Nonprofit Board Balance and Perceived Performance

Based on prior literature, this article offers a reconciliation of the core roles of nonprofit boards and aligns these role‐sets with organizational theories. A survey instrument was developed and validated to measure each of four role‐sets (monitoring, supporting, partnering, and representing) to assess whether emphasis on specific roles affects board members’ perception of performance. Our study of nonprofit boards in a midsized midwestern city found that balance across the role‐sets was associated with effective organizational performance. Furthermore, when board members describe any of the four role‐sets as deficient, they perceive the organization as less effective. The results of the study provide practitioners with a validated survey tool that provides nonprofit boards with a method to identify which roles their board emphasizes.     

Board development practices and competent board members: Implications for performance

This study explores underlying assumptions about board development practices in nonprofit governance. Specifically, a model was developed to determine if using recommended recruitment, board member orientation, and evaluation practices resulted in more competent board members and if the presence of these board members led to better board performance. The sample consisted of 1,051 survey responses from CEOs and board chairs representing 713 credit unions. As member‐benefit nonprofit organizations, credit unions rely almost exclusively on voluntary board members in an oversight capacity. Results support the contention that board development practices lead to more capable board members, and the presence of these board members tends to explain board performance. The study advances the understanding of nonprofit board development practices by further defining the concept and proposing an empirically tested assessment strategy. Furthermore, the findings support using specific recruitment practices that should strengthen nonprofit boards.     

Training Policy Governance in Nonprofit Boards of Directors: The Views of Trainer‐Consultants

Although scholars widely discuss John Carver's (1990) Policy Governance model for nonprofit organizations, they have conducted little formal research on the implementation of the model. For this study, the researchers surveyed ninety‐two trainer‐consultants who graduated from Carver's Policy Governance Academy. The goal was to learn three things from their experiences: (1) whether trainer‐consultants maintain the model as a coherent whole or teach only parts of it; (2) what they perceive as the major challenges for nonprofit boards in implementing the Policy Governance model; and (3) what contextual factors, if any, they feel affect implementation of the model across nonprofit boards with different characteristics. Survey responses indicated that (1) consultants predominantly teach the model as a whole, (2) particular policy areas appear to be problematic for nonprofit boards of directors that implement the model, and (3) two contextual factors may negatively affect the ability of a board of directors to successfully implement Policy Governance boards larger than fifteen members, and organizations with no hierarchy, where the board also functions as staff. Overall, consultants' responses indicated that they feel Policy Governance is far superior to other models, but they recognize the problems and challenges that boards face in trying to implement it.     

The Board as a Monitor of Organizational Activity: The Applicability of Agency Theory to Nonprofit Boards

Monitoring, as an important function for boards of directors in both the private and nonprofit sectors, receives widespread attention throughout the empirical (Chait, Holland, and Taylor, 1996; Eisenhardt, 1989; Golden‐Biddle and Rao, 1997; Kosnik, 1987) and normative literature (Axelrod, 1994; Block, 1998; Carver, 1997; Houle, 1997; Ingram, 1989). Despite the consensus about the significance of this crucial board responsibility, scholars know little about the ways in which a nonprofit board actually performs its monitoring function. In this article I report on an empirical study of the monitoring behavior of twelve nonprofit boards of directors. Agency theory provides the framework for this analysis. I show that the way in which individual board members define their relationship with the chief executive and understand the scope of the monitoring function influences how, or if, they monitor agency action. The findings also show that, given ambiguous rules of accountability and unclear measures of performance, nonprofit board members tend to monitor in ways that reflect their professional or personal competencies rather than paying attention to measures that would indicate progress toward mission‐related goals and initiatives.     

Local Unit Performance in a National Nonprofit Organization

Board members and chief professional officers (CPOs) from the local units of a national nonprofit organization completed questionnaires that revealed (1) statistically significant differences as to what functionsand activities each believes the other should do and does perform, (2) areas of possible tension between boards and their CPOs, and (3) those activities with significant correlations to common performance measures established by the national organization. Both board members and CPOs believe boards should be doing more than they do, with CPOs being more critical of board members than they are of themselves or than board members are of them. There is significant tension between boards and CPOs regarding responsibility for some operational issues. However, neither the presence nor absence of tension was significantly correlated with the effectiveness of the organization. Finally, self‐reported measures of effectiveness correlated with external measures developed by the national organization, providing some evidence that self‐reported measures may be valid.     

Inclusive Governance Practices in Nonprofit Organizations and Implications for Practice

An inclusive board seeks information from multiple sources, demonstrates an awareness of the community and constituents that benefit from and contribute to the organization's services, and establishes policies and structures to foster stakeholder contributions. This research investigated the prevalence of inclusive governance practices and its relationship to board composition, diversity attitudes, and recruitment practices. Fifty‐six executive directors and forty‐three board members representing sixty‐two nonprofit organizations returned a mailed survey (29 percent response rate). The study profiled two organizations that represented different styles of inclusive governance. The survey, part of a larger study, contained questions about inclusive practices, board composition, attitudes toward diversity, and recruitment practices. Most organizations indicated that they operate with inclusive governance practices. The organizational profiles provide a picture of boards that used different strategies to accomplish the goal of inclusivity. Boards that use more inclusive practices were not necessarily heterogeneous in board member composition. Inclusive boards were more inclined to be sensitive to diversity issues and used recommended board recruitment practices. The existence of a task force or committee on diversity was also significantly associated with a more inclusive board. Nonprofit organizations must consider their philosophy on stakeholder involvement, recognizing that different strategies lead to different levels of stakeholder involvement.     

The Impact of Board Diversity and Expertise on Nonprofit Performance

This study examined the impact of board of director characteristics on nonprofit performance. Using data collected through a survey of nonprofit colleges and universities, the author provides evidence that specific board member characteristics are vital in shaping the financial and nonfinancial success of nonprofit institutions of higher education. Results indicate that both board member diversity and expertise are associated with better‐performing organizations. This work makes important initial forays into the relationships between board of director qualities and nonprofit performance. Although limited by the relatively small sample of colleges and universities, this study is unique in its ability to analyze nonprofit boards and both financial and nonfinancial performance measures.     

The Profile of Board Membership in Israeli Voluntary Organizations

This study of 161 nonprofit organizations in Israel was aimed at exploring the composition of boards, the methods employed to recruit new board members, and the selection criteria of board members. The results suggest that boards tend to be closed, elitist circles. Most organizations use mainly informal means to recruit new board members. The most important selection criteria were those related to interpersonal relationships, willingness to contribute time, and expressing an interest in working for the organization.     

Leader‐member exchanges and board performance of voluntary sport organizations

Using leader‐member exchange theory developed by Dansereau, Graen, and Haga (1975), this chapter analyzes the dyadic relationship between leaders (board chairs and paid executives) and members (volunteer board members) within the boards of Australian voluntary sport organizations. The chapter specifically examines the quality of leader‐member exchanges that exist within a sample of thirty‐four Queensland State Sporting Organizations and their relationship with board performance. It was found that board chairs and executives perceived the quality of their leader‐member exchanges to be higher than their respective relationships with board members, and that higher‐quality leader‐member exchanges among all three possible pairings of executives, board chairs, and board members were positively related to higher levels of board performance. The chapter discusses implications and directions for further research into leader‐member exchanges within voluntary sports organizations.     

The governance self‐assessment checklist: An instrument for assessing board effectiveness

This article describes the development and validation of the Governance Self‐Assessment Checklist (GSAC). The GSAC was designed to assist boards of directors of nonprofit and public sector organizations to identify strengths and weaknesses in the governance of their organizations, educate board members about the essentials of good governance, and improve their governance practices. The instrument comprises 144 items organized into twelve subscales. The results of the study indicated that the subscales have excellent internal consistency reliability, exhibit good criterion‐related validity, and are able to discriminate between stronger and weaker aspects of board functioning. The relative strengths and weaknesses in board effectiveness were identified, and the implications of the findings for the assessment of board effectiveness and field applications of the GSAC were discussed.     

Effective boards: how executive directors define and develop them

There is growing recognition in the nonprofit field that the executive director has a key role in determining whether the board of directors will function effectively. To aid executives in this vital role, two recent studies defined a "good board" from the point of view of two samples of executive directors of community agencies, then sought factors related to board performance as measured by this definition. In interviews, executives whose boards scored higher than their peers on this performance measurement related how they work with their boards in such areas as recruitment of new members, financial management, fundraising, and leadership development.     

Board performance and organizational effectiveness in nonprofit social services organizations

This article examines the tasks and responsibilities of nonprofit boards of directors and explores the relationship between board performance and organizational effectiveness. Thirty-three activities in nine areas of board responsibility were examined through questionnaires and interviews with board members and chief executive officers of sixteen nonprofit organizations serving developmentally disabled adults. Rankings of organizational effectiveness were determined using external evaluators and accreditation surveys. A significant relationship between board performance and organizational effectiveness was found, and the board activities most strongly correlated with organizational effectiveness are reported, including policy formation, strategic planning, program monitoring, financial planning and control, resource development, board development, and dispute resolution.     

Called to order: A board president in trouble

This is a fictionalized case based on real events. It is intended as a teaching tool to stimulate discussion about procedural issues in nonprofit governance; board roles and responsibilities; communications; and relationships between boards, chairs, and executives, particularly in the context of smaller organizations. It is meant to support sessions on nonprofit boards and governance in introductory courses on nonprofit management or for use in workshops with new or less experienced executives and board members. Set in an organization engaged in cultural exchange, the case can be used in introductions to nonprofit management, arts administration, or international nongovernmental management.     

Common Agency in Nonprofit Advocacy Organizations

Most theories of nonprofit organizations and nonprofit leadership recognize the multitude of stakeholders—including board members, donors and volunteers, funders, the media, and policy makers—that organizational leaders must contend with in doing their work. For nonprofits engaged in advocacy, demands from stakeholders may be even more challenging to meet. Although stakeholder theory recognizes the effect of various groups on an organization, it does not explain how leaders manage the preferences of their often‐competing stakeholders while they make choices for the organization. This study develops a common agency framework, evaluating the roles of three groups crucial to nonprofit advocacy organizations: the organization's board of directors, elected officials, and donors/members. The common agency framework is then illustrated with interviews with leaders of nonprofit advocacy organizations in California. Findings suggest that the leaders of these groups have a significant amount of discretion in guiding their organizations’ activities and operations.     

What Nonprofit Executives Want and What They Get from Board Members

In theory, nonprofit boards of directors exist to perform mission‐setting and oversight functions that help to ensure organizational accountability. Yet there is evidence that board behavior often falls short of this ideal. Using survey data from a sample of 241 executive directors of nonprofit agencies, we investigated whether nonprofit boards are meeting executive directors’ expectations, and if not, what factors explain this? We find that although board behavior tends to align closely with executive directors’ preferences for involvement in administration and management tasks, there is a greater disconnect between board behavior and executive directors’ preferences for involvement in mission‐setting and oversight duties. Factors that mitigate this gap include organizational professionalization and stability, whereas more extensive reliance on government funding exacerbates it. Female executive directors experience a greater disconnect in their preferences for board involvement and actual board involvement than male executive directors. We conclude by discussing the implications of our findings for both theory and practice.     

Leadership within Australian voluntary sport organization boards

This article applies leader‐member exchange theory to the study of dyadic relationships between leaders (board chairs and paid executives) and members (volunteer board members) within the boards of Australian voluntary sport organizations. The article specifically examines leader‐member exchanges within a sample of six Queensland State sport organizations and their relationship with board performance. It was found that leadership within voluntary sport organization boards emanates from either board chairs or executives and that when the individuals fulfilling these roles are able to develop a mature working relationship, the board's ability to perform is enhanced. These findings extend our understanding of the importance of leadership roles held by volunteers and paid professionals for the achievement of organizational outcomes.     

How does a board of directors influence within‐ and cross‐sector nonprofit collaboration?

Board members play a significant, yet largely unexamined, role in nonprofit collaboration. Processes, such as finding prospective partners, creating common ground with a partner, and establishing appropriate collaborative governance implicate nonprofit board members. In contrast to the scholarship of the role of interlocking directorates as potential networks for nonprofit collaboration, this paper examines the role of board members' social and human capital on nonprofit collaboration with other nonprofits, businesses, and government agencies. Drawing on online survey data from 636 nonprofit organizations, this paper finds that board social capital—but not board human capital—is positively related to the presence and number of within‐sector and cross‐sector nonprofit collaboration. However, board human capital enhances nonprofit‐government collaboration, when board social capital is also high. The results provide a novel perspective in nonprofit collaboration and board management research.     

Behavioral Determinants of Nonprofit Board Performance

There is an increased awareness that the performance of boards (good governance) is not only determined by structural determinants but by behavioral determinants as well. These behavioral determinants might be particularly important for public and nonprofit governance, where the role of the board is more diffuse and heterogeneous than in corporate governance. Here we investigate how social dynamics within boards in secondary education influence their performance. We follow a concise model that includes cognitive conflict, the use of expertise, effort norms, and social cohesion as determinants of board task performance. A survey among all secondary schools in the Netherlands serves as the empirical underpinning for this process‐oriented model of good governance. We show that the behavioral determinants have different effects on the control task and advice task of boards. Also, we find that cognitive conflicts in supervisory boards do not lead to less but rather to more social cohesion within boards. Building on these findings, we suggest a revised model of the behavioral determinants of nonprofit board performance.     

A scale to assess board member motivations in nonprofit organizations

The purpose of this study was to develop a framework for identifying the motivations of board members in nonprofit organizations. Building on previous work of board member motivations (Searle, 1989; Inglis, 1994) and motivations of direct service volunteers (Clary and others, 1998), the results of the current study support a framework consisting of six components: Enhancement of Self‐Worth, Learning Through Community, Helping the Community, Developing Individual Relationships, Unique Contributions to the Board, and Self‐Healing. We discuss contributions by the panel of experts who reviewed the instrument and by the respondents who offered additional reasons for joining the board in view of how they can add validity to scale development. Frameworks such as the one reported in this article are valuable for understanding the complex involvement of attitudes and motivations as they relate to individuals' decisions to join boards. These insights may be applied in areas such as board member recruitment, training and development, and retention.