When should a board get its hands dirty?

Governance as Leadership

Broadsource, 2004
By Richard P. Chait, William P. Ryan, and Barbara E. Taylor

Over the last 30 years Christian charities, churches and schools have echoed a catchy phrase as the gold standard of board governance: “noses in, hands out.” It neatly delineates roles: boards should engage in oversight and strategy without meddling in operations. The goal of such a posture was to liberate the principal, pastor or executive director to act productively without the board’s meddling. But after all this time . . . what has it produced?

In my estimation, “noses in, hands out” may attempt to prevent micromanagement and thus empower staff, but its shadow side is that it limits a board’s potential – especially in a rapidly changing, complex environment. It has produced disengaged boards – people who stepped onto the board because they have deep passion but then find themselves handcuffed to participate meaningfully. Is this an overstatement? Yes, but not by much.

Harvard researchers Richard Chait, William Ryan and Barbara Taylor challenged this “noses in, hands out” mentality in their groundbreaking book, Governance as Leadership. They argue that boards must evolve beyond strict boundaries and adopt adaptive governance – a model that fluidly engages across three essential modes.

Operational (Fiduciary) Governance

Yes, boards must safeguard assets, monitor performance and ensure compliance – traditional “noses in” tasks. But too often, boards stop there, reducing their role to watchdogs and risk managers. How great it can be if board members actively participate in planning a key fundraising event or brainstorm once a year with the communications staff of the charity in a board training session! This is hands-on, likely doesn’t step on toes and will do great good for both board members and the organization.

Policy Governance

In this mode, boards help shape priorities, review resource allocations and focus on the policies and procedures necessary to allow the staff to properly function. They are fence-builders to ensure the organization does not stray too far away and is risk-free. This is necessary “noses in” behaviour to use from time to time.

Generative (Adaptive) Governance

This is where the magic happens. Boards ask the big questions: Why are we doing this? What are we not seeing? What does the future demand of us? Generative governance demands full presence – minds, hearts and yes, sometimes even hands. It calls for deep contextual understanding, often involving strategic conversations that blur into operations. If you don’t know what I mean, read last month’s CC column!

New questions

Boards should ask: When is it appropriate to get our hands dirty? And when must we step back? (This is perhaps the best question a board could ask.) But is this approach Christian? Is it faith-filled? Yes!

“Noses in, hands out” has too long produced pastors, directors and principals who are either straddled with too much focused responsibility, or who themselves desire too much power. The result is that boards and senior staff persons inevitably end up at odds. This must stop and a more cooperative environment needs to replace it.

Jesus shared responsibility. The early church councils exhibited a balanced approach across operations, strategy and theology. And the Bible is full of examples such as Joseph, David, Abraham and others who distributed power.

So if you are on a board – pay attention to all three modes! Contribute to the mission, policy and strategy. The best posture isn’t “noses in, hands out,” but “eyes wide, minds open, hands ready – when needed.” That’s responsible oversight.