Reorienting a board that has become too deeply involved in an organization's operational details is one of the most important—and difficult—challenges for any association CEO. With the right level of leadership commitment, however, it is possible to overcome resistance to governance change.

The International Association for Dental Research and the American Association for Dental Research provide a case in point. Their solution: a reinvention of their committee structure.

Five years ago, IADR and AADR unanimously approved a plan to modernize an outdated committee structure that had encouraged board members to get too heavily involved in association operations rather than remain focused on strategic governance. For each of their boards, IADR and AADR created four governing committees:

• Board Operations: Headed by the elected board president and consisting of the chairs of the other three committees, this committee is responsible for the effective functioning of the board and for maintaining and developing the board-CEO working relationship.


• Strategic and Operational Planning: This committee designs and coordinates board participation in strategic and operational planning, including budget preparation.


• Performance Monitoring/Audit: This committee monitors programmatic and financial performance, updates operational policies and systems, and oversees the audit function.


• Member/Stakeholder Relations: This committee is charged with maintaining effective communication and working relationships with members and key stakeholders and for making sure that volunteer involvement is highly productive and satisfying.

This new structure replaced a series of "silo" committees corresponding to specific association programs and functions (for example, Annual Session, Publications, Government Affairs, and Science Awards). These became nongoverning committees consisting only of non-board volunteers, and each reports to the appropriate governing committee.

IADR and AADR board members' active involvement in strong governing committees has made for a deeply satisfying governing experience.

The IADR and AADR boards also adopted detailed operating guidelines for the new governing committees—for example, that every board member is assigned to only one of the three governing committees (other than Board Operations), that committee chairs and members rotate regularly, and that all reports and recommendations are made by committee chairs and members.

Powerful ROI

Almost six years after the new structure was launched, IADR and AADR have realized a handsome return on their investment of time and money in establishing and supporting each board's four committees. Four impacts loom largest.

First, both boards have become more strategic governing bodies whose decisions have much greater impact. For example, the two associations jointly launched a new journal; the IADR board developed a day-long training session targeted at young investigators; and the AADR board replaced a diversity and inclusion task force with a permanent advisory committee to develop programs aimed at promoting D+I.

Second, IADR and AADR board members' active involvement in strong governing committees has made for a deeply satisfying governing experience. Board members truly own their governing work, rather than merely reacting to finished staff work, and they are strongly committed to their governing decisions.

Third, by providing additional volunteer leadership opportunities at the advisory committee level, an expanded pool of nominees for board positions has emerged.

And fourth, meetings of both boards have become more productive and efficient because of the detailed preparatory work accomplished in governing committee meetings. Far less time is wasted in board meetings going over details that are now worked out at the committee level, and far more time is devoted to truly strategic discussion.

Beating the Odds

Two primary factors account for the two associations' ability to overcome the odds against implementing major change: significant board member involvement in shaping the recommendation to establish the new structure and hands-on CEO leadership of the change process.

A daylong IADR/AADR governance retreat in December 2010, at which board and executive team members identified governance issues and explored possible improvements, laid the foundation for board approval of the new structure in March 2011. And the intensive involvement of both boards' officers in reviewing the retreat facilitator's report recommending the new structure transformed them into committed owners of—and ardent champions for—the new governing committees.

The CEO of IADR/AADR played a leading, hands-on role that included securing the two boards' agreement to hold the governance retreat, retaining a consultant to facilitate the retreat, and ensuring that the consultant prepared a detailed set of recommendations and an implementation plan. The CEO helped the boards' officers present the recommendation to create the new governing committees at a joint board meeting. Once the change was approved, the CEO set it up for success by establishing a process to provide ongoing executive support to the new governing committees.

Implementing far-reaching governance change is difficult to pull off in almost any organization. But resistance can be overcome with substantial involvement by board members and the chief staff executive and with a clear understanding of the benefits change can bring.