Organizational Transformation and Governing Boards: Many Ways and No One Path

ASAE, The American Society of Association Executives, is a membership group for those that manage associations, nonprofit and for profit. The organization has a research arm, a Center for Association Leadership, certifications, professional development, and a century plus history. They are good resource, and I recently came across one of their publications that I found to be quite helpful. Transformational Governance: How Boards Achieve Extraordinary Change, by Beth Gazley and Katha Kissman, is a data-informed study of how different types of governing boards achieved real change.

Gazley is a professor at Indiana University with deep expertise in nonprofit management. Kissman is an author, governance activist, and consultant. She has led and/or worked on a wide range of boards for decades. Together, the authors possess hands-on and theoretical knowledge of board governance.

The book’s introduction comes from Anne Wallestad, the CEO of Boardsource. It is an organization that provides support and resources to nonprofit boards. Boardsources’s 2015 report, “Leading with Intent: A National Index of Nonprofit Board Practices 2015” found that the overall average of board effectiveness to be a B-. The rating came from a survey of board members, people in the best position to know. Walletstad notes that the results are a call to action, for significant work has to take place if there are to be improvements in board governance. Wallestad stresses that Transformational Governance is an important contribution to the field, for it offers real examples of what transformative change can look like, why it happened and how it happened.

The book itself was a product of ASAE and its research arm. It was grounded in a study to see how boards might go from good to great, with an underlying appreciation of transformative growth (and not transactional leadership). After looking at the field, noting the relevance of work already done by ARNOVA (Association for Research of Nonprofit Organizations and Voluntary Action), the authors decided that an across the board (profit and nonprofit) study of the change process itself would be helpful to the field. Evidence was drawn from ASAE’s national survey of good governance practices was the starting point. The authors followed up with structured interviews of key participants. Investigation led to a book about process, with hands on data and histories. It looks at who, what and why facilitated change, how it happened and what did/did not take place. The authors make no claims that what worked in one circumstance would work in another. Instead, the high-level project is about understanding the larger landscape and how various boards dealt with change.

Examining where change begins, the authors sketch out well-known theories of change and change management. High-level structures tell only part of the story. The book shifts, appropriately, to people and leadership. The relationship between culture, structure and leadership is teased out. This is a strand that will reoccur in the volume and in several examples. From respiratory therapists to estate planners to the electric power association, the book is eclectic and inclusive in its studies.

What’s fascinating to examine, through the data, and appreciate is that there is no one best model, no one best recipe. Things happen many different ways for many different reasons.

When change is being considered, the authors – and the data – indicated that some sort of visioning exercise/s is often helpful. Experience indicates that with that, and changing expectations, board must anticipate challenges, friction and bumps. The book is candid, too, in noting that boards have to maintain the “illusion of democracy” in order to facilitate change.

A strategy that worked for several boards is using committees or teams within the board to organize change. A chapter highlights common sense practices: good contract, clear understanding of expectations, indemnity, etc. Changing board membership is another reliable vehicle for effective transformation. 

What makes it all possible – and essential – is a good relationship between the CEO and the board. Examples drive that point home. Many found external expertise to be critical parts of building that relationship and steering that journey. The data also emphasizes that an effective board chair is critical.

Another best practice is board self-assessment. Research has found a high correlation between board effectiveness and self-assessment. Meeting evaluations can also help. The authors note that there are many good resources readily available for board assessment. The book concludes with a list of resources.

Transformational Governance is straightforward, easy to read and understand, and direct. Like a report, it knows its audience. Light on speculation and long on examples, this book serves as guide, benchmark and inspiration.

David Potash