Oh Dear! The Board thinks its role is to make policy and regulations: "to decide the objectives, strategies and policies to be followed by CASA; and ensure that CASA performs its functions in a proper, efficient and effective manner."
Well that has stuffed it! As lectured by my own Board from time to time on Governance years ago, that is not the role of the Board. The Boards role is to ensure risk is competently managed by the senior management of CASA. That means that the Board doesn't decide anything, what it does is approve. If it decides things then it has entangled itself in the management of the business and can no longer function as a dispassionate oversight as risk manager.
To put that another way, if the Board so much as touches the steering wheel of the business, it becomes part of the management. That means ownership of projects and very, very tangled chains of command. Its a very great temptation particularly for pilots to want to get "hands on" but once you have touched something. you own it.
The Board should question the CEO about her corporate plan for the business to ensure she is managing risk. When they are satisfied they approve the plan.
As for major projects, the Board is entitled to query the CEO about them to again ensure they dovetail with the plan and that again risks are managed adequately. Now those projects are brought to the Board by the CEO not for approval but for scrutiny. If the Board doesn't like what it sees then after one or two such incidents, you fire the CEO for being a slow learner.
What has happened now, if the minutes are correct, is that the Board is now part of management, which diffuses the responsibility when things go wrong - a situation very much to the liking of senior management.
Well that has stuffed it! As lectured by my own Board from time to time on Governance years ago, that is not the role of the Board. The Boards role is to ensure risk is competently managed by the senior management of CASA. That means that the Board doesn't decide anything, what it does is approve. If it decides things then it has entangled itself in the management of the business and can no longer function as a dispassionate oversight as risk manager.
To put that another way, if the Board so much as touches the steering wheel of the business, it becomes part of the management. That means ownership of projects and very, very tangled chains of command. Its a very great temptation particularly for pilots to want to get "hands on" but once you have touched something. you own it.
The Board should question the CEO about her corporate plan for the business to ensure she is managing risk. When they are satisfied they approve the plan.
As for major projects, the Board is entitled to query the CEO about them to again ensure they dovetail with the plan and that again risks are managed adequately. Now those projects are brought to the Board by the CEO not for approval but for scrutiny. If the Board doesn't like what it sees then after one or two such incidents, you fire the CEO for being a slow learner.
What has happened now, if the minutes are correct, is that the Board is now part of management, which diffuses the responsibility when things go wrong - a situation very much to the liking of senior management.