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.     

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.     

Board members' influence on the government-nonprofit relationship

This study examines whether, how, and under what conditions nonprofit boards of directors influence the government and voluntary sector relationship. The survey responses of executive directors and board presidents in a randomly selected sample of 400 nonprofit organizations indicate that boards are not bystanders in the contracting relationship with government. Rather, many boards play multiple roles, simultaneously enhancing interdependence and maintaining the boundary between state government and nonprofits.     

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.     

Responsibilities and roles of boards in nonprofit organizations: The Israeli case

In this study, nine roles and responsibilities of boards of directors in nonprofit organizations in Israel are examined and perceptions of these roles and responsibilities by chairpersons of the boards and the executive directors are compared. Four groupings of board roles were found: senior human resource management, maintenance of relationships with the task environment, policymaking, and fiscal management and fundraising. The findings show that in most organizations boards fulfill all these roles and play a significant role in decision making. A significant consensus exists between chairpersons and executive directors in respect to most of the boards' roles, whereas significant differences in perceptions were found in respect to financial matters and maintenance of relationships with the task environment.     

Board practices and board effectiveness in local nonprofit organizations

This study of sixty-four locally governed nonprofit charitable organizations used a social constructionist perspective to investigate the relationship between the extent to which nonprofit boards use prescribed board practices and stakeholder judgments of the effectiveness of those boards. A social constructionist perspective implies that different stakeholders use and evaluate different kinds of information in making judgments about board effectiveness. The results suggest that there is wide variation in the use of the prescribed board practices, that judgments of board effectiveness often differ substantially, and that chief executives' judgments of the effectiveness of their boards is moderately related to the extent of use of recommended board practices.     

Boards of directors in nonprofit organizations do they follow a life-cycle model?

In this study the authors used data from a survey of Canadian nonprofit organizations to empirically test hypotheses derived from models of nonprofit board “life cycles.” The authors suggest that while formal structural elements of board behavior change in the manner suggested by life-cycle models, the more enacted or behavioral aspects of nonprofit boards do not. The data further suggest caution in the use of life-cycle or age-dependent models to either explain or guide nonprofit board behavior.     

Board Accountability: Lessons from the Field

Accountability has become a major issue in the nonprofit sector. Numerous external and internal approaches to strengthening performance in this area exist, and many nonprofit boards expect their executives to account foruse of their organizations' resources. However, few boards apply any such expectations to themselves. Qualitative analysis of records from interviews, consultations, and meeting observations with 169 board members of thirty‐four diverse nonprofit organizations revealed six sets of practices that foster board accountability. They include setting clear expectations and standards for the group and for its members, actively using policies regarding conflicts of interests, identifying and staying focused on priorities, maintaining strong two‐way communications directly with constituency groups, conducting assessments of meetings and board performance, and experimenting intentionally with new approaches to their work. The experiences of these boards provide numerous examples of practical steps that others may consider when they seek to increase the value they add to their organizations as well as to strengthen public trust.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Strengthening Board Performance

Many nonprofit boards have undertaken board development activities, yet there has been little empirical evidence of the impact on board performance. This article reports findings from organizations: ten participated in developmental interventions, and fourteen received no interventions but served as matched comparisons. The experimental group showed significant improvements in board performance, and the comparison group did not. Lessons from the study include a number of practical steps boards can take to reorganize governance procedures and structures to enhance board effectiveness.     

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.     

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.