Many consultants (not including me) preach that nonprofit boards have a responsibility, nay, an obligation to raise funds. These consultants subscribe to the old paradigm that board members should be recruited and judged based on their giving or getting.
I recenty chatted with a nonprofit executive who believes that while she recognizes it is absolutely great, enhancing even, when board members join-in and support her particularly to make "asks" of institutions and individuals and place strategic "calls of introduction" should they have these, she most values her board members for two characteristics: their passion and understanding for and of the mission and their 'intelligence" which enables her to build strategy and success.
Her board does not "meddle" into details of day-to-day operations unless she asks and a couple have that kind of expertise but respond when asked. Her board partners with her on strategy to provide insights about opportunities and direction. Her board asks probing questions about finance and outcomes toward mission. And sometimes, a few have a connection that can open a door to money. A few give what they have. The give and get work is not a demand but is welcomed as any gift.
Bad board or good board? Useful board or useless board? Going against the collective wisdom of consultants? Yes, absolutely! So who's correct?
Please share your thinking.