90. The thing about Carver...

SCRIPT Let me start by saying to any listener who loves the Carver Policy Governance model: I have no fundamental problem with Carver. It can be a perfectly fine approach to corporate governance. To the rest of you who are either skeptics or have no idea what I’m talking about, here’s an unfairly short summary. The Carver Model, or Policy Governance, is a branded approach to board-management interaction that started in the 70s and has remained pretty popular, especially in the not-for-profit sector. As I see it, Carver has two defining characteristics. First, it claims to simplify and clarify the role of the board by limiting it to defining the boundaries within which management should operate and then stepping back and letting management do their thing. Second, most Carver adherents are usually SUUUUPER serious about Carver. If you’re a fan of OMG, you’ll already know why this concerns me. The biggest risk, in my opinion, is that Carver boards might forget that no matter how carefully they set their boundaries and policies, they are still accountable for LITERALLY EVERYTHING! And you can’t delegate accountability. So a set it and forget it approach to governance doesn’t fly in my book – every element of a governance model needs to be re-assessed and evaluated regularly. Which brings me to my bigger point – I’m pretty sure there’s no approach to governance that’s going to be perfect for any organization forever. Lots of excellent boards have adopted modified versions of Carver, or abandoned the model entirely over time. As long as you’re asking yourself how your board can be a bit better tomorrow than it was yesterday, and making the necessary adjustments, it’s all good in my book…