Committee drift is gradual. A strategic committee starts drafting the content it should be evaluating. An oversight body begins managing the function it exists to monitor. Nobody voted to blur the roles; the drift happened because gaps appeared and conscientious volunteers filled them.
Why drift feels helpful and is not
Every hour a committee spends executing is an hour not spent on its chartered functions of strategic planning, oversight, and evaluation. Worse, a committee that authors the work cannot objectively approve it. The board ends up reviewing its own homework, and internal controls quietly weaken while everyone feels productive.
The diagnostic questions
Read each committee’s charter, then its last year of outputs. Do the outputs match the chartered responsibilities? Is the committee measuring its success against the charter at all? Where committees operate without demonstrating chartered function, a gap has opened between policy and practice, and that gap is where accountability disappears.
The repair
Restate charters in plain language with example activities that belong and do not belong. Require a brief annual charter compliance summary from each committee. Then fix the upstream role definition gaps that invited the drift, because committees fill vacuums; the durable fix is not discipline, it is design.
Mel Meier, DBA conducts board governance assessments for national and international member organizations, applying the Baldrige Excellence Framework alongside ASAE and BoardSource standards. She serves boards through board advisory, organizational diagnostics, and governance assessments at iB Consulting USA.
Mel Meier, DBA is an applied social scientist and the founder of iB Consulting USA, a woman owned, WOSB certified advisory firm. She advises boards, associations, and executive teams through board advisory, organizational diagnostics, speaking engagements in the United States and internationally, and organizational assessments.
