When it comes to creation of a strategic plan for a nonprofit organization, there are two schools of thought regarding who has this responsibility. One school says that the board of directors should drive the planning process. The other says that the nonprofit CEO should drive the process. Where do you fall?

The Board Drives the Strategic Planning Process
For those who advocate a board-driven planning process, a major argument is that the board of directors has responsibility for the governance of the organization. They argue that the board sets the vision and direction of the organization. It is the board that sets the mission, vision, and goals for the organization to achieve. They view the board as the owners of the organization, as well as the governors of it; to develop a strategic plan without board direction and direct involvement would be like a contractor’s building a new home without consulting the owners for whom the home is being built.

The CEO Drives the Strategic Planning Process
On the other hand, many argue that the board of directors does not have the technical expertise to understand what can and cannot be reasonably accomplished with the organization’s resources. The board, they believe, does not have a grasp of the day-to-day realities facing the CEO, and so they are ill-equipped to mandate strategies, let alone the tactics, calendar, and budget included in any useful strategic plan. They also view the board more as overseers of the cause and less as owners of the organization.

The Board Sets the Mission, Vision, and Values; The CEO Drives the Planning Process

The best option, however, is the  C I V I C U S  approach. A proper board governance culture calls for the owners and governors of the organization–that is, the board of directors–to set the long-term purpose of the organization. The board should regularly review the mission, vision, and values of the organization. It should obtain input from stakeholders, including major donors and grant makers, recipients of services (clients or customers, depending on the organization type), volunteers, community leaders, or others who are affected by the nonprofit. It should conduct an environmental scan, community assessment, or other analyses. Once a thoughtful review of all this input and data is completed, the board should reaffirm or revise the organization’s mission. It should review and revise, if necessary, the vision and the values. And then it should say to the CEO, “Come back to us with a deliberate, focused, and doable strategic plan that will get us from where we are now to where we want to be.”

At that point, the CEO involves all levels of the organization–including all staff, if possible–in assessing methods, means, alternatives, and innovative solutions to move the organization to where the board has stated it wants to be. The CEO includes board members as volunteers to assist with this process as appropriate. Using whatever framework the CEO determines (we are prone to use the Balanced Scorecard model), the strategic plan is drafted and presented to the board of directors for approval. The board has an opportunity to review the plan, ask questions for clarification, and recommend changes. Then the board holds the CEO accountable for achieving the goals, implementing the strategies, and staying within the budget outlined in the plan.

Too many boards of directors have gone beyond their fiduciary and governance roles and attempted to manage the organization. This is a sure way to destroy morale and lose top-notch staff–especially leadership. If the board wants to achieve what it sees as the vision of the organization, it must hire good people, achieve clarity through full and transparent debate, properly govern through sound bylaws and clear policies, and assure the CEO has established a solid organizational infrastructure and a culture of accountability.  From there, the board of directors should let go of the CEO and let her lead the organization as she was hired to do.