·         CAJIL expanded its services and user base.

·         Recruitment began for younger members with relevant skills.

·         The addition of board members from various professional backgrounds, including economics, engineering, and medicine, has enhanced the board's capabilities.

Governance gaps-

·         Relying on a single leader.

·         No succession plan in place.

·         Aging membership.

·         Relying on voluntary board members with time restrictions.

·         Fifty-year project exceeds typical tenure of a board.

Question 1: What can we learn from this case study?

This case study highlights that all Boards need to align governance structures with organisational growth and long‑term strategic ambitions. CAJIL’s experience demonstrated that long‑serving and committed leadership can drive stability and growth, but over‑reliance on one individual poses governance risks and that constant evolution of a Board is necessary for long term success especially in CAJILs case where there is a very long term investment horizon.

The case study also illustrated the issues where the membership base begins to erode through time as it may not represent effectively the needs of the community which informs strategy.

The case study was an excellent example of the importance of all Boards included NFPs to engage in very deliberate succession planning, board renewal, and ensuring effective stakeholder engagement that is representative of the community the organisation serves.

What went well:

CAJIL benefited from a long‑serving, highly committed chair. The organisation recognised emerging governance risks and proactively began recruiting younger board members with diverse professional expertise, including economics, engineering, and medicine. The board also realised that the new investment project and its long investment timelines required stronger governance capacity and continuity.

The Governance gaps:

Clearly in what the Board focused on to correct, there was an issue regarding the over-reliance of a single individual whic is similar to what can occur in family business and its founder. As was discussed there was not enough separation between strategy and operations in the way the Chair managed the Board. The membership base had also not sufficiently evolved creating a range of ongoing governance risks. Succession planning was also not sufficient given the very long horizon of the investment project, that would have impacts on both investor and public confidence.

This case reinforces the importance of anticipating governance needs rather than being overly reactive. I am more in an operational role but the key takeaway is the necessity of embedding succession planning and leadership development well before transitions become urgent. So making sure you are constantly developing your people so that they are ready to take on more senior roles. As I have found with projects I have managed that have taken 4-5 years, it is important when possible to prioritise continuity, corporate memory, and adaptability that lives beyond a single point of failure in one person.

The case also highlights the value of regular board skills audits and planned board renewal to ensure the mix of expertise aligns with organisational strategy and risk exposure. Actively engaging and renewing membership or stakeholder bases is equally critical to maintaining accountability, legitimacy, and relevance.

As always we also need to ensure that there is clear frameworks in separating strategy with operational tactical implementations. When these are blured between boards and executive or in one role like they can in family businesses or some NFPs things can get messy with a range of organisational risks arising.

However, there were also several governance gaps. The organisation may have benefited from a board skills matrix to identify the capabilities required to support its strategic direction and guide board recruitment. There also appeared to be a need for a more informed and engaged membership base to ensure members understood the organisation's challenges and future needs. Increasing the number of board members may have provided greater diversity of skills, experience, and perspectives, as well, as spreading the workload.

The case study also highlights the value of investing in board capability. This could include allocating budget for director training to ensure board members have the knowledge and skills required to fulfil their responsibilities effectively. In addition, incorporating regular governance reviews, including annual assessments of the board's skills mix, to identify capability gaps and inform succession planning and recruitment in Board calendars.