The quiet work of governance
— By Sheldon Morris
Governance rarely announces itself. When a board is working as it should, the enterprise simply moves with a certain steadiness — decisions are made in season, authority is exercised without drama, and the institution absorbs shocks that would unsettle a lesser one. The absence of noise is not the absence of work. It is the work.
The boards that struggle are seldom short of talent. They are short of clarity: about who decides, about what the board owes the enterprise that the management cannot supply, and about the difference between oversight and interference. These are not questions of intelligence. They are questions of discipline.
Oversight is a posture, not an event
A board that treats governance as a quarterly ritual will find itself perpetually behind the enterprise it is meant to steward. The material questions — succession, risk, the integrity of the strategy — do not arrive on the calendar. They accumulate quietly and then present themselves all at once, usually at the least convenient hour.
“The absence of noise is not the absence of work. It is the work.”
The remedy is not more meetings. It is a board that understands its own standard and holds to it between meetings — that knows what it is watching for, and why. That standard is set slowly, through candor that most boards find uncomfortable and the best boards make routine.
The value of an outside read
There is a particular usefulness in counsel that owes nothing to the organization's internal politics. An outside adviser can say the plain thing that everyone in the room already knows and no one has been positioned to say. Often that is the whole of the contribution — and it is worth a great deal.
Good governance is unglamorous by design. It is the discipline of attending to the important before it becomes the urgent. Boards that master it are rarely celebrated for it, which is exactly as it should be.
— Continue reading