Yes, but it may too simple.
Despite that, I think it gives a quick way to describe Policy Governance.
You can think of it as "The What's Left Over Principle." First, there
are two organizational areas that need to be identified: Ends
and Means. The way this is
done is by first identifying the Ends
and what's left over are Means.
There are two types of Means: board
Means and executive Means.
The way these are identified is by first identifying the board Means
and what's left over are executive Means.
Within board Means, there are
Means decided by the whole board and
Means decided by the chair. The board
identifies what is theirs as a whole and what's left over is the chairs.
The board delegates authority to the executive by identifying everything
that is unacceptable and what's left over is acceptable.
Most other approaches
reverse this process. They start with the executive's Means,
and what's left over belongs to the board. The board delegates
authority by identifying what is acceptable and what's left over is
unacceptable. This probably doesn't hold for the Means
and Ends separation because few
organizations even identify Ends.
Everything for them is a Means.
This simple technique
provides a clarity that is not found in other governance approaches or even
management strategies. This clarity creates the increased
accountability that Policy Governance provides. It creates the control
and freedom that no other approach provides.