For too many nonprofits, the board of directors is simply a group of successful, busy people that meets a few times a year to approve budgets and affirm staff-generated decisions, while for the unlucky nonprofit it can be a cabal plotting to usurp the chief executive's power. The good news, say Richard Chait, William Ryan, and Barbara Taylor in their new book, is that it doesn't have to be that way. In fact, boards can and should be high-functioning groups that have the patience and motivation to ask insightful questions and focus on a broad range of governance tasks.

Published by BoardSource, a nonprofit that works to improve the effectiveness of nonprofit boards, Governance as Leadership does not prescribe which tasks belong to the board and which are the role of the CEO and senior management. Instead, it offers three governance models — fiduciary, strategic, and generative — and argues that nonprofit boards need to strike a balance between opportunity and capacity within one of those frameworks. (The latter is emphasized in the book because it's the least understood, and because most boards see their role chiefly as fiduciary and/or strategic.) The preferred work state, or "flow," they argue, produces concentration, absorption in a task, and high performance.

The authors, who have been writing about nonprofit governance together and separately for many years, define "generative thinking" as a kind of planning which precedes goal setting, strategy, development, and problem solving. In other words: take stock before you solve a problem, and determine exactly what problem needs to be solved. They further suggest that board members who embrace generative thinking will find their board work to be more meaningful and are likely to be more creative and committed to the nonprofit they've signed on to help. Or, as they write, "We maintain that governing-by-mode is not only more effective than governing-by-task, it is also more engaging and meaningful."

Of course, not every board action requires generative thinking, and fiduciary and strategic tasks remain crucial aspects of a board member's role. Just as fire departments don't spend all their time extinguishing fires, boards are not always developing strategic plans or looking to hire a new executive director. But while the authors' exploration of different governance models might excite the reader who has sat through too many pointless meetings, the book seems to suggest a course of action that requires a lot of meetings that may never actually lead to a resolution.

Perhaps the authors are trying to solve the wrong problem. While the goal of building a more satisfied and effective board is a noble one, the chances of success are slim without an energetic board chair to keep the group focused and on track. Now that they've reframed the work of nonprofit boards, the authors may need to examine the role of the board chair.