Over the past several months the public has learned a lot about cover-ups in nonprofits: churches, boy scouts, football, cycling -- the list goes on and on.
Should the public accept that the boards governing these nonprofits really were all "in the dark" about all these cover-ups? At some level - sure. We know that most of these organizations have a CEO who stands as the buffer between what goes on in the "weeds" and governing. So, does this buffer excuse the boards?
I propose not. At minimum, let's say that the board has a dashboard that provides an assessment of where the organization is at in relationship to its goals and values, yes, values. If so, the board, through this manner, is asking the right questions, which in turn can lead to understanding about what should and should not be happening.
Easy, no. Responsible, yes. Certainly, there is not a nonprofit that subscribes to the "do harm" value, is there? So, let's suggest there is a "do no harm" gauge and under that are subcategories that include: customers, employees, vendors.... Well, you get the picture.
Comments