Quote Originally Posted by Pierre Dénommée View Post
On the contrary, I find the number to be very relevant. A board with only three directors is subject to hostile takeover bu a group of two friends who can disregard the work of the third director or even decide everything between themselves before the board meeting begins. Too many directors runs the risk of the failure to elect the minimum number of directors which is catastrophic for the organization.

More realistically, the mains problem of a too large board of directors is "deadwood". This can be eliminated with good Article of Incorporation and bylaws. Each Governor at Large should be assigned in writing responsibility such as chairman of a committee, get Federal funding, responsible of Chess in Prison... This would make possible to evaluate the Governor at Large and eventually remove him if none of his task has been done.

Furthermore, any project that has a supporter on the board of directors will usually advance much faster then a project without any support at the top.

Many information are labelled "Confidential" and cannot be shared with volunteers who are not on the board. A volunteer may not be able to help because the board cannot tell him all the truth.

Last, a board member will feel more implication then a mere volunteer.

I believe the minimum number of directors is one and practically three if we are a soliciting corporation or receive funds from public bodies like the federal government which is not yet the case.