One of the most frequent questions when working with a nonprofit on board development is “What is the best size for a board?”. It’s no surprise that there is no single correct answer, other than “it depends”. The roles of the board impact the size and composition to best suit those needs. Simple governance responsibilities don’t necessitate a large board, however a board active in resource development is more effective with a wide range of members and networks.
After their governance and fiduciary responsibilities typically the board’s primary role is in resource development. This is not something for “some” board members but should be
on the minds and in the efforts of all board members. Certainly, some board members have more contacts and/or experience in helping bring in resources, but there are activities in this area that all board members can participate in. It would seem that if maximizing funding is critical, then “the more the merrier” for board size. Not necessarily. If the organization has a robust staff, including development professionals, who can help engage board members in resource development, then a board of 40 would certainly be more effective than a smaller board.
However, that size board would overwhelm a smaller nonprofit with few staff who may have responsibilities in addition to resource development. A board of 12 or 15 may be more appropriate and effective. Once again, there would be no room for board members who do not engage in bringing in resources, but they should be just as effective as a larger board.
One significant advantage a larger board has is that the collective networks of 40 members would potentially engage more prospects than a smaller number of networks. However, all boards have the ability to engage volunteers in resource development whether or not they are on the board. Speaking from experience as both a board and staff member, I have seen extremely effective fund raisers who serve on committees and have the same passion for the organization (and sometimes more effectiveness than board members).
You also need to respect staff time; the reality is that a larger board is more work for staff. More efforts go into all aspects of board supports, communication, meetings, meeting follow ups, etc. There needs to be sufficient staff to support these activities and a high level of activity by board members to justify it.
