The role of the board in shaping foundations’ strategy: an empirical study

Abstract

This paper investigates the relationships of the choice of philanthropic strategy with board capital (diversity and networks), board activities (board processes, internal board committees, and board effectiveness), and CEO leadership. Using a sample of 110 Italian foundations, the research shows that board processes have the strongest positive association with an evolved strategic approach to philanthropic institutional grant-giving, while board diversity and strong CEO leadership are associated with the strategic approach only under certain conditions. In particular, good governance processes (e.g., training the board, self-evaluation of trustees, setting the stage for effective board and committee meetings, implementing control software, and steering meetings to improve the board’s analysis) are positively associated with evolved strategic approaches to philanthropy (e.g., signaling other funders for the best grantees, improving the performance of grant recipients, and advancing selected social fields’ state of knowledge and practice)

Exploring, Examining, and Explaining How Participatory Governance Adds Value to Saudi Foundations’ Philanthropic Strategy

“…The purpose of this study was to examine the role that governance practices play in shaping the philanthropic strategy of foundations. Taken together, the results support the view that governance practices are associated with adopting more sophisticated philanthropic approaches (Cornforth, 2003;Green & Griesinger, 1996;Brown, 2005;Engle, 2013;Boesso, Cerbioni, Menini, & Parbonetti, 2017). The evidence reported here should encourage researchers to move beyond attending to the over-studied topics such as "board composition" (Andrés-Alonso, Azofra-Palenzuela, & Romero-Merino, 2010), "CEO characteristics" (Siciliano, 2008) and "organization age" (Graddy & Morgan, 2006) determinants of strategic development to study process factors that are particularly relevant to the public-private nature of family foundations, where control remain within the same family.…”

“…The underlying assumption of such research is that board activities and processes have more to say about the strategic approaches and performance than the structural perspectives (e.g., board size and other more static characteristics) (Cornforth, 2003;Green & Griesinger, 1996;Brown, 2005;Engle, 2013). In a study on 110 Italian foundations, Boesso, Cerbioni, Menini, & Parbonetti (2017) found that good governance processes (e.g., training the board, self-evaluation of trustees, setting the stage for effective board and committee meetings, implementing control software, and steering meetings to improve the board's analysis) have the strongest positive association with an evolved strategic approach to philanthropy when compared to board diversity and strong CEO leadership.…”

“…In recent years, there has been a growing focus among scholars in the governance of foundations and how governance, for example, impacts strategy and performance. An increasing number of studies address such topics as board composition (including board size and the race/ethnicity, gender, and demographic characteristics of board members) (Dyl, Frant, & Stephenson, 2000;Callen, Klein, & Tinkelman, 2003;O'Regan & Oster, 2005;Andrés-Alonso, Martín-Cruz, & Romero-Merino, 2006;Falk & Callen, 1993;Oster, 1995) and board processes (e.g., the use of steering meetings, recruiting the right people, training new board members, evaluating the CEO, the encouragement of self-evaluation, and participating in short-and long-term strategic planning) (Boesso, Cerbioni, Menini, & Parbonetti, 2017;Andrés-Alonso, Azofra-Palenzuela, & Romero-Merino, 2010).…”

Mapping Philanthropic Foundations’ Characteristics: Towards an International Integrative Framework of Foundation Types

“…Pharoah, Walker, & Goddard, 2017). Empirical research indicates that these drive strategies and decisionmaking on the types of philanthropic actions undertaken (Boesso, Cerbioni, Menini, & Parbonetti, 2016), thus linking back to foundations' approach and role.…”

“…Alongside age, differences in board composition, governance structures, and industry characteristic are emphasized (e.g., Pharoah, Walker, & Goddard, 2017). Empirical research indicates that these drive strategies and decision making on the types of philanthropic actions undertaken (Boesso, Cerbioni, Menini, & Parbonetti, 2017), thus linking back to foundations’ approach and role.…”