What do you think?
Rate this book
Putting Purpose First: Nonprofit Board Leadership Today
BoardSource has been at the forefront of thought leadership on the roles and responsibilities of nonprofit board members for many years. Itself a nonprofit organization, BoardSource has published a number of volumes over the years, designed to give board members a strong grounding in their legal duties and best practices in governance. In Putting Purpose First, they bring us to a new level of understanding "what a board does and how individual board leaders can come together as a collective body to provide leadership and stewardship that empower their organization to do the most good."
The book builds on Anne Wallestad's trailblazing article "The Four Principles of Purpose-Driven Board Leadership" published in the Stanford Social Innovation Review in March 2021. Putting Purpose First describes how a purpose-driven mindset affects how board members approach their core responsibilities: setting strategic direction, providing oversight, and ensuring organizational resources. It is a view of board governance and leadership from the 30,000 foot level.
The book builds on Anne Wallestad's trailblazing article "The Four Principles of Purpose-Driven Board Leadership" published in the Stanford Social Innovation Review in March 2021. Putting Purpose First describes how a purpose-driven mindset affects how board members approach their core responsibilities: setting strategic direction, providing oversight, and ensuring organizational resources. It is a view of board governance and leadership from the 30,000 foot level.
100 pages, Paperback
Published October 1, 2021
1 person is currently reading
1 person want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
September 28, 2022
Not going to lie - I am finding some of the concepts in this little book quite challenging. I think I agree with the premise and with most of the specifics, but I have been wrestling with it for months because I simply can't figure out (yet) how to apply these ideas in my own nonprofit consulting practice.
There are a variety of reasons for this.
First, some of the concepts are very different from what I have been teaching for years and the book just does not provide enough guidance for how to translate this new direction into practical, on the ground assistance to a board of directors. Much of the descriptive material here is straightforward and unchanged - fiduciary oversight is still a very important part of a board's governance responsibilities, for example. But are we saying there are now more important conversations to have in the board room? Perhaps it will help when BoardSource issues revisions of its own practical guidance documents such as "The 10 Basic Responsibilities" or "Exceptional Programmatic Oversight." I do hope so. I get why the practical material comes so long after a new theory, but until more of it gets here I am uncertain how or even whether to change up how I do what I do.
Second, the pictures of boards that emerge from these pages are very different from my lived experiences. The majority of my clients would need two years of remedial governance work before they could even begin the types of thoughtful purpose-driven board room conversations described here. The boards I interact with are simply not where Putting Purpose First imagines they are. Most board members I know care more about projects they are working on than anything else. Governance responsibilities are often little more than an after thought. My job has long been to get more board members to care as much about good governance as they do about their individual projects. It's incremental work, where members of the same board have different starting points. How does it help to advise them to think big thoughts that seem a million miles from the problems they are actually trying to solve? Is that the way to a strong trust-based relationship? I don't see it.
Here's an example from page 75: "Boards should beware of becoming so relentlessly fixated on monitoring the benchmarks and performance indicators associated with with specific organizational strategies that they lose sight of the bigger picture, including what's happening outside the organization, and how it fits into the broader ecosystem of organizations that do work related to the purpose and mission." OK, I see that. But I spent all day yesterday with a board of directors of a small, unstaffed nonprofit who have never discussed the impact of the programs they are working so hard to put together, let alone the benchmarks or performance indicators. Do I encourage them to do that now, or shall we go straight to discussing the organization's role in the ecosystem?
Many consultants solve this dilemma by carefully choosing clients who are closer to ideal, but that is not my way. I try to meet people where they are and help them get where they want to go. Good governance is an important part of that, but it is rarely very fast.
Third, I am baffled by this business of what a governance model is or isn't. Was "Policy Governance" a model but "Governance as Leadership" was not? Does it matter? One of the authors of Putting Purpose First told me some thought leaders believe we should be teaching just the stripped back legal minimums so groups can build their own governance foundation from there. Does that mean that all best practices are jettisoned and we have nothing to offer those seeking to improve their board practices? I can't imagine that is what is expected.
Fourth, and perhaps controversially, I am not sure I understand why *theories* of board governance needed a radical shift in the first place though I certainly understand that board *practices* needed such a shift. I am deeply grateful for the thought leaders who have taught me how inequities have been baked into the very soul of our nonprofit sector, embedding power imbalances that persist across generations. Until we thoroughly examine and eradicate these practices - rooted in outdated and wrong-headed thinking - we will remain part of the problem, tilting at windmills, never able to promote the social good we profess to care about. All of that is true and is motivating me to continuously engage with these ideas when many would wonder why I bother.
Anyway, I went back through 25 years of BoardSource books and articles and I can't find where it ever said "all board members should be connected to wealth and be willing to ask their networks for it." That is a common practice in board recruitment, for sure. Many organizations believe that, train new generations of board members to believe that, want me to say that when I come in as consultant. But that kind of thinking simply isn't in the governance literature. It wasn't there 25 years ago and it isn't there now. And if that is the case, shouldn't we put more effort into leaning in on what we've known all along about good governance rather than redesigning it? Are we at risk of throwing out the baby with the bathwater?
Like most people I know I am perfectly delighted for an opportunity to learn, grow, and change. I am excited to hear and read new thought leaders and I will always strive to absorb and apply emerging ideas for the benefit of my clients. With Putting Purpose First, however, I feel like I am looking at a clear picture on a puzzle box where none of the pieces inside seem to match or fit together. I like the picture, even as I have clients who may not care about it, but I need more help determining the actual way forward from where my clients are right now. I wish Putting Purpose First provided that guidance, but I am afraid I am left still searching.
There are a variety of reasons for this.
First, some of the concepts are very different from what I have been teaching for years and the book just does not provide enough guidance for how to translate this new direction into practical, on the ground assistance to a board of directors. Much of the descriptive material here is straightforward and unchanged - fiduciary oversight is still a very important part of a board's governance responsibilities, for example. But are we saying there are now more important conversations to have in the board room? Perhaps it will help when BoardSource issues revisions of its own practical guidance documents such as "The 10 Basic Responsibilities" or "Exceptional Programmatic Oversight." I do hope so. I get why the practical material comes so long after a new theory, but until more of it gets here I am uncertain how or even whether to change up how I do what I do.
Second, the pictures of boards that emerge from these pages are very different from my lived experiences. The majority of my clients would need two years of remedial governance work before they could even begin the types of thoughtful purpose-driven board room conversations described here. The boards I interact with are simply not where Putting Purpose First imagines they are. Most board members I know care more about projects they are working on than anything else. Governance responsibilities are often little more than an after thought. My job has long been to get more board members to care as much about good governance as they do about their individual projects. It's incremental work, where members of the same board have different starting points. How does it help to advise them to think big thoughts that seem a million miles from the problems they are actually trying to solve? Is that the way to a strong trust-based relationship? I don't see it.
Here's an example from page 75: "Boards should beware of becoming so relentlessly fixated on monitoring the benchmarks and performance indicators associated with with specific organizational strategies that they lose sight of the bigger picture, including what's happening outside the organization, and how it fits into the broader ecosystem of organizations that do work related to the purpose and mission." OK, I see that. But I spent all day yesterday with a board of directors of a small, unstaffed nonprofit who have never discussed the impact of the programs they are working so hard to put together, let alone the benchmarks or performance indicators. Do I encourage them to do that now, or shall we go straight to discussing the organization's role in the ecosystem?
Many consultants solve this dilemma by carefully choosing clients who are closer to ideal, but that is not my way. I try to meet people where they are and help them get where they want to go. Good governance is an important part of that, but it is rarely very fast.
Third, I am baffled by this business of what a governance model is or isn't. Was "Policy Governance" a model but "Governance as Leadership" was not? Does it matter? One of the authors of Putting Purpose First told me some thought leaders believe we should be teaching just the stripped back legal minimums so groups can build their own governance foundation from there. Does that mean that all best practices are jettisoned and we have nothing to offer those seeking to improve their board practices? I can't imagine that is what is expected.
Fourth, and perhaps controversially, I am not sure I understand why *theories* of board governance needed a radical shift in the first place though I certainly understand that board *practices* needed such a shift. I am deeply grateful for the thought leaders who have taught me how inequities have been baked into the very soul of our nonprofit sector, embedding power imbalances that persist across generations. Until we thoroughly examine and eradicate these practices - rooted in outdated and wrong-headed thinking - we will remain part of the problem, tilting at windmills, never able to promote the social good we profess to care about. All of that is true and is motivating me to continuously engage with these ideas when many would wonder why I bother.
Anyway, I went back through 25 years of BoardSource books and articles and I can't find where it ever said "all board members should be connected to wealth and be willing to ask their networks for it." That is a common practice in board recruitment, for sure. Many organizations believe that, train new generations of board members to believe that, want me to say that when I come in as consultant. But that kind of thinking simply isn't in the governance literature. It wasn't there 25 years ago and it isn't there now. And if that is the case, shouldn't we put more effort into leaning in on what we've known all along about good governance rather than redesigning it? Are we at risk of throwing out the baby with the bathwater?
Like most people I know I am perfectly delighted for an opportunity to learn, grow, and change. I am excited to hear and read new thought leaders and I will always strive to absorb and apply emerging ideas for the benefit of my clients. With Putting Purpose First, however, I feel like I am looking at a clear picture on a puzzle box where none of the pieces inside seem to match or fit together. I like the picture, even as I have clients who may not care about it, but I need more help determining the actual way forward from where my clients are right now. I wish Putting Purpose First provided that guidance, but I am afraid I am left still searching.
Displaying 1 of 1 review