Choices in Organizational Philosophy: Policy Governance
Apr 16, 2012

This is hands-down the best choice for almost all organizations. Developed by John Carver, there is a lot of written material and experience with this approach.

Principles: Common organizational problems, particularly organizational ineffectiveness, are attributable to:
• weak board function
• weak chief staff officer function
• confusion between means and ends
• confusion between the person and the idea
• poorly developed skills relevant to organizational role

Improving organizational effectiveness requires clear understanding, improved skills and performance of roles and responsibilities by boards and by senior staff.
1. Board responsibilities:
• Two-way link to stakeholders including members and clients
• Focus on setting organizational policy
• Define desired ends for the organization
• Define constraints for the chief staff officer
• Monitor organizational progress toward desired ends
• Assure quality chief staff officer performance using pre-set criteria and wide input

2. Chief Staff Officer responsibilities:
• Focus on assuring that operations met board-set organizational ‘ends'
• Contribute to board planning and monitoring processes
• Establishes effective outside relationships for the organization
• Act as spokesperson for the organization in conjunction with the board chair.

Pros: Independent of organizational design, intent or size (beyond basic start-up phases). Focused on root causes of organizational ineffectiveness and board/ senior staff dissatisfaction. Clarifies board and staff functions/ responsibilities/ authorities. Makes more efficient use of all personnel: board and staff. Helps lift organizations into innovation and shortens lags between decisions and implementation.

Cons: Requires mastery of some new language and concepts. Requires additional skill development from board members and from many senior staff. Requires honesty about real ‘ends' desired by board members and senior staff.