Today the work of nonprofit boards is under the microscope of several organizations and governmental bodies. Many new ideas have emerged as to how a board should be constructed and how it should function. This article will briefly describe the traditional community board and introduce two newer concepts.
The traditional nonprofit board methodology has worked well for many years. In it, leadership is shared between the board of directors and the chief executive of the organization. A key area of this board concept is the establishment of a cooperative relationship between the executive director and the board dhair. The board’s main duty is to be accountable to the public trust through being responsible for mission, strategic direction, oversight, and resources. How these responsibilities impact the work of the board and its members will change over time as the organization goes through various stages of growth. Boards at these stages of an organizational life have sometimes been referred to as 1) the organizing board 2) the governing board and 3) the institutional board. I only refer to these to establish that traditional board methodology recognizes board work is not static and boards will change with the organization.
A newer board concept is the governance method introduced by John Carver, which is sometimes referred to as the Carver Model or Policy Governance®. Unlike most solutions to the challenge of board leadership, its approach to the design of the governance role is neither structural nor piecemeal, but is comprehensively theory-based. As a generic system, it is applicable to the governing body of any enterprise. According to its adherents the model enables the board to focus on the larger issues, delegate with clarity, control management's job without meddling, rigorously evaluate the accomplishment of the organization; and truly lead its organization.
In contrast to the approaches typically used by boards, Policy Governance separates issues of organizational purpose (ENDS) from all other organizational issues (MEANS), placing primary importance on those ENDS. To simplify, this means the board sets parameters within which the organization can operate and does not interfere as long as the organization operates within those limits. Policy Governance boards demand accomplishment of purpose and limit the staff's available means to those which do not violate the board's pre-stated standards of prudence and ethics.
Engagement governance is another interesting new framework for board governance. This “work in progress,” shares governance responsibility throughout an organization’s key sectors: constituents, staff, board, and other community stakeholders. It is based on principles of participatory democracy, self determination, partnership and community-level decision making. Proponents say it more closely reflects the essence of nonprofits by creating vehicles for constituent empowerment and community change. Practitioners of engagement governance feel that above all, the nonprofit sector should advance the ideas of democracy and self-determination rather than dependency and disempowerment.
There is no one perfect system for board governance. Any system used must reflect and deal with the legalities of board responsibilities. These include being the community watchdog, i.e., making sure the nonprofit is operating in an ethical and responsible manner. They also include making sure the nonprofit is properly and adequately funded and working to advance the mission of the organization. Boards and organizations, especially nonprofits, are fluid entities always going through challenges of growth, changes in climate and changes affecting clientele. The board must be aware of these changes and willing to adjust to those environmental challenges we all face.
Sources: www.boardsource.org/, www.policygovernance.com/, www.nonprofitquarterly.org, (summer 2007).
Bremer NRSs have had board training by BoardSource and can help with suggestions for your board.
Howard Barlow, NRS, Fargo
No comments:
Post a Comment