The literature on nonprofit boards of directors is rich with prescriptive advice about the kinds of activities that should occupy the board’s time and attention. Using organizational theory that has dominated the empirical investigation of private sector board behavior (agency,r esource dependence, and institutional),this article contributes to the literature on nonprofit board governance in three important ways. First,it provides a link between theory and practice by identifying the theoretical assumptions that have served as the foundation for the “best practice” literature. Second,the article presents a theory-based framework of board behavior that identifies the environmental conditions and board/organizational considerations that are likely to affect board behavior. And finally,it offers a set of hypotheses that can be used in future empirical investigations that seeks to understand the conditions under which a nonprofit board might assume certain roles and responsibilities over others.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Abzug, R. (1996). The evolution of trusteeship in the United States: Aroundup of findings fromsix cities. Nonprofit Management & Leadership. 7, 101-111.
2.
Abzug, R., DiMaggio, P. J., Gray, B. H., Kang, C. H.,& Useem, M. (1993). Variations in trusteeship: Cases from Boston and Cleveland, 1925-1985. Voluntus, 4, 271-300.
3.
Alexander, J. A., & Weiner, B. J. (1998). The adoption of the corporate governance model by nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 8, 223-242.
4.
Alexander, J. A., Weiner, B. J.,& Succi, M. (2000). Communityaccountabilityamonghospitals affiliated with health care systems. The Milbank Quarterly, 78, 157-184.
5.
Anderson, C. A., & Anthony, R. N. (1986). The new corporate directors. New York: John Wiley.
6.
Axelrod, N. R. (1994). Board leadership and board development. In R. D. Herman & associates (Eds.), The Jossey-Bass handbook of nonprofit leadership and management(pp. 184-207. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
7.
Bainbridge, S. M. (1993). Independent directors and the ALI corporate governance project. George Washington Law Review, 61, 1034-1083.
8.
Bazerman, M. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1983). Alimited rationality model of interlocking directorates. Academy of Management Review, 8, 206-217.
9.
Block, S. R. (1998). Perfect nonprofit boards: Myths,paradoxes,and paradigms. Needham Heights, MA: Simon & Schuster Custom.
10.
Boeker, W., & Goodstein, J. (1991). Organizationalperformance and adaptation: Effects of environment and performance on changes in board composition. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 805-826.
11.
Bowen, W. G. (1994). Inside the boardroom: Governance by directors and trustees. New York: John Wiley.
12.
Boyd, B. (1990). Corporate linkages and organizational environment: A test of the resource dependence model. Strategic Management Journal, 11, 419-430.
13.
Bradshaw, P., Murray, V.,& Wolpin, J. (1992). Do nonprofit boards make a difference? Anexploration of the relationships among board structure, process, and effectiveness. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 21, 227-249.
14.
Carver, J. (1997). Boards that make a difference: Anew design for leadership in nonprofit and public organizations(2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
15.
D’Aunno, T., Sutton, R. I., & Price, R. H. (1991). Isomorphism and externalsupport in conflicting institutionalenvir onments: A study of drug abuse treatment units. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 636-661.
16.
Daily, C. M.,& Schwenk, C. (1996). Chief executive officers, top management teams, and boards of directors: Congruent or countervailing forces? Journal of Management, 22, 185-208.
17.
Dart, R., Bradshaw, P., Murray, V., & Wolpin, J. (1996). Boards of directors in nonprofit organizations: Do they follow a life-cycle model? Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 6, 367-380.
18.
Dess, G. G., & Beard, D. W. (1984). Dimensions of organizationaltask environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 52-73.
19.
DiMaggio, P. J.,& Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147-160.
20.
DiMaggio, P. J.,& Powell, W. W. (1991). Introduction. InW. W. Powell,& P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
21.
Drucker, P. F. (1995). Managing in a time of great change. New York: Truman Talley Books/Plume.
22.
Fama, E. F.,& Jensen, M. C. (1983). Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26, 301-325.
23.
Finkelstein, S., & D’Aveni, R. A. (1994). CEO duality as a double-edged sword: How boards of directors balance entrenchment avoidance and unity of command. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 1079-1108.
24.
Fligstein, N., & Freeland, R. (1995). Theoretical and comparative perspectives on corporate organization. Annual Review of Sociology, 21, 21-43.
25.
Fredrickson, J. W., Hambrick, D. C., & Baumrin, S. (1988). Amodelof CEO dismissal. Academy of Management Review, 13, 255-270.
26.
Golden-Biddle, K.,& Rao, H. (1997). Breaches in the boardroom: Organizational identity and conflicts of commitment in a nonprofit organization. Organization Science, 8, 593-611.
27.
Gibelman, M., Gelman, S. R.,& Pollack, D. (1997). The credibility of nonprofit boards: Aview from the 1990s and beyond. Administration in Social Work, 21(2), 21-40.
28.
Green, J., & Griesinger, D. W. (1996). Board performance and organizationalef fectiveness in nonprofit social service organizations. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 6, 381-400.
29.
Greening, D. W.,& Gray, B. (1994). Testing a modelof organizational response to socialand political issues. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 467-498.
30.
Hall, R. H. (1996). Organizations: Structures,pr ocesses,and outcomes(6th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
31.
Harlan, S. L., & Saidel, J. R. (1994). Board members influence on the government-nonprofit relationship. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 5, 173-196.
32.
Harris, M. (1993). Exploring the role of boards using total activities analysis. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 3, 269-281.
33.
Herman, R., & Tulipana, P. (1985). Board-staff relations and perceived effectiveness in nonprofit organizations. Journal of Voluntary Action Research, 14, 48-59.
34.
Hoskisson, R. E., Johnson, R. A.,& Moesel, D. D. (1994). Corporate divestiture intensity in restructuring firms: Effects of governance, strategy, and performance. Academy of Management Journal,37, 1207-1251.
35.
Houle, C. O. (1997). Governing boards: Their nature and nurture. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
36.
Ingram, R. T. (2003). Ten basic responsibilities of nonprofit boards. Washington, DC: NationalCenter for Nonprofit Boards.
37.
Jackson, D. K., & Holland, T. P. (1998). Measuring the effectiveness of nonprofit boards. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 27, 159-182.
38.
Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs, and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 305-360.
39.
Johnson, J. L., Daily, C. M., & Ellstrand, A. E. (1996). Boards of directors: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 22, 409-438.
40.
Johnson, R. A., Hoskisson, R. E.,& Hitt, M. A. (1993). Board of director involvement inrestructuring: The effects of board versus managerialcontr ols and characteristics. Strategic Management Journal, 14, 33-50.
41.
Jun, S. P.,& Armstrong, G. M. (1997). The basis of power in churches: An analysis from a resource dependence perspective. Social Science Journal, 34, 105-125.
42.
Kang, C. H., & Cnaan, R. A. (1995). New findings on large social service organization boards of trustees. Administration in Social Work, 19, 17-44.
43.
Kanter, R. M.,& Summers, D. V. (1987). Doing good while doing good: Dilemmas of performance measurement in nonprofit organizations and the need for a multiple-constituency approach.InW. Powell (Ed.), The nonprofit sector: Aresearch handbook(pp. 154-166). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
44.
Kaplan, S. N., & Minton, B. A. (1994). Appointments of outsiders to Japanese boards: Determinants and implications for managers. Journal of Financial Economics, 36, 225-258.
45.
Kramer, R. M. (1985). Toward a contingency modelof board-executive relations in nonprofit organizations. Administration in Social Work, 9, 15-33.
46.
Lang, J. R., & Lockhart, D. E. (1990). Increased environmentaluncertainty and changes in board linkage patterns. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 106-128.
47.
Luoma, P., & Goodstein, J. (1999). Stakeholders and corporate boards: Institutional influences on board composition and structure. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 553-563.
48.
Mallette, P.,& Fowler, K. L. (1992). Effects of board composition and stock ownership on the adoption of ‘Poison Pills.’ Academy of Management Journal, 35, 1010-1035.
49.
Mathiasen, K. (1999). Board passages: Three key stages in a nonprofit board’s life cycle. Washington, DC: National Center for Nonprofit Boards.
50.
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340-363.
51.
Middleton, M. (1987). Nonprofit boards of directors: Beyond the governance function. In W. W.Powell (Ed.), The nonprofit sector: A research handbook. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
52.
Miller, J. L., & Lakey, B. M. (1999, November). The nonprofit board self-assessment process: Lessons from the field. Paper presented at the NationalMeeting of the Association for Research on Nonprofit Organizations and Voluntary Action, Washington, DC.
53.
Mintzberg, H. (1983). Power in and around organization. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
54.
Mizruchi, M. S.,& Stearns, L. B. (1988). Alongitudinal study of the formation of interlocking directorates. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39, 118-140.
55.
Oliver, C. (1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 16, 145-179.
56.
Ostrower, F., & Stone, M. M. (2001, November). Governance research: Trends,gaps, and prospects for the future. Paper presented at the NationalMeeting of the Association for Research on Nonprofit Organizations and Voluntary Action, Miami, FL.
57.
Pettigrew, A. (1992). On studying managerial elites. Strategic Management Journal, 13, 163-182.
58.
Pfeffer, J. (1972). Size, composition, and function of corporate boards of directors: The organization and its environment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17, 218-228.
59.
Pfeffer, J. (1973). Size, composition, and function of hospitalboar ds of directors: Astudy of organizationenvironment linkage. Administrative Science Quarterly, 18, 349-364.
60.
Pfeffer, J.,& Salancik, G. R. (1978). The external control of organizations: Aresource dependence perspective. New York: Harper & Row.
61.
Powell, W. W. (1988). Institutional patterns and organizations: Culture and environment. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
62.
Price, J. L. (1963). The impact of governing boards on organizationalef fectiveness and morale. Administrative Science Quarterly, 8, 361-377.
63.
Provan, K. G. (1980). Board power and organizationalef fectiveness among human service agencies. Academy of Management Journal, 23, 221-236.
64.
Provan, K. G., Beyer, J. M., & Kruytbosch, C. (1980). Environmentall inkages and power in resource dependence relations between organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25, 200-225.
65.
Ryan, W. P. (1999). Is that all there is? Searching for more useful governance strategies beyond the board room. The New England Nonprofit Quarterly, VI, 8-15.
66.
Saidel, J. R. (1998). Expanding the governance construct: Functions and contributions of nonprofit advisory groups. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 27, 421-436.
67.
Saidel, J. R.,& Harlan, S. (1998). Contracting and patterns of nonprofit governance. NonprofitManagement & Leadership, 8, 243-260.
68.
Schoorman, F. D., Bazerman, M. H., & Atkin, R. S. (1981). Interlocking directorates: Astrategy for reducing environmental uncertainty. Academy of Management Review, 6, 243-251.
69.
Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
70.
Selznick, P. (1949). TVA and the grass roots. Berkeley: University of California Press.
71.
Siciliano, J. L. (1996). The relationship of board member diversity to organizational performance.Journal of Business Ethics, 15, 1313-1320.
72.
Stearns, L. B.,& Mizruchi, M. S. (1993). Board composition and corporate financing: The impact of financialinstitution representationon borrowing. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 603-618.
73.
Steckel, R., Simons, R.,& Langsfelder, P. (1987). Filthy rich and other nonprofit fantasies: Changing the way nonprofits do business. Berkeley, CA: Ten Speed.
74.
Taylor, B. E., Chait, R. P., & Holland, T. P. (1996). The new work of the nonprofit board. Harvard Business Review, 74, 36-46.
75.
Westphal, J. D.,& Zajac, E. J. (1995). Who shall govern? CEO/board power, demographic similarity, and new director selection. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 60-83.
76.
Wood, M. (1993). Is governing board behavior cyclical? Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 3, 139-163.
77.
Zahra, S. A., & Pearce, J. A. (1989). Boards of directors and corporate financialperformance: A review and integrative model. Journal of Management, 15, 291-334.
78.
Zald, M. N. (1967). Urban differentiation, characteristics of boards of directors and organizational effectiveness. American Journal of Sociology, 73, 261-272.
79.
Zald, M. N. (1969). The power and functions of boards of directors: Atheoretical synthesis.American Journal of Sociology, 74, 97-111.
80.
Zald, M. N. (1970). Organizational change: The political economy of theYMCA. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
81.
Zucker, L. G. (1983). Organizations as institutions. In S. B. Bacharach (Ed.), Research in the sociology of organizations(Vol. 2, pp. 1-47). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
82.
Zucker, L. G. (1987). Institutionaltheories of organization. Annual Review of Sociology,13, 671-701.
