Governance in Advocacy

Governance fatigue is real—many hear the word and think, here we

go again. Dr. Agota Szabo, shared the following key insights on how governance extends beyond rules to ensure an organization's long-term survival. More than that, it prevents the abuse of power: a concern that is all too real at the top.

Too often, governance becomes a compliance checklist: a result rather than a starting point. Organizations tend to fall into two categories: those that strive for meaningful governance, integrating it into strategy, and those constantly playing catch-up, reacting to regulatory requirements. As Dr. Szabo pointed out, the future will see a split between these two. Those who embrace governance as a strategic tool will lead, while those focused only on compliance will struggle to keep up.

Good governance frameworks are only as strong as the people implementing them. And here’s the issue: human nature resists structure. Governance, by design, limits individual influence in favor of collective oversight. This misalignment means that even the best governance structures require constant renewal. People naturally avoid conflict, which often leads to dysfunction. No one wants to have tough conversations about underperforming board members. But should organizations accept weak governance just to avoid discomfort? To deal with it, Dr. Agota Szabo suggests: "You have to focus on adaptability as a board and you constantly need to reassess and reevaluate what you do, what you can contribute, and if you have the right board members at the moment."

The solution starts with board selection and tenure. Conducting a critical needs assessment helps define what the board needs for the next 5–10 years. Reassessing board members based on future adaptability, and not just past contributions, ensures continued relevance.  Onboarding is another weak link. Most organizations introduce new members with standard details—history, stakeholders, structure—but fail to discuss values, ethics, and integrity. Without these conversations, governance is weakened before it even begins.

As Dr. Szabo noted, “What you have on paper and what you actually implement in the boardroom might be two very different things." Thus, effective board evaluation requires more than policy reviews—it demands observation. Executives and non-executives often clash, blurring governance roles. Strong governance ensures that everyone stays in their lane—executives execute, supervisors supervise.

Boards need meaningful evaluations beyond standardized forms. An external evaluator can pinpoint governance failures and guide change. But resistance is common. CEOs may welcome reform, only to face pushback from boards unwilling to acknowledge their own dysfunction.

Governance isn’t a box to check; it’s the foundation of advocacy, strategy, and long-term success.