The Fields Institute Turns Twenty-Five 170725 Final book with covers | Page 77

From Seedling to Maturity
55
At the outset, Board meetings tended to wrestle more
with stakeholder rights than with the future of the Institute.
Gradually, the Directorate and the non-affiliated Board
members were able to develop the sense that all members, no
matter where they came from, served on the Board in order to
advance the Institute as an Institute. The focus of the Board
shifted from stakeholder desires to the Institute’s needs.
Governance for the Future
The Institute places most normal governance issues in the
hands of its Board of Directors. The broad issues of shaping
the nature of the business would normally also rest in the
hands of the Board of Directors. In the case of the Fields
Institute, however, these issues are properly placed in the lap
of the Scientific Advisory Panel (SAP), an arrangement that
has worked exceedingly well.
I would recommend that the Board of Directors and the
Scientific Advisory Panel continue to fulfill their roles as they
have done, but that there also be periodic joint discussion so
that each entity has a better understanding of all the issues
facing the Institute.
Providing Long-Term Services through
Short-Term Funding
The Institute commits to providing specific services four or five
years into the future, while its funding sources are typically
defined for periods of not more than two or three years. With
respect to operations, this arrangement means the Institute
needs to plan for activity and make commitments three or four
years into the future without knowing if funding will be there.
Management must always allow for the distinct possibility that
funding sources might be curtailed or eliminated.