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.     

Conflict in the boardroom: a participant observation study of supervisory board dynamics

We develop a conflict-oriented model of board task performance and argue that a common framework, that is, a shared understanding of its role, helps boards to perform well. Conflict is the mediating effect through which this plays out. We posit that a common framework increases board task performance because it reduces intragroup relationship conflicts, increases task conflicts within the board, and reduces conflicts in the relationship between board and CEO. We explore the model through a comparative participant observation study of 11 supervisory boards in action. The results show that while low levels of relationship conflict are typically considered a sign of a well-functioning board, the avoidance of relationship conflict negatively impacts board task performance and may lead to ‘cognitive blindness’. Boards of directors should manage—rather than avoid—relationship conflict. Based on our findings, we suggest an extended model of conflict in boards that takes into account the negative effect of conflict avoidance.