
• Credibility
• Connections
• Attention
• Access
All valuable.
But board service requires something much less glamorous:
Time.
Engagement.
Follow-through.
And that’s where the gap often appears.
The same people who are:
• Leading multiple organizations
• Serving on several boards
• Constantly in demand
• Regularly being asked for their time
…may simply not have the capacity to be an engaged board member.
So what happens?
They attend occasionally—often remotely.
They participate lightly.
They lend their name more than their time.
And then something even more damaging happens:
The board adjusts its expectations around them.
Missed meetings are understandable.
Unfinished work gets overlooked.
Limited participation is accepted.
Other members are expected to do things the prominent member isn’t.
Prestige quietly earns an exemption from accountability.
And now the problem isn’t just one disengaged board member.
It’s the message being sent to everyone else.
Strong boards think differently.
They don’t ask:
“How impressive would this person look on our board?”
They ask:
“How will this person contribute—consistently—over time?”
Reputation can be valuable.
Connections can be valuable.
Influence can be valuable.
But none of them substitute for mission alignment and engagement.
I’d rather have a board member whose name no one recognizes but whose contribution everyone relies on…
than a name everyone recognizes attached to an empty chair.
Recruit board members for what they will do—not for who they are.