[Community-Discuss] Evaluating Performance of the Board

Chevalier du Borg virtual.borg at gmail.com
Tue Dec 29 09:52:41 UTC 2015

2015-12-29 12:13 GMT+04:00 Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>:
> In this case, you’re talking about how well a goal is executed.

correct. but there's a goal that board sets for company for company to
execute. but don't you think board himself have some goal which it

just for clarify: i don't think you should evaluate board based on
execution within the company.

> That is how you evaluate the CEO and the staff. Evaluating the board involves
> a determination if the goal that they directed the CEO to pursue was the correct
> goal for the membership and the community.

agree 100%. i'm just wondering IF it is possible and not just in the 2
- 3 years it take for strategic plan to be implemented.

> Further, one wants to evaluate whether
> the board gave the CEO the tools/authority/latitude/resources necessary to execute
> those goals.
> Now wha I’ve said in the preceding paragraph may be controversial to some. I don’t
> have an MBA or any sort of credential, so just following my ideas blindly probably
> isn’t the best thing to do.

MBAs are useful ... or not ....  [1]  :-)

>>>> should we add that check and balance formally to responsabilite of governance
>>>> committee? i belief good performance and good governance go hand in
>>>> hand.
>>> The devil is in the details here. We should not, IMHO, make the board accountable
>>> to a committee that effectively serves at the pleasure of the board. That creates
>>> a number of conflicts of interest around how the committee is selected, how
>>> the committee performs its duties and how the committee can communicate
>>> with the community and the membership.
>> +100 governance council in my opinion should come from community &
>> members and report to community and members and not board. the council
>> can then use a set of measures like suggested above (plus others) to
>> do their work.
> I disagree. Setting up a secondary committee that takes direction from the
> membership (and/or community) is a recipe for disaster and fractious dysfunction
> throughout the organization. It’s like hiring two captains to pilot a ship and
> then having one of them report to the owners of the ship and having the other
> one report to the passengers. No good can come of that.

Point taken ... i'd rather have vigilant passengers

> Yes… It’s even more work than you think, but, yes, it is the price of good
> governance.

are we ready to do that work?

Borg le Chevalier
"Common sense is what tells us the world is flat"

[1] "Managers, Not MBAs" -

More information about the Community-Discuss mailing list