Untitled Document
Combining Practice and Theory to Improve Nonprofit Accountability and Governance
Session II
Chair/Moderator: Jeffrey L. Brudney, Albert A. Levin Chair of Urban Studies and Public Service, Maxine Goodman Levin College of Urban Affairs, Cleveland State University
Governance Processes for Tackling Tough Issues
(Particularly attractive to individuals leading associations and cooperatives.)
Paper 1. Nancy McInerney-Lacombe
Women Directors: When Championing the "Tough Issues" at the Board, How and Why Do They Do It and Do They Do It Differently Than Men?
Boards of Directors are often criticized for being compliant or silent on critical issues. In the powerful yet collegial environment of the board, raising "tough issues" has proven to be a challenging task. This lack of action can result in ineffective decision-making and, in some cases like Enron, the demise of the firm (O'Connor, 2003). In view of the fact that management's expertise is valued (Baysinger, Kosnik and Turk, 1991), it takes tenacity to question management's judgments and recommendations (Janis, 1992; Sonnenfeld, 2002; Leblanc & Gillies, 2005). This is especially true if management is long tenured and powerful (Arthur, 2001). However, Kramer, Konrad and Erkut (2006) revealed an interesting phenomenon with respect to women on boards. In their Critical Mass study, many CEO respondents (male and female) reported that women, more than men, were prepared to push the tough issues at the board. This finding raises the question that lies at the center of the present qualitative research. When women champion the "tough issues" at the board, how and why do they do it and do they do it differently than men? A championing model is presented to examine the "tough issues" phenomenon and the potential collateral benefits for board performance. Women, currently underrepresented in the boardroom, may have a unique role to play in improving the decision-making quality of boards.
Discussants: Lynn Singer, Deputy Provost and Vice President Academics Programs, Case Western Reserve University
Barbara J. Danforth, President & CEO, YWCA Greater Cleveland
Paper 2. Brian Newton
Conduits for Tough Issues facing Boards of Electric Cooperatives:
Relationships and Engagement
The role that leaders perform in governing nonprofit organizations has confounded practitioners and scholars since the time of the early settlers, when the functions of governance were first separated. Is governance the role of the board, management, or both? Today, little has changed. Public and private nonprofit organizations, almost all of which are governed by boards of lay citizens and by professional executives, continue to define the gap between what the board's role is and what the chief executive officer's (CEO) role is. Organizations such as BoardSource (formerly the National Center for Nonprofit Boards), The Aspen Institute, the Independent Sector, and the Foundation Center fund, publish and disseminate research and reports in an attempt to educate, explain, and understand the complexity of nonprofit governance. This present study is based on empirical data of quantitative surveys, qualitative interviews, and policy statements from 18 board-chairmen and CEOs with nonprofit electric co-operatives.1 The study describes the perceptions of their roles in governance. Our findings suggest that boards and CEOs recognize their overlapping role in governance. Hence, they put in place systems, processes, and boundaries to facilitate schemes of joint engagement. Furthermore, our results describe practices of engagement as a means of managing complexity and tension between boards and CEOs. The operatives can facilitate joint engagement between boards and CEOs. The results highlight implications of good governance and dimension of joint engagement for practitioners-boards and CEOs, as well as for scholars.
Discussants: Jeanine Arden Ornt, Esq., Vice President & General Counsel, Case Western Reserve University
Markus Bryant, President & CEO, North Central Electric & Lorain-Medina Electric Cooperatives
Paper 3. Mark Engle
Big Issues Resulting in Bold Decisions:
How Boards of High-Performing Professional Societies Engage
According to Taylor, Chait, and Holland (1996) and Carver (1997), boards of nonprofit organizations spend too much of their limited available time pursuing trivial decisions. This paper examines how boards of high-performing professional societies tackle big issues. Using a decision theoretic approach, the paper conceptualizes bold decision making as involving a particular decision space (Papadakis, Lioukas, & Chambers, 1998), a set of decision steps (DeSanctis & Gallupe, 1987; Nutt, 1984), and group processes associated with bounded rationality (Boland & Pondy, 1986; Simon, 1991). This framework is measured against findings from fieldwork, resulting in a revised conceptual model and general support for the ability of decision theory to provide insights into effective board functioning.
Discussants: J. Clarke Price, CAE, President & CEO, Ohio Society of CPAs
David A. Simpson, CEO, Hospice of the Western Reserve
|
