Boards of public sector organizations: a typology with Dutch illustrations

Abstract

Purpose -The purpose of this study is to present two heuristics for researchers to identify different types of boards in public sector organziations, and thus enable exchange of research findings and comparative research. Design/methodology/approach -Based on existing knowledge, two typologies are presented. The first typology discerns four archetypes of boards, and the second typology distinguishes six board roles. The use of these typologies is briefly illustrated with findings on supervisory board in Dutch ZBOs. Findings -Application of the two heuristics is possible and should preferably been done in combination as formal competencies and actual practices of boards do not always coincide. In the Dutch case, boards take on more than one role often exceeding their formal position. On the other hand, examples can be found where boards are overruled and stripped from their formal powers. Combining the two heuristics renders more comprehensive insight into what boards are and do. Originality/value -The two heuristics show that there are different types of boards. Researchers can use these to carry out comparative research. Practitioners and policy makers can use them, for example, when designing appropriate governance structures in public sector organizations or applying international guidelines to specific types of boards and organizations.

Local governments and their arm’s length bodies

“…Type 2 and 3 ALBs often have a corporate structure with a one or two-tier board. The one-tier model is the predominant model in Anglo-Saxon countries, while the two-tier board with an executive and non-executive board is a common model in continental European countries (Van Thiel 2015). In the latter model, the executive board manages the ALB and the non-executive board officially is advisor and supervisor of the ALB.…”

Are school boards and educational quality related? Results of an international literature review

“…As to board models, it is clear from the literature that there are many different types of boards (e.g. Carver 2006;Van Thiel 2015). Here, it is crucial to distinguish between one-tier and two-tier boards.…”

The meaning of institutional logics for performance assessment in boards of municipal companies

“…However, despite the growing prevalence of municipal companies and other hybrid constructions, they have so far attracted limited research interest (Grossi et al, 2015;Ringkjøb et al, 2008). Research on boards of municipal companies and their appointed members is particularly scarce (Ringkjøb et al, 2008;Van Thiel, 2015). However, there is some research on institutional boards, especially in the UK, for instance on boards in the National Health Service (NHS) (Ashburner, 2003;Ferlie et al, 1996;Robinson and Shaw, 2003), local school boards (Farrell, 2005) and boards in central government (Wilks, 2007).…”

“…Related to the governance of public and non-profit organizations, the board should represent the interests of the client groups served by the organization, even if they do not have attractive resources (Cornforth, 2003). As such, the board's service role contributes to ensure that external stakeholders are heard in the boardroom, for example by board members raising their voice if the municipal company is underperforming (Van Thiel, 2015). The service role of corporate boards describes the board as a boundary-spanning resource provider to the company (Pfeffer, 1972;Minichilli et al, 2009), for example through board members' professional networks.…”