If you work in a nonprofit or charitable organization, or serve on a board of one of these organizations, chances are you’ve tackled the notion of “governance”. The very word is enough to make people’s eyes glaze over and have them scrambling for the exits.
Yet when done well, governance contributes to the overall health and sustainability of the organization. It’s not just about “bums in seats”, but requires all board members to be active participants in discussion and decision-making.
A healthy board:
has a strong chair who facilitates conversation and discussion
has members that come to each meeting prepared to voice opinions
has everyone attend meetings having read the reports and minutes
tolerates dissent but speaks with one voice
can make decisions in a timely matter because quorum is met every time
An unhealthy board:
has a dominating or weak chair who is ineffective in facilitating discussion
has members who don’t participate or who remain silent to avoid controversy
has members who dominate the discussion
has members who come unprepared; unable to contribute because they are not up to speed
has instances of “sidebar conversations” outside the meetings that don’t involve the entire board
has “rogue” board members who act contrary to the will of the board
has difficulty reaching quorum due to non-attendance of board members
Funders are increasingly making decisions about where to invest based on the health of your board. Which type of board would you rather have?
