The case illustrates an aspect of board work that is seldom witnessed: a board's self-reflection exercise and the subsequent recognition that its governance practices need to be transformed. It also offers a great opportunity to engage in discussion about major theoretical issues, such as the debate about the effectiveness and positive impact of independent directors vis-à-vis shareholder/stakeholder board representation. At the practical level, the case opens a window on the efforts of progressive boards in building and establishing processes conducive to sound governance practices. The case provides a platform for organizations considering the transformation of their governance practices and is relevant to both non-profit and for-profit organizations. It encourages reflection about governance whatever the nature of the organization and thus illustrates the applicability of principles of corporate governance to non-profit/humanitarian organizations. The lessons drawn from this case- should also appeal to private companies since they highlight the challenges and opportunities that governance transformation presents. Some elements of the case have been disguised for reasons of confidentiality.

The case offers a great opportunity to engage in discussion about major theoretical issues, such as the debate about the benefits of effective governance for the competitiveness of firms vis-à-vis the negative effects of excessive regulation. At the practical level, the case opens a window on the efforts of progressive enterprises in adopting behaviors, and building and establishing processes conducive to their competitiveness. The case provides a platform for considering the strengthening of business competitiveness. It encourages reflection about competitiveness whatever the nature of the organization. The lessons drawn from this case, thus, could appeal to any company because they highlight the challenges and opportunities that the search for competitiveness brings.