“There is no single `right way’ to structure your board,” says Michael Burns, a board consultant. “The design must reflect the maturity of the organization and its future needs.” Trying to make boards conform to preconceived structures can seriously damage their effectiveness.

Many organizations try to model their board structure on one of two common models: the traditional model and the Carver model. In the traditional model, the board develops plans, policies, and evaluates the program, and staff advise the board and deliver services. In the Carver model, the board establishes and monitors corporate policy while staff execute that policy and creatively oversee operations.

Problems with both blueprints

According to Burns, both of these models are problematic because they assume that all boards are alike, that all organizations have the same needs and that they all just have to practice good governance. Clearly, this is not always the case. Burns argues that the stage of development of the governing body is the most important aspect of the welfare of an institution. Consequently, you should create a board design that reflects your board’s stage of development. He offers four broad stages of development, but stresses that these too can be quite variable.

Infancy stage focuses on operation

Organizations at the grassroots level, which may have few or no staff, usually have boards that are operationally focused. The board does the operational planning, and board members are often key volunteers in implementing the plans. Boards in this stage develop few if any policies and evaluation programs are usually event- or activity-focused.

Burns points out that it is silly to implement one of the traditional board models at this stage. The board needs to be operationally focused to get things done. While it is fine to promote greater attention to governance and long-range planning, it is often also necessary for the board to play a hands-on role in building the organization itself.

Juvenile stage introduces governance issues

Once an organization has grown to a certain level, the demands of keeping in touch with donors, issuing receipts, and performing regular administrative duties require paid staff. Boards in this juvenile stage of development often have a few staff who are focused on filling undesirable organization needs which board members are no longer prepared to perform on their own. Board interest in operations is reduced overall, and the board begins to examine the governance needs of the organization.

This stage may be the most uncomfortable for staff members, because it is the point at which they usually begin to take a back seat to the board-driven agenda. However, the stage is usually short-lived because it often means that the organization is in a strong growth period. As administrative efficiency is improved and the organization continues to grow, the staff take on a more significant role and begin to exert influence on the shape of the organization itself.

Adolescent conflict is common

The adolescent stage of board development is often filled with the greatest conflict. Staff, in this stage, are focused on all aspects of the organization. They have developed a deep understanding of the charity because of regular contact with members, funders and other interested parties. This understanding often leads to more vocal expression of opinions and ideas about how the organization should be run.

At the same time, board members – particularly those who have been with the organization for a long time – are less clear about their roles and responsibilities. As staff assume more control over daily functions, some board members may feel squeezed out and uncomfortable with a governance-focused role. It is also a time where internal conflicts among board members may erupt as they negotiate a balance between over-managing operational aspects of the organization and removing themselves from operations entirely.

The battles of the adolescent stage, however, are necessary to develop a mature organization. Without them, the board never really gets away from micro-managing to look at long-term interests and opportunities. Staff are frustrated by the lack of empowerment and organizational development becomes mired in internal conflict.

Maturity breeds understanding

If an organization makes it through the task of hammering out parameters for staff and board actions, it enters the mature stage of development. In this stage, staff are focused on operations and the board centres its efforts on the governance needs of the organization and its long term goals. Still, each organization may be at a different place on the continuum, with some groups placing more directive power in the hands of staff and others reserving it for boards alone. Although his stages appear as a linear progression, Burns notes that it is often necessary, and not always a setback, for organizations to move back to different stages, depending on their needs at the time. A mature organization that undergoes a major growth period – such as a capital campaign – may revert back to an operationally-focused board (the Juvenile stage) for the campaign period and pay only minimal attention to broader governance issues during that time. After the campaign, it will shift back into governance mode, often changing many board members at the same time.

Likewise, it is often helpful for an organization to revisit the adolescent stage. Don’t be afraid to give yourself space and time to find out what type of organization you really want. The negotiation process itself is key to defining the character of your organization.

The fundamental rule of board development, explains Burns, is that organizational needs must drive the development of the board, not an imposed structure which may wind up doing more harm than good.

Based on remarks by Michael Burns at the recent conference of the Canadian Council for the Advancement of Education (CCAE) in Fredericton, NB. Michael Burns can be reached at (203) 481-4199, fax (203) 481-9536.