Abstract
In their book on corporate governance, Lorsch and McIver (1989) document that board members said they felt confident in their ability to question the CEO of their organisation about matters of concern. Yet in their observed performance, board members rarely did this. If board members raised problems, this was generally done covertly and outside the board. Similar accountability issues occur in nonprofit organisations. Board performance rarely reflects the rhetoric implicit in regulatory and legislative requirements. There are competing and at times contradictory expectations and demands. How do boards and managers seek to balance these in ways that allow them to maintain their integrity and yet still satisfy the expectations of different stakeholders?
This paper explores some of the issues that make accountability problematic for boards and managers. It then outlines how different stakeholders have differing capacities to enforce accountability demands. This creates complex dilemmas for boards and for managers because there are not options to fulfil one demand and not the other. However, the paper also suggests that there is a game played that raises interesting issues about how accountability is enacted in organisations. Finally, it outlines the issues that need investigation to understand the strategies boards and managers adopt to deal with these problems.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.