Why Boards Should Play a Bigger Role in Building an Impact Roadmap

Strategic planning has been getting a lot of attention lately, and for good reason. Mike Burns recently explored this topic in Nonprofit Pro, raising questions about how nonprofit boards participate in shaping organizational direction. His argument is simple: boards cannot treat strategic planning as a staff assignment that shows up as a completed document for approval. If strategic planning reflects governance, then a board that stands on the sidelines is not governing the way it should.

That point is hard to brush aside. Yet the broader question is worth pressing even further. If strategic planning is such a core part of board leadership, what exactly should boards be planning for? And does the traditional planning model even help them fulfill that responsibility?

At SureImpact, we have been encouraging nonprofits to rethink the planning process altogether. In a recent post, we introduced the concept of an impact roadmap and asked whether it may offer a stronger alternative to traditional planning structures. Many boards claim they want to be more data informed, more aligned with community needs, and more focused on mission. Yet strategic plans often steer them toward operational checklists instead of outcomes.

So if boards want to show real leadership, why cling to planning practices that rarely drive mission progress?

This is where the Burns article and the impact roadmap discussion intersect. Both point to a simple truth: boards must engage deeply, ask harder questions, and anchor their decisions in evidence rather than habit.

Below is a closer look at what that can look like in practice.

Rethinking the Board’s Role in Planning

The Burns article highlights three specific junctures where board participation is essential during any planning effort. These also happen to be the points most closely tied to impact measurement, which makes them highly relevant for organizations shifting from traditional strategic plans to impact roadmaps.

Here are the three moments Burns identifies, along with why they matter even more for outcome driven planning.

1. Identifying Strategic Issues and Data

If a board wants to lead effectively, then it must be willing to challenge assumptions. What problems are truly strategic? Which issues reflect mission risk? Which data sources are reliable enough to guide decisions?

Boards sometimes prefer to skip this stage and accept staff recommendations without much debate. But identifying strategic issues is not a ceremonial exercise. The value lies in the questions board members ask:

• Are we seeing the full picture of the problem?

• Do we have data or only intuition?

• Are we treating symptoms instead of root causes?

This is where impact measurement becomes a powerful tool. Without strong outcomes data, boards are left to guess whether their programs or strategies are working. With an impact roadmap, identifying strategic issues becomes a data anchored activity rather than a theoretical discussion.

2. Reviewing or Renewing the Organization’s Theory of Change, Mission, Vision, and Values

The second juncture asks boards to revisit the organization’s foundational framework. This is not a rubber stamp situation. The board is responsible for ensuring that the mission reflects both community needs and organizational capability. But reviewing a theory of change also requires clarity on measurable results. If a board updates a mission statement but cannot articulate how success will be measured, what has actually changed?

This is where the roadmap approach becomes more practical than a static plan. Instead of rewriting mission and vision statements that sit untouched for three to five years, an impact roadmap forces continuous validation. Boards must ask whether their programs, partnerships, and investments support measurable results aligned with the mission.

A skeptical board member might ask: If we claim this is our mission, where is the evidence our programs are achieving it?

That question is healthy. It keeps organizations working towards mission-critical goals.

3. Considering and Acting on Strategic Goals Based on Data Analysis

A board cannot meaningfully set goals without understanding what the organization can actually achieve. Burns reinforces this point by emphasizing the CEO’s role in supplying information but not leading the strategic planning process. This balance is important. Staff understand operational realities. Boards hold responsibility for long-term direction.

When the planning process shifts from strategic plans to impact roadmaps, this stage becomes even more consequential. Roadmap goals are not merely aspirational. They rely on outcomes data that shows what works, what does not, and where improvement is needed.

If the board is reviewing outcomes data regularly, then setting or revising strategic goals becomes a disciplined process instead of a creative writing exercise.

Why Boards Need Mission Focused Metrics to Lead Effectively

These planning responsibilities point directly back to the argument that boards cannot govern meaningfully if they only look at financial statements. There is no shortage of boards that spend 70 percent of their meeting time on budget updates, fundraising performance, or compliance tasks, while mission indicators receive a few minutes at the end.

This imbalance undermines not only planning but also accountability. If mission progress is barely discussed, how can anyone be held responsible for delivering it?

In a recent post, we highlighted five specific practices that help boards shift from inputs to outcomes. Two of those recommendations connect especially well to the conversation at hand.

Allocate Board Time to Mission Critical Activities

Jane Wei Skillern and Mary Kooistra argue that boards must intentionally design agendas that protect space for strategic thinking. That means setting aside time specifically for reviewing outcomes data and understanding impact trends.

Boards that do this gain a clear advantage during planning. They arrive at the process already familiar with evidence, not guessing about what needs attention.

Reframe Accountability and Success

Boards must redefine success in terms of how individuals and communities are better off, not simply how the budget looks at the end of the quarter.

This is precisely why impact roadmaps are gaining traction. A roadmap does not outline tasks or operational priorities. It ties every action to a measurable change in someone’s life. A board that embraces this mindset becomes far more effective in fulfilling its fiduciary duty.

Where Boards Often Struggle

There is no denying that some boards hesitate when the conversation turns to outcomes. Burns mentions this indirectly when describing boards that avoid strategic planning during times of uncertainty. But reluctance often stems from something else: discomfort with data.

Boards may fear that outcomes data will expose program weaknesses, challenge deeply held beliefs, or require new investments. Yet avoiding data does not protect an organization. It only shields it from the information needed to improve.

The more direct question boards should ask is: If we claim to serve our community, how do we know we are succeeding?

Impact measurement is not a luxury. It is a governance responsibility.

Why Boards Should Champion the Impact Roadmap Movement

The case for impact roadmaps is not theoretical. When organizations commit to measurement, learning, and accountability, they see real gains. Data strengthens fundraising, improves program quality, and aligns staff around shared goals. SureImpact clients have seen this firsthand.

Boards can either drive this transformation or slow it down. The choice often comes down to whether they are willing to reexamine long-standing habits.

Are traditional strategic plans helping boards lead? Or are they simply familiar documents that take pressure off the harder work of measuring results?

Boards that embrace the impact roadmap approach signal something important: they are ready to govern with intention, evidence, and transparency.

A Call to Action

If your board is committed to building a culture of measurement and aligning planning with mission impact, the next step is to equip yourself with the right tools and frameworks.

Download The Ultimate Guide to Impact Measurement to strengthen your board’s ability to track results, ask better questions, and guide your organization with confidence.