Dr. Fram notes in his recent blog about director types:
The Vanilla Director
This is a board member who attends meetings regularly, occasionally makes an interesting comment. He/she is dedicated to the mission of the organization and can make substantial financial or other contributions. One such director I observed, volunteered to assist the staff with a difficult field problem. According to Frankel, these board members are “less critical and offer encouragement…. ” However, like many other nonprofit board members, across behavioral types, avoid rigorous discussions at board meetings. If substantial conflict appears between factions of the board on a major issue, they may resign instead of taking an unpopular stand.
I concur and want to instead that boards
BoardSource among others have offered that boards should be regularly engaged in generative conversations.
Generative governance moves past mundane tasks like reporting and rubber-stamping proposals. It provides an opportunity for boards to deepen their analysis and focus on more abstract concepts in order to be better able to adapt to a changing environment.
Of course in order to have these conversations committees and the executive must bring and prepare subject matters to the table and ensure meeting agenda time is set aside specifically. I would pose that a simple analysis of progress on strategic goals and strategies or specific external environmental issues are perfect as a source for these discussions. Boards just have to want to contribute to the present and future pursuit of mission.