Executive Leadership

Watch Your Language: You’re The Only One

Watch Your Language: You're the Only One

How everyone, no one, always, and never quietly do a leader’s damage, and forecast a future that does not have to come true

A capable manager sits down for what she thinks is a routine check-in. She has had what she perceives as a good few months. Then her director leans back and says, “I will be honest with you. Everyone has concerns about you, and you are the only one on this team I cannot count on.” That is the whole of it. No name attached to “everyone.” No example behind “cannot count on.” She walks out of that office a different employee than the one who walked in, and not in a way that helps anyone.

This column is not about that one director. It is about five or six small words that often show up in offices, kitchens, and pro shops, doing more damage than their size would suggest. Everyone. No one. Nobody. Always. Never. The only one. They feel like emphasis. They are actually something else.

Start with the plain fact that they are rarely true. “Everyone has concerns” is usually one person, or two, or just the speaker borrowing a crowd for cover. “You always drop the ball” describes a couple of moments, not a lifetime. “Nobody is impressed” is a private feeling dressed up as a consensus. The instant a leader reaches for an absolute, the truth has already been stretched, and most people on the receiving end can feel the stretch even when they cannot name it.

Here is what the absolute does to the person hearing it. It takes away any way to respond. If a leader says, “The board report went out a day late this month,” the person can answer that, own it, or explain it. If the leader says, “You always drop the ball,” there is nothing to take hold of. You cannot defend yourself against “always”. You cannot cross-examine everyone. The absolute is not an opening for a conversation. It is a door swinging shut, and both people usually know it.

There is a quiet evasion tucked inside the borrowed crowd. “Everyone thinks you are difficult” is a way of not saying “I think you are difficult.” “No one believes that plan will work” spares the leader from saying “I do not believe it, and here is why.” Hiding a personal judgment behind an invented consensus feels safer, and it does two costly things at once. It denies the person any chance to answer the actual individual who holds the concern, and it signals to everyone in earshot that the leader will not stand behind their own opinions. A team learns quickly whether the person in charge speaks for themselves or imagines a crowd to speak for them.

Absolutes also perform a quiet trick with time. “You missed this month’s committee update” is about a single moment. “You never keep the committee informed” is about who you are. One is a correction. The other is a verdict. When a leader turns a single lapse into always and never, the person stops hearing feedback and starts hearing a character sentence, and a character sentence is the kind of thing people tend to either fight or shrink under. Neither reaction gets the update written.

The repair is not softer language. It is more specific language. Watch how much changes when you remove the absolute.

Instead of “You are the only one on my senior team I cannot rely on,” try “Two commitments slipped this quarter, and I want to understand what is getting in the way.” Instead of “Everyone on the board has lost confidence in you,” try, “Two board members raised a specific concern after the last meeting, and I want to walk through it with you.” Instead of “You never keep me informed,” try, “I learned about the membership dip from the financials rather than from you, and I need that to change.” Instead of “Nobody thinks the renovation is on track,” try, “The last two updates on the renovation raised more questions than they answered, so let us get into the specifics.”

Notice what the specific version does that the absolute cannot. It names the real thing rather than a vague cloud. It owns the concern as the leader’s own instead of hiding it inside a crowd. It points at a behavior the person can actually change, rather than a fixed flaw they cannot. The honesty stays fully intact. What disappears is the exaggeration, and with it the sense that the verdict was handed down before the person ever sat down.

Then there is the absolute that may do the most quiet harm of all, the one aimed at the future. “You will never be ready to run this on your own.” “No one is ever going to respect you if you keep this up.” “This team will always be behind.” These are spoken as descriptions. They land as forecasts, and people have a way of living down to the forecast a leader names for them. Tell a capable manager often enough that they will never be ready, and you are not predicting their ceiling. You are helping to build it. Said often enough, those words stop describing the future and start shaping it.

The same absolutes can run in the other direction, and that carries its own risk. Many clubs have a sacred cow or two, the long-tenured favorite whom the members adore, told again and again that everyone loves them and the place could not run without them. It feels generous in the moment. It also makes a quiet promise. What happens when that person is passed over for a promotion, when the position is eliminated in a restructuring, or when the skill set doesn’t match the picture the membership has painted? The higher the praise was piled, the harder the fall, and the more betrayed the employee feels by a story the club repeated for years. Praise, like criticism, lands best when it is specific and earned, not an absolute that quietly commits leadership to a future it may not be able to deliver.

The damage rarely stays with the person it was aimed at. Others watch how a colleague gets spoken to, and they draw their own conclusions about how judgments are handed down here. If “always” and “everyone” can be aimed at one good employee over a single stumble, they can be aimed at anyone. The result is that the team starts to protect itself. People stop volunteering for the hard assignment, stop raising the honest problem, and start managing the story that might be told about them. A leader who traffics in absolutes does not just bruise one person. They teach the whole staff to play it safe.

The story does not stop at the exit interview. The employee who was told that everyone had concerns eventually leaves, and carries that version of events into the industry, to the next club, to peers at a conference, to anyone who asks what it was like to work there. The private club world is small; word about how people are treated travels faster than any search, and what a leader said behind a closed door has a way of becoming what the industry hears about that leader long after the person is gone.

None of this is an argument for going soft or pretending a real problem isn’t real. A leader who sees a genuine pattern should name it. The point is that a real pattern deserves real specifics: the dates, the moments, the actual behavior, owned by the person raising them. Absolutes are the shortcut people reach for when they have a feeling but have not done the work to back it up. The shortcut feels forceful in the moment. It reads as laziness later, and it wears down the trust that makes the next hard conversation possible.

So here is a test worth applying before the big word leaves your mouth. Ask whether it is literally true. Is it truly everyone, or is it you? Is it really always, or was it Tuesday? Could you swap the absolute for the specific thing that is actually bothering you, and would you be willing to say that specific thing out loud and stand behind it? If the honest answer is that the absolute is easier because the specific turns out to be thinner than it felt, that is worth knowing before you hand it to someone who will carry it for a long time.

Watch your language. Everyone, no one, always, and never feel like the strong words, the ones that land. What they actually do is stretch the truth, corner the listener, and quietly forecast a future that did not have to happen. Your team is listening for which future you believe in. Give them the specific truth instead. It is harder to say, and it is the kind worth hearing.

BoardRoom Briefs – September 2026

Michelle A. Riklan, ACRW, CPRW, CEIC, CJSS is a Career Strategist, Search & Consulting Executive at KOPPLIN KUEBLER & WALLACE (KK&W). KK&W is the leading executive search and consulting firm in the private club industry. Michelle can be reached at 833-KKW-HIRE (559-4473) ext. 717 and at michelle@kkandw.com.

Watch Your Language: You’re The Only One2026-09-14T18:14:06+00:00

Build What Makes Your Club Special

Build What Makes Your Club Special

Every club eventually faces the capital decision: the new clubhouse wing, the reimagined dining venue, the aquatics complex that has been on the wishlist for a decade. These conversations almost always begin with what the club should build. We would offer a different opening question: who are we, and what should this investment make possible for our club’s experience?

A capital project is rarely remembered for its construction timeline. Members remember these projects for what they signal about who the club is becoming. The building is a platform. When leadership treats the project as an act of identity rather than only an act of construction, the investment aligns leadership and deepens member attachment. That alignment is achievable, and it does not require a full rebrand or cultural overhaul. It requires getting the sequence of operations right.

Define who you are before you decide what to build

”We find that the clubs getting the most from their investment understand their identity before they break ground,” explains Derek Sussner, Founder at Sussner. “That clarity tells them what to build and how to program it. Many leaders tell us in hindsight that they wish they had done the identity work first, because it would have shaped the facility from the start.”

Identity defined early makes the project pay off. A club that understands itself as offering a breadth of experiences can build new dining venues as distinct destinations, each telling a variation of the larger story, each proving the identity through lived experience.

Tom Wallace, Partner at KK&W, agrees. ”We see the same principle expressed through governance and data. The starting point for any capital decision needs evidence. Two documents anchor that evidence: the Capital Reserve Study, which establishes the obligatory capital a club must spend to protect its physical assets and manage deferred maintenance, and the Campus Master Plan, which establishes the aspirational capital that elevates the member experience and advances the long-range vision.”

Understanding the balance between obligatory and aspirational spending is a critical strategic conversation between the Board and General Manager. It shifts capital planning from a contest of personal preferences and loud voices to a transparent, defensible process. When a project reinforces who the club is becoming, it’s an investment.

The two lenses meet on a single test: does this project strengthen what makes the club distinct, or does it replicate what other clubs in the market are already doing?

Watch for the amenity that does not match the identity

There is a reliable warning sign that capital is drifting away from identity. Picture a club that describes itself as a family destination for every generation, yet continues to pour capital into a championship golf course while the pool deteriorates. When the only truly premier amenity is the one that does not match the stated identity, the investment is quietly working against the story the club tells about itself.

At Sussner, we read that gap to avoid a perception problem,” says Sussner. “Every element a member encounters is either reinforcing who the club is or diluting it. A facility that contradicts the identity teaches members to distrust the message.”

Wallace emphasizes, ”The same gap is a stewardship problem. Stewardship is a leadership philosophy. It means ensuring the club is healthier, stronger, and more vibrant for the next generation. Every capital decision is a message to the membership about what the club values and who it values.”

Leadership that balances the aspirational with the obligatory, the new with the existing, sends a message of care for the whole club rather than only its shiniest parts.

This is also where staff spaces deserve a deliberate place in the plan. When break rooms, locker areas, and back-of-house workspaces are overlooked, the message to employees is unmistakable: member experience matters; yours does not. Over the past five years, the leading clubs have recognized that the member experience is always a reflection of the employee experience, and they have invested accordingly. A club cannot be an employer of choice without providing a great employee environment.

Lead the people, then tell the story

A capital project asks the General Manager to operate in two modes at once: as a strategic change leader and an operational stabilizer.

“Over time, our executive search due diligence has consistently shown that communication remains one of the most critical competencies identified by private club Board Members and Search Committee. A GM/COO communicates up to the Board, across to vendors and project managers, down to staff, and outward to members, with messages tailored to each audience but never contradictory. When people lack information, they fill the void with assumptions and anxiety. The strongest GM/COOs over-communicate with intention,” confirms Wallace.

Governance discipline protects that clarity. A board-driven Long-Range Planning Committee, inclusive of the GM/COO, owns the strategic direction. A Construction Steering Committee provides focused oversight during active work. For any project exceeding three million dollars, a dedicated professional Project Manager should report to the General Manager/COO, not the board, and should never be a club member, because a member in that role blurs governance boundaries and puts personal relationships in the middle of high-stakes decisions. Boards own the what and the why. General Manager/COOs own the how. When those lanes are clear, projects move faster and with far less friction. And when debates arise, they stay behind closed doors; public alignment is non-negotiable.

”That internal clarity is exactly what makes member communication land,” adds Sussner. “The instinct during a project is to announce what is being built and when it will be done. The stronger message is: we are investing in this because of who we are, and here is what it allows us to accentuate.”

When members understand the why, expectations take care of themselves; people stop measuring the project against their personal preferences and start measuring it against the club’s direction. The same clarity should apply to staff. Rather than scripting every interaction, we equip people with a genuine understanding of what makes the club special, so they know how to handle the moments no one anticipated. Understanding solves challenges a script didn’t know could occur. This is how internal and external identities stay aligned, including in the moments no one planned.

When the project opens, the work returns to identity. A new venue should carry a name and a story of its own, one that ladders into the larger story and creates an atmosphere of “if you know, you know.” That quality is what makes the place feel genuinely theirs.

First steps for the General Manager/COO and Board

You do not need a finished master plan to begin aligning capital with identity. A few low-barrier moves create momentum:

  1. Name the identity before the next project conversation. Articulate who the club is and what makes it special, and use that as the screen every proposed project must pass through.
  2. Put the two documents on the table. Review the Capital Reserve Study and the Campus Master Plan side by side, so the obligatory and the aspirational are weighed in the same conversation.
  3. Clarify the roles early. Agree on what the board decides, what the GM executes, and how the two will communicate, before the first announcement goes out.
  4. Lead member communication with the why, not the what. Frame the investment as an expression of identity, and let the construction updates carry the story forward.

A capital project is one of the most visible decisions a club will make. Handled as construction, it produces a building. Handled as an act of identity and stewardship, it produces a stronger, clearer, more enduring club.

NCA Club Director – August 2026

Sussner is a Minneapolis-based branding firm specializing in helping private clubs define, design, and deliver brand clarity. With a strategic and creative approach, Sussner partners with clubs to modernize their brand identity, strengthen member engagement, and elevate their market perception.

Build What Makes Your Club Special2026-08-19T19:35:26+00:00

Board Evaluation In Private Clubs

Board Evaluation in Private Clubs

Private club boards ask a great deal of the volunteers who serve on them. Directors are expected to fulfill significant fiduciary and leadership responsibilities, including setting policy, overseeing finances, safeguarding the club’s culture, and partnering with the general manager, often with little formal governance training and relatively short board tenures. Given those stakes, it’s striking how few clubs formally evaluate the people doing the governing. Most clubs track General Manager/COO performance closely. Far fewer turn that same discipline inward, toward the board itself.

To acknowledge this important situation, industry leaders are spending significant time rallying together to formalize private club governance best practices that include regular board self-evaluation as a core value.

Why Board Evaluation Matters

Most private clubs are comfortable with organizational-level assessments: financial benchmarking, member satisfaction surveys, strategic plan and KPI check-ins. Board reflection and self-evaluation is a different, more sensitive layer. It asks directors to consider and assess how well the elected group functions as a board:

  • Do we prepare for and facilitate efficient meetings?
  • Does the board communicate with members in a transparent manner?
  • Does the board think and act strategically?
  • Do we respect management boundaries and avoid operational meddling?
  • Do we bring a club-wide perspective rather than representing a single faction or amenity?

Skipping this layer has real costs. A board can be financially sound and strategically well-directed while still being dysfunctional, dominated by one or two strong personalities, spending too much time on topics that come up outside of the confirmed agenda, or populated by directors who are not accountable to the club’s strategic plan and agreed-upon master goals.

Directors complete a structured questionnaire rating board connectivity to the membership, strategic direction, structure and process, and relationship with club management. Board evaluation is the lowest-friction entry point for private clubs new to the practice, and it works best paired with another method like a governance best practice session or annual board orientation for both new and returning board members. Ongoing education and structured onboarding for new board members strengthens alignment, improves decision-making, and fosters more effective partnerships between governance and management.

Board evaluation also serves a quieter but equally important function: it protects the General Manager/COO. When a board has no formal mechanism for reflecting on its own performance, dissatisfaction with governance often gets redirected at staff, or expressed informally through second-guessing and scope creep. A structured self-evaluation gives directors a legitimate outlet for raising governance concerns with each other, rather than working around the General Manager/COO or the club’s chain of command.

What the Industry Recommends

NCA and CMAA’s governance competencies for club managers explicitly list board self-evaluation alongside General Manager/COO performance reviews, orientation, and succession planning as core areas club managers should help boards address. Treating board evaluations as a standing governance function rather than an occasional exercise promotes long-term alignment and continuity across turnover and transitions. CMAA and NCA jointly publish Private Club Governance: A Handbook of Principles and Best Practices, now in its second edition, which devotes a chapter to board and committee evaluation and includes sample instruments clubs can adapt directly rather than build from scratch.

Boards benefit from using a structured governance framework that clearly defines director roles, responsibilities, and expected behaviors. Establishing these standards creates a meaningful basis for board evaluation, helping assessments focus on performance and governance effectiveness rather than subjective personality judgments. Widely adopted governance models in the private club sector have demonstrated the value of this approach by providing boards with a common language for accountability, collaboration, and leadership development.

A Best-In-Class Approach

A strong model for a club introducing or enhancing its board evaluation process looks something like this:

  1. Start with role clarity. Evaluation is meaningless without an agreed standard. Before implementing, adopt board policy manual complete with written charters, a roles and responsibilities matrix, and an approvals matrix. Train boards in strategic governance and clarify roles between management and governance to foster collaboration and consistency.
  2. Anonymize and aggregate results. Whether conducted internally or facilitated by an outside consultant, evaluation results should be shared with the board in aggregate form. Presenting results in aggregate keeps the discussion focused on board performance as a collective responsibility rather than turning the process into an assessment of individual personalities.
  3. Tie results to action, not just filing. A board evaluation should be viewed as a governance improvement tool. Findings should translate into concrete actions that strengthen board effectiveness over the coming year. Evaluation results can help refine board orientation and onboarding programs, identify development needs, shape committee assignments, and clarify expectations for board service. Where a nominating or leadership development committee exists, the evaluation can also inform decisions regarding director renomination, succession planning, and future recruitment priorities. A well-designed evaluation process creates accountability by ensuring that insights lead to measurable improvements rather than being reviewed once and forgotten.
  4. Benchmark externally. Comparing evaluation results against industry data or peer organizations provides valuable context that internal discussions alone cannot offer. Benchmarking helps boards distinguish between challenges that are unique to their organization and those that are common across the sector. For example, concerns about strategic focus, meeting length, recruitment of qualified directors, or committee workload may be more widespread than directors realize. Understanding how the board compares with peers can reduce unnecessary concern, validate existing strengths, and highlight areas where improvement efforts should be prioritized. External benchmarks also provide an objective reference point for tracking governance progress over time.
  5. Revisit annually. Like General Manager/COO evaluations, board evaluations deliver the greatest value when they become part of a recurring governance cycle. A one-time assessment may generate useful observations, but it rarely produces lasting organizational change. Conducting evaluations annually creates an opportunity to measure progress, identify emerging challenges, and reinforce a culture of continuous improvement. Many organizations schedule evaluations to align with the fiscal year, strategic planning process, or director rotation cycle so that findings can inform upcoming governance decisions. When the process is repeated consistently, board evaluation becomes an embedded governance practice rather than a symbolic exercise undertaken only when concerns arise.
  6. Close the loop with the membership. Directors are accountable to the members who elected them, so the evaluation process shouldn’t end as an internal-only exercise. Boards don’t need to publish raw results, but a brief report at an annual meeting or in a member communication noting that a self-evaluation was conducted and summarizing the resulting governance priorities reinforces the transparency the evaluation itself is meant to measure.

The Role of the General Manager/COO

While the evaluation is meant to assess the board rather than staff, the General Manager/COO typically plays a supporting role in the process rather than staying entirely apart from it. Many clubs have the General Manager/COO help select or administer the instrument, provide operational context that informs the questions asked, and receive a summary of the results, since several evaluation items (i.e. the board’s respect for management boundaries, the clarity of its direction to staff) describe the General Manager/COO relationship directly. The General Manager/COO’s involvement should stop short of shaping how directors are scored, both to preserve candor and to keep the evaluation focused on governance rather than becoming, in effect, a referendum on staff performance.

Common Pitfalls to Avoid

Clubs that get less value from board evaluation often fall into one of a few patterns:

  1. Treating it as a compliance exercise. When a survey is distributed and filed away without discussion, directors quickly learn the process doesn’t matter and engage with it less honestly the next time around.
  2. Skipping the follow-up conversation. The questionnaire itself surfaces information; the facilitated discussion afterward is what turns it into a shared understanding of priorities.
  3. Making it personal. Without clear ground rules, an evaluation intended to assess collective board performance can devolve into airing individual grievances, which discourages candid participation in future cycles.
  4. Starting without a governance baseline. Asking directors to rate the board’s effectiveness against standards that were never written down invites inconsistent, subjective answers.

The purpose of evaluation should be to promote continuous improvement, not to find fault. Because most volunteer directors enter their roles with limited formal governance training, boards benefit from a structured process that helps members understand the expectations of effective board service and assess their performance against those standards. When evaluation is treated as a routine component of good governance, it can strengthen board effectiveness, improve collaboration with management, and reduce the interpersonal conflicts that can undermine organizational stability and member confidence over time.

NCA Club Governance – August 2026

Richard M. Kopplin, Kurt D. Kuebler and Thomas B. Wallace III are partners at KOPPLIN KEUBLER & WALLACE. Richard can be reached at dick@kkandw.com. Kurt can be reached at kurt@kkandw.com. Tom can be reached at tom@kkandw.com.

Board Evaluation In Private Clubs2026-08-19T19:38:10+00:00

The People You Pay are Talking

The-People-You-Pay-are-Talking

A club runs on its members and its staff. But not on them alone. Behind a flawless dinner service, an immaculate fairway, and an event that goes off without a hitch, there is a wide circle of people and companies the club relies on from the outside. The linen company and the equipment technician. The food and wine purveyors. The technology providers, the insurance broker, the auditor, the architect, the interior designer, and the search and consulting firms that help you find your talent. A club is a web of relationships, and a great many of the strands in that web reach beyond the people who collect a club paycheck.

Here is the first tell, before a single real sentence is spoken. Listen to the words a leader reaches for to describe those people. Some say, “our partners.” Some say, “our service providers.” Some say, “just a vendor.” Not everyone who serves a club is a partner in the truest sense of the word, and that is fine. But no one who does honest work for you is “just” anything. The word you choose, often without a second thought, already signals how the next conversation is going to go. Language reveals leadership, and it starts with the label.

Let me be fair before I am pointed, because the fairness is the whole point. A club deserves solid service, real responsiveness, and work that is worth the investment. The people who serve you owe you that, and the good ones hold themselves to it. If a delivery is late, a system fails, or the work misses the mark, you have every right to say so, and to expect better. Accountability is not the enemy of respect. It is part of it.

But things are not always perfect, and they never will be. A part fails on the hottest weekend of the year. A shipment arrives short. A new system stumbles during a busy service. None of that is a character flaw. It is the ordinary friction of real work done by real people under real pressure. The question is never whether something will go wrong. It will. The question is how a leader speaks when it does.

In a club, that question never clocks out. Leadership in this industry is always on display, from early in the morning until well past the last event, and at the many clubs where members live right on the property, it never truly goes dark. Members are watching and listening. Staff are watching and listening. So is everyone else, often in a quiet moment when no member happens to be nearby, and the polish comes off. That is when the real leader shows. The person you are when you think it does not count is the person the rest of us actually meet. It is not only the outside professionals who notice, either. The same voice carries to the department head two doors down and the newest hire in the kitchen. Consistency. The same respect no matter who is standing in front of you is one of the most honest things about you.

Let me get specific, because vague never helped anyone. Here are a few things that get said around a club, or things close to them, and what they tell the person standing there.

The Facilities Director to the outside repair company whose fix did not hold on a second visit: “This is the second time. I could find someone who actually knows what they are doing.” It is blame with no curiosity, the same game of gotcha this column has named before. A better version, with the appropriate tone, costs nothing: “This is the second time, and I am frustrated. Help me understand what is really going on so we can fix it for good.”

The Executive Chef to the food purveyor over an order that came up short: “This is a joke. Do you even know what kind of kitchen we run here?” Contempt does one thing well. It shuts down the very relationship that gets you taken care of when you are truly in a bind. Try instead, “This one really put me in a spot for service. Please walk me through what happened so we can avoid it in the future.” Same frustration, opposite result.

The Director of Golf to the company that leases and services the cart fleet, after a breakdown on a full tee sheet: “Just make it work, I do not care how. That is what we pay you for.” It reduces skilled people to a problem that should already be gone. A better approach: “This really hurt us this morning. Tell me what is realistic to keep it from repeating, and what you need from me to get there.”

The florist, who has serviced the club’s events for years, was let go without a word after one party that did not go perfectly. No conversation, no explanation, just silence and, a few months later, someone new. Silence is a sentence, too, and the people who serve you read it clearly. One honest conversation would have kept a good relationship, and very likely taught you something for next time.

Then there is the leader who reviews an outside professional’s work, the auditor, the insurance broker, the outside consultant, and lets the tone say what the words do not. The reply that takes two weeks. The call that gets bumped again. The unmistakable sense that their time matters less than everyone else’s. You may be entirely within your rights on the substance. But how you carry yourself while you handle it tells that professional exactly where they stand with you.

Now here is the part leaders forget, and it is the reason this is worth writing at all. The people you speak to do not just absorb your words. They carry them. Your equipment technician services a dozen other clubs. Your wine representative meets with food and beverage directors all across the region. The recruiter you retain talks all day to the very people you hope to attract someday. This industry is small, and word moves through it faster than any newsletter ever could. When you treat someone who serves you as a nuisance to be managed rather than a professional you chose, they remember. They are human. It shapes what they say, and what they do not say, when someone asks, “What is it like to work with that club?”

Here is how that plays out. Most of these professionals will never disparage a client. It is not good business, and it is not who the good ones are. They also will not manufacture warmth they do not feel. A recruiter will not tell a strong candidate that a club is a wonderful place to work after seeing otherwise, and the recruiter is not the only one talking. Before a strong candidate says yes, they do their own homework. They reach out to people who worked for you last year and five years ago. They ask the person who left what really happened, and whether they would go back. They compare notes with peers who have sat where they are about to sit. Any one honest read is a single voice in that chorus, and the chorus is singing whether you are in the room or not. So, the way a leader treats the people around them does not just bruise a feeling in the moment. It quietly shapes the story that gets told about the club, and how convincingly anyone can tell it. You may never know what you did not get.

So here is a test worth applying. Before you speak to someone who serves your club in a way you would never speak to a member, ask yourself what that person is likely to say about you when you are not in the room because they will say something. The only question is whether it helps you or costs you.

Watch your language. Not because these people are fragile, but because they are listening, remembering, and talking, often to the very people and clubs whose opinion you care about most. Members tend to see your best face. Everyone else tends to see your most honest one, and they are often the ones telling your story when you are not there to tell it yourself.

The BoardRoom Magazine – 2026

Michelle A. Riklan, ACRW, CPRW, CEIC, CJSS is a Career Strategist, Search & Consulting Executive at KOPPLIN KUEBLER & WALLACE (KK&W). KK&W is the leading executive search and consulting firm in the private club industry. Michelle can be reached at 833-KKW-HIRE (559-4473) ext. 717 and at michelle@kkandw.com.

The People You Pay are Talking2026-07-27T16:27:13+00:00

We’re Not a Family

Watch-Your-Language-We're-Not-a-Family

Walk into almost any private club in America, and within a few weeks of working there, you will hear the phrase. From a manager, from the GM, from a board member making a town hall toast. “We’re a family here.” It’s meant kindly, almost always. It is one of the most common phrases in our industry and one of the most quietly damaging.

I want to make the case, in this column, that it is a phrase club leaders should retire.

Start with what the word family actually communicates underneath the warmth. Family is a relationship you do not choose and cannot easily leave. Family is governed by loyalty rather than performance. Family does not pay you and expects sacrifice without question, because that is what family does. Family conflict gets resolved at the dinner table, not through a process. Many of us grew up with a version of family where we take care of our own forever, no matter what. Many of us grew up with a much different version.

Translate each of those into a workplace and listen for the dissonance.

“We’re a family here” most often arrives in the orbit of a request. Cover the holiday shift. Stay an extra two hours “as a favor.” Come in on your day off because a coworker called out. Train the new hire during your lunch break. The phrase does the moral work of obligation without ever naming what it is asking for, and refusing the request becomes disloyalty to the family.

It also works in reverse when people try to leave.

  • “After all the club and I have done for you.”
  • “We thought you were one of us.”
  • “I’m shocked you would leave us.”

A two-week notice gets reframed as a betrayal because the language framed the relationship as kinship in the first place. The same leader who would not bat an eye if a vendor moved on takes a staff member’s departure as a personal wound because the language taught everyone, leader included, that the relationship was something it was never legally, financially, or ethically meant to be.

There is a quieter version of this, too. The long-tenured housekeeper who becomes the team’s “grandma.” The veteran chef who becomes the kitchen’s “dad.” It’s warmth, on the surface, but can easily create a chill when action needs to be taken. Underneath, that housekeeper’s performance is now almost impossible to address because doing so feels like betraying family. The chef’s sharp tone toward the line cooks is excused as “just how he is” because pushing back on the chef means pushing back on a father figure. Family language protects dynamics that a professional vocabulary would let a leader correct cleanly.

Here is the part that matters most for retention.

The phrase lands differently depending on who is hearing it. The employee who grew up in a healthy family hears warmth and lights up. The employee who grew up in a dysfunctional family flinches at the word “obligation”. The employee who has previously worked at a toxic family-run business recognizes the script immediately, smiles politely, and starts looking for the exit within the month. The leader has no way of knowing which group is sitting at the table during the welcome speech, and the same words land as an embrace, as a warning, and as a red flag, all at once.

People stay in workplaces where the language matches the reality they live in. When family language is paired with genuinely respectful treatment, fair pay, and clean processes, it survives as quaint warmth. When family language is paired with overwork, blurred boundaries, and guilt-soaked asks, it accelerates exit. The corrosion is invisible until your best people are already gone.

So, what should we say instead?

There are honest alternatives that ask a leader to surrender nothing of substance. The simplest is team, which names the structure plainly and without pretense. Crew works, and it is a word that kitchens have used for a century.

Colleagues, staff, and the people who work here all do the same honest work, describing the relationship as what it actually is, which is a group of adults who have chosen, for now, to do work together in exchange for fair compensation and a sense of purpose and who are free to renegotiate that arrangement at any time without the renegotiation becoming a personal wound.

Specific changes a leader could make starting tomorrow: “We’re a family here” becomes “We’re a team that looks out for each other.” “We take care of our own” becomes “We back the people who work here.” “You’re part of the family” becomes “You’re part of this team now.” “After all this club has done for you” deserves no rewrite. That sentence has no place in a professional conversation. Cut it.

None of those substitutions is colder than what they replace. They are warmer, in a way, because they are honest. Respect is warmer than performative kinship. Naming someone as a valued colleague carries real weight precisely because it is not a word you would use for a stranger. Calling everyone family flattens the word until it means nothing.

The strongest cultures in this industry are not families. They are professional communities where people are paid fairly, treated like adults, given channels to raise concerns, and are free to leave when circumstances change, or an opportunity arises that aligns more closely with where their lives are headed, without that leaving being framed as a betrayal. The language has to match the reality, or the reality will eventually win, and your best people will be the ones to act on it first.

Watch your language. We are not a family. We are something better. We are a team of professionals who have chosen, for now, to do good work together. Say that, and mean it, and the people who hear it will know they are seen as adults rather than children, and they will stay longer for it.

BoardRoom Briefs – July 2026

Michelle A. Riklan, ACRW, CPRW, CEIC, CJSS is a Career Strategist, Search & Consulting Executive at KOPPLIN KUEBLER & WALLACE (KK&W). KK&W is the leading executive search and consulting firm in the private club industry. Michelle can be reached at 833-KKW-HIRE (559-4473) ext. 717 and at michelle@kkandw.com.

We’re Not a Family2026-07-23T20:15:18+00:00

BoardRoom Leadership Lens Podcast – Leadership Begins With Listening

Leadership-Begins-With-Listening-Podcast

Step into a thoughtful conversation with Michelle Riklan, career strategist, consulting and search executive with KOPPLIN KUEBLER & WALLACE. With a career shaped by communication, human resources, executive coaching and strategic search, Michelle shares how language, listening and transparency influence leadership at every level.

BoardRoom Leadership Lens Podcast – Leadership Begins With Listening2026-07-16T16:49:47+00:00
Go to Top