I accepted an appointment this year to the DuPage County Workforce Board. I was seeking a board to serve on and this one works well for the publisher of a local business newspaper because the board’s mission focuses on the workforce needs of our area, a topic that we report and write about often.

The Workforce Boards play a key role in the economic development of both their local workforce areas and the entire region. There are 26 workforce boards in Illinois, nine of which are located in the Chicago metro area.

The board is comprised of a diverse group of individuals representing business, labor organizations, education and government. As boards of directors go, this is a pretty large one—36 members, which means, of course, that many board members are there just to lend an ear and a vote.

I’ve been involved with many boards during my career and there is a definite pattern that emerges. Approximately one third of the members of any board rise to the top to serve as committee chairpersons or officers on the executive committee. This is usually a factor of talent, leadership abilities, ambition, a mandated role or a combination of all of the above.

Typically, the larger the board, the more power and decision-making is located in the executive committee. That’s not a bad thing as it relies then on the group of people who are most involved, dedicated and aware of the issues.

One third of the board is usually moderately involved. They don’t necessarily have officer ambitions but will serve when called upon.

Then there is the last third of the members who may have been told by their bosses that they need to represent their company or organization. “Go, listen, report back, and don’t get too involved,” would be their general instructions. That group tends to have the highest absentee rates.

I don’t think this group dynamic is any different in Congress, boards of publicly-held companies, or local libraries.

With that structure in mind let me throw some numbers at you. Quoting from “A Guide for Workforce Board Members”—

“Metro Chicago is one of the world’s largest diversified economies. Home to more than 8.4 million individuals, 4.3 million jobs and over 207,000 businesses, the region is the economic engine driving the Illinois economy. The region contains more than 400 chambers of commerce and industry associations, over 250 economic development organizations and 17 community colleges.”

So it is this huge economy upon which we 36 board members are trying to have some sort of positive influence. And, of course, like most organizations, public and private, there just isn’t enough money to go around.

At our last board meeting there were several reports from members explaining that their publicly funded organizations were woefully under funded. Besides the DuPage Career Center, we also heard about the lack of funds to support research and development at Argonne and Fermi laboratories and the negative economic impact that could have on our community.

As I listened to these reports from these dedicated and committed public servants, I thought about how much more good could be done with more money. I found myself sympathizing with their plight...

until it hit me.

Like many business executives I am cynical about government spending in general. There is a built in assumption that government can’t run anything as well as private industry. And, if these public organizations were fully funded, it woul1d just mean more tax dollars from me. And, how many government functions am I willing to support?

I believe that government needs to do some things for the rest of us such as providing for public safety, transportation and education, just to name a few. Unfortunately, we all have become so accustomed to government providing so many services to us over the years that it is hard to think of some of the other services going away.

But our state particularly has been in a financial mess for years. I had a conversation recently with an employee in one of our state agencies who told me that when she first came to work there they had somewhere around 90 employees. Now they were down to 10. One has to wonder if we needed the 80 extra employees in that department to begin with.

But, just as in private business, this is an important part of the weaning process. If the money isn’t there, you can’t spend it. Spending has to reach equilibrium with funding. It means that the workforce will migrate to where the jobs are, maybe not overnight, but it will happen. The private enterprise system picks up where government leaves off.