The Leland Leadership Group | Rantings and Ruminations

Rantings and Ruminations

Finally: The Answer to Board Size

I rarely lead a discussion on nonprofit governance where I am not asked “How many people should be on a board of directors?” Knowing that people want me to give a number – as if a specific number holds the key to effective governance – I’m sure they are disappointed in my response. For my response is always some version of the same idea: “You need the number that is needed to get the work done.”

The appropriate size of a Board is dependent on many factors but begins with identifying the work that the board members need to do. For example, is the organization of sufficient size, i.e., with the needed staff and internal capacity, so that the Board can focus on issues of strategy and governance? Or does the organization lack the staff needed to carry out the day-to-day work so that board members are asked to take on more operational (or “staff-like”) tasks in addition to governance? The former example may need fewer board members whereas the latter situation may demand more board members. So the first task in determining an appropriate board size depends on assessing the organization’s needs and the role of the Board in meeting those needs. In other words: how many hats will our board members wear?

Other factors that impact the number needed on the board:

How strong is the board committee structure? Are there sufficient opportunities through committees to do the analysis, deliberation and/or labor that is needed before bringing recommendations to the Board for consideration and ultimate approval? Do these committees involve non-board members and/or staff? If so, a smaller Board might be sufficient. If, however, there is a weak committee structure and few opportunities for wider consultation and participation by non-board members, you may need a larger Board with a broader diversity of voices, skills and experience.

What role does the board play in contributing to the organizations’ bottom line? If an organization desires a significant amount of “board member giving” or has reached the stage where the Board is a “fundraising Board,” then the organization might choose to have a very large Board of Directors, with a smaller Executive Committee that provides day-to-day support and leadership. This is not uncommon in educational or cultural institutions where you might find a Board of 50-60 individuals and an Executive Committee of 10-12 people. This potential for a very large number of board members points out another factor …

How many board members can the organization comfortably manage? While theory of governance promotes the idea that Boards of Directors are self-governing, any experienced executive director will tell you that the presence, involvement and support of the executive director is critical to effective governance. Given this reality – and regardless of what theory suggests – a key question is what is the capacity of the organization to support the Board? Who schedules meetings, who has responsibility for gathering reports and sending out materials, who handles the logistics of various board and committee meetings? If the answer to these questions is “the executive director,” then s/he would (likely) advocate for a smaller board. If the answer to these questions is a secretary or administrative assistant, the organization can manage the work of a larger Board with more board members.

When I am (invariably) asked “How big a Board do we need?” I wish I had a specific number to give. I wish there was a magic answer that would ensure effective board operations. The answer is – regrettably – “It depends.” On what it depends is the willingness of a group of people to explore the needs of the organization and create a board size (and composition) that is responsive to the organization’s needs.

This is a clear situation where form should follow function.

***************************************************************************************************************************

An Invitation to Succession Planning

A nonprofit recently closed its doors.

This alone isn’t news; I know a number of nonprofits that have down-sized, merged or closed in the last couple of years because of the economy.

But this need not have happened to this organization; the economic downturn was not the source of the organization’s problems. It was simply the last nail in the coffin.

This organization closed because 10 years ago the board did not do the succession planning that was required. Its future could have been very different … if the Board had planned for the departure of its executive director.

Theirs was not then – nor now – an unusual situation. The long-time executive director “didn’t need to work” and, therefore, didn’t expect or ask to be paid wages that were competitive to the market.

I imagine that, at the time, the Board was happy not to have higher salary expenses.

A couple of long-time funders, however, were concerned about the low director salary. They communicated with the board, reminding them that at some point the director would retire (or resign) and they’d have to pay a higher salary to get the skills and talents that the organization and its mission demanded.

But the Board chose to ignore these concerns.

And – sure enough – the director left the organization.

This is about the time that I got the first phone call. “Pam, do you have any suggestions for us? We can’t seem to find a qualified executive director for the salary that we can pay.” I suggested some methods to quickly generate at least some of the funds they needed. However, I must assume that they were, at best, only partially successful because what unfolded was a revolving door of executive directors – more than 7 “permanent” or acting directors in 8 years.

I believe that if the succession issues had been addressed 10 years ago – this particular organization would still be here today.

This example is, obviously, more complicated than this one factor. No organization that ceases operations can point to a single factor as the reason for closure. It isn’t as simple as “the economy stupid.” The ones that end up closing their doors have closed because they found themselves in a perfect storm – with issues of effectiveness, internal capacity, leadership and finances.

And indeed, at the end, this particular nonprofit had more than its share of problems. But I remained convinced, that if – 10 years ago – the board of directors had worked to set aside the funds and resources they would eventually need to hire someone with the skills and talent to lead the organization effectively, they would still be here today.

It is never too early to plan for an effective succession process.

What a tragedy.