Not automatically, anyway

Organizations often invest significant time and energy in adopting Policy Governance. Boards attend training, policies are developed, and there is a genuine sense of alignment about roles, responsibilities, and purpose. For a while, things feel more clear and grounded.

When clarity begins to erode

Then, gradually, that clarity begins to fade. New questions arise. Old habits resurface. People who were not part of the original work step into key roles. What once felt coherent becomes harder to sustain, even though nothing obvious has gone wrong.

When this happens, it’s tempting to look for a single cause — a missed explanation, a gap in training, a lack of follow-through. But the pattern is too consistent, and too widespread, to be explained that way. Something more systemic is at work. Left unattended, systems revert to familiar patterns, not because anyone chooses them, but because nothing is actively countering them.

Knowledge does not equal sustainability

The issue is not that people forget the principles. It’s that the principles are not consistently embedded in the routines where governance actually happens. Training builds shared understanding, but it does not, on its own, create new habits of thought or new ways of working. Over time, old patterns reassert themselves — not because anyone rejects the model, but because practice was never designed into the system.

Governance as habits, not events

In practice, governing well depends on habits of thought that develop only through use. Habits like staying in policy when a concrete issue pulls attention downward. Like judging interpretations for reasonableness rather than personal agreement. Like assessing evidence for sufficiency and credibility, not comfort. These ways of thinking don’t become automatic through understanding alone. They have to be practiced, repeatedly, in the moments where decisions are actually made.

We see this in other areas of life as well: understanding what to do rarely changes behaviour unless it becomes part of an existing routine. Governance is no different.

This need to develop new habits is not just a question for boards, nor is it just a question for staff. Governance relies on different kinds of discipline at different levels of the organization — and both require practice.

But what kinds of habits are we talking about in the context of governance? Not personal routines, but ways of thinking and working that become automatic over time. Habits that shape how people approach decisions, interpret policy, and assess evidence for sufficiency and credibility.

Different work, different habits

For both board and staff members, these habits need to be integrated into work that is already taking place. Good governance practices do not become sustainable when they are treated like extra tasks or special occasions. They become sustainable when they are attached to existing routines — how agendas are prepared, how reports are written, how questions are framed, and how decisions are discussed.

The specific habits differ by role. For board members, good governance in action depends on transcending personal preference and developing the habit of abstracting up from specific events and situations to what policy does, or should, say. It also means listening for the values that underlie a question — rather than moving too quickly into detail. This kind of listening takes discipline, especially when situations appear to call for immediate solutions.

Meanwhile, staff members need habits of translating policy into interpretations, plans, and decisions, and of systemizing the collection of relevant evidence to demonstrate achievement of, or compliance with, board policy. For both board and staff members, these habits develop through repeated use in real situations, not as a result of one or two training exercises.

Where sustainability quietly settles

Unfortunately, the development of habits and governance skills takes time — often longer than board members’ terms, or their memories of the training experience and the reasons for adopting Policy Governance in the first place. As boards change in composition or mindset, much of the responsibility for sustaining the organization’s investment in governance shifts quietly to staff. Not because staff are meant to govern, but because they are closest to the day-to-day decisions, reporting, and evidence upon which accountability depends. Over time, staff become the translators, interpreters, and stabilizers of governance practice, often without shared language or structured support.

What good governance actually asks of us

The point of governing well is not to win awards for having good processes. Boards adopt Policy Governance for a reason: to do a better job of translating owners’ values and expectations into meaningful results. Those results might include healthy patients, well-equipped students, successful farmers, happy seniors, or highly skilled project managers. Achieving these results requires new mindsets, skillsets, and habits for both board members and staff. Cultivated consistently over time, these habits make good governance not a special event, but simply part of the furniture. Governance may never feel natural, but excellence is possible when board and staff habits are intentionally supported over time.

If this resonates, you may be interested in a new course I have created for CEOs, managers, and staff who support boards using Policy Governance. The Board EXCELerator: Management Edition focuses on how governance actually shows up in day-to-day work — interpreting policy, preparing monitoring reports, and sustaining accountability over time.

Inspiration for this post came from:

• conversations with members of the Xylem Group
• keynote speech by John Carver at the inaugural IPGA conference on June 4, 2004, “Transcending Ourselves: The Board’s Unique Contribution to Success“
• writings and advice of James Clear and Zachariah Salazar

See also: Tick, Tock! Time to Make Policy Governance Easier Already