I received the following inquiry that I believe to be really important and worthy of sharing.
I am interested in finding a book (or article or essay) that makes the case for substantially reducing or eliminating board structures… After 20 years in nonprofit, I am wondering if the ENTIRE model of nonprofit governance is fundamentally flawed. In my estimation, more than 80% of nonprofit boards have sub-par performance… even the very good ones are still subject to power struggles, bureaucracy, etc.
A few nonprofit organizations I work with that are very successful actually operate with NO board (save the required IRS officers) or committees. They are very entrepreneurial, efficient, innovative and can adapt to change quickly. In essence, they remain mission centered but operate like small for-profit businesses.
Do you know of such a book? Does anyone share this question? (Seems to me that so much of the literature is aimed at propping up the model, but doesn’t question its validity).
Alas, few in the field have been willing to put in writing what you have just clearly put forth. On the other hand, I know that many execs share this experience and feelings. And, I agree. The model IS flawed. The theory is that nonprofit board members will be and act as owners with all the responsibility and none of the tangible rewards (like in corporate boards). That is certainly what I believe to be the fundamental problem. Passion or commitment to mission is just not tangible enough to make boards or their members fully effective and reliable. But, the IRS has not been willing to accept another construct.
Meanwhile, I think this new social enterprise model may be offering a possibility (L3C -- http://www.nonprofitlawblog.com/home/2009/03/l3c-developments-resources.html ) which, while not a perfect solution and not paying particular attention to the governance issues, will likely significantly reduce the role of the nonprofit board as we have known it.
I think where a board is particularly dysfunctional, reducing the size to the minimum (usually 3) is a good strategy to begin starting over. I also believe that as long as this is the construct we must work in, we must continually seek solutions to making it effective. Finally, let's not underestimate the role of the Board Chair in really making a difference between an effective and ineffective board. I am quite convinced that the Board Chair can make or break a nonprofit board.
Please let me know if you find some other references beyond the plethora of literature focused on making nonprofit boards work.