A configurational analysis of board involvement in intergovernmental organizations

Abstract

Manuscript Type: EmpiricalResearch Issue: Research on board involvement has evolved and shifted towards seeking the appropriate role these boards should play in the strategy process. Current theoretical debates and inconclusive empirical findings in the literature point to an unresolved issue regarding the level of board involvement that is conducive to effective strategy formulation. This study aims to identify the levels of board involvement that are associated with highly effective and less effective strategy formulation.Research Findings: We examine the boards of 16 intergovernmental organizations by conducting an inductive fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis to identify different levels of board involvement that are associated with highly effective and less effective strategy formulation. Our results illustrate that both active and less active board involvement are associated with highly effective strategy formulation, while an intermediate level of board involvement is associated with less effective strategy formulation.Theoretical Implications: This study contributes to the literature seeking to understand board involvement in the strategy process. We build a multi-dimensional board involvement framework consisting of board dynamics, the use of director resources, and context. We use the information-processing perspective to elucidate the relationship between different levels of board involvement and effective strategy formulation.Practitioner Implications: Our findings suggest that the optimal level of board involvement in strategy formulation depends on an organization's complexity, a factor which determines its information-processing needs.

A typology of board design for highly effective monitoring in intergovernmental organizations under the United Nations system

“…Following Callen et al . () and Federo and Saz‐Carranza (), the existence of an executive committee was coded separately. Executive committees are subgroups of the board consisting only of directors that handle major issues when a full board cannot be assembled (Kesner ).…”

“…The outcome for the analysis is board monitoring effectiveness, which is taken from the most recent MOPAN assessment reports published from 2011 to 2014 (e.g. Federo & Saz‐Carranza ). MOPAN's assessments are one of the references used by its member governments –Organisation for Economic Co‐operation and Development (OECD) countries that support and provide a huge percentage of funding to the assessed IGOs – when reviewing contributions to these IGOs.…”

“…We used the same thresholds to calibrate the fuzzy set (e.g. Federo & Saz‐Carranza ). Full membership is at 5.50, which is the threshold score for “very high” effectiveness.…”

“…; Misangyi & Acharya ). Scholars suggest that IGO board designs impact the effectiveness of boards to perform their functions (Federo & Saz‐Carranza ). Currently, no research has systematically analyzed how different board designs in IGOs are associated with effective board monitoring.…”

“…Examination of the IGO board is important because this body plays a significant role in organizational decisionmaking (Hexner ) and is an arena where member states try to ensure benefits for themselves, such as securing developmental programs and funding (Kaja & Werker ). Apart from being involved in the strategic process (Federo & Saz‐Carranza ), IGO boards also perform a “performance police” function by overseeing managers through constant performance monitoring, which ensures that managerial decisions and actions are aligned with organizational mandates (Martinez‐Diaz ). As we identify the board designs that are associated with effective monitoring, we help IGOs – and other public and nonprofit organizations – prevent or mitigate the agency problem, thereby helping to improve their performance.…”