Monitoring Compliance with Board Policy

Over the past years there has evolved a greater understanding by Boards of the importance and value of policy. It appears as if Boards have spent considerable time establishing policy. But too often, they fail miserably when it comes to the other part of that task: monitoring compliance with that policy.

It takes a lot of work to establish the rules (policy). But what I’m witnessing more often than not are those rules being placed on a shelf to gather dust (much like strategic plans used to do). What good are rules if you don’t monitor compliance with them? Is a Board truly discharging its responsibility for effective management of the organization by simply trusting that the Chief Staff Officer (CEO, Executive Director) is complying with that policy? Frankly, I don’t think so!

Every policy that compels the Chief Staff Officer to do (or not to do) something needs to be monitored. Each policy should be discussed by the Board to determine what information they need to satisfy themselves that the policy is indeed being complied with, and how frequently they require that assurance.

And I also suggest that when the compliance information is advanced to the Board, that the Board also discuss and consider whether the policy needs to be amended based on changing needs or circumstances. This ensures that policy will always be “top of mind”, and certainly provides great information and orientation to new members of the Board. Both are important.

How often are your policies on your agenda?

An all too frequent scenario: a Board invests significant time and effort to establish a wide range of governance policies, covering issues related to the role of the Board and the role of the Chief Staff Officer, and setting out limitations on the authority of the Chief Staff Officer. The policies then get plunked into a Board manual, and are handed out to existing and new Board members. Thus far, good stuff!

But what happens all too often after that is: nothing! The policies are rarely if ever discussed, and the Board, as a consequence, goes bad to old habits.

What a shame. All that work and effort for what?

Here's what needs to happen. If the organization has, let's say, thirty (30) policies in place and meets six (6) times each year, five (5) of those policies should be on each Board agenda. What to discuss? With each policy, the Board should ask itself these questions:

• Does the policy still satisfy our needs?


• With regard to policies that place limitations on the authority of the Chief Staff Officer, are we receiving adequate information that allows us to satisfy ourselves that the policy is indeed being complied with?


• Is the policy clear to everyone to whom it applies (all Board members and the Chief Staff Officer)?

Policy discussion at each Board meeting reinforces that the Board governs through its policy-making function - this is a critical step in the orientation of new Board members. They must be given adequate opportunity to learn how a Board governs, and they must be afforded opportunity to question the intent and or appropriateness of every policy that exists.

I also find it odd that Board Chairs rarely re-focus the Board back to discussion about policies. When Board members wade into operational discussion (and this, as we all know, happens frequently) the Chair needs to bring discussion back to existing Board policy. The Chair needs to ask the Board member(s) what their real concerns are, and bring them back to discussing the Board policy that governs that particular issue. The question to the Board member needs to be, "What amendment would you propose to the existing policy to satisfy your concern, or what new policy needs to be established"?

Governing in this manner way can eliminate Board discussion on the same or a similar matter year after year - establish policy that governs those circumstances, and you won't have to have the same discussion again. Then you can focus most of your time on your other important task: focusing on the future.