What really drives the decisions trustees make? And do these motivations impact the quality of the decisions that are made?
For the first time, research has provided evidence that the answer to these questions could be the key to transforming charity board effectiveness across the UK.
A ground-breaking study by University of Bath, sponsored by the Charity Excellence Framework/Ian McLintock and supported by Nigel Kippax, has revealed a startling truth: trustees motivated by genuine passion for their charity's mission make significantly more effective decisions and demonstrate stronger alignment with organisational purpose.
Perhaps more surprisingly, the research found that trustees driven by external motivations, such as career advancement, networking opportunities, or personal recognition, not only show no improvement in decision-making effectiveness but actually negatively impact mission alignment.
The findings challenge conventional wisdom in trustee recruitment and could reshape how the UK's 170,500 registered charities select their board members.
The heart versus head divide
The research team surveyed 242 charity trustees and analysed responses from an additional 748 participants through the Charity Excellence Framework benchmarking surveys.
Using sophisticated statistical analysis, they measured what they termed 'intrinsic motivation' (heart-driven commitment to social mission) versus 'extrinsic motivation' (head-driven focus on personal benefits such as reputation or career development).
The results were unequivocal. Trustees with higher intrinsic motivation demonstrated statistically significant improvements in decision-making effectiveness and mission alignment. The research showed that 6.5% of the variation in decision-making effectiveness could be attributed directly to intrinsic motivation levels – a meaningful relationship in governance research.
Conversely, extrinsic motivation showed no relationship with decision-making effectiveness. More worryingly, it demonstrated a clear negative relationship with mission alignment, suggesting that trustees driven by external rewards may prioritise considerations beyond the charity's core purpose.
Why this matters
The research underpins a fundamental shift in our understanding of board effectiveness and decision-making and has implications for those recruiting to charity boards.
While skills and experience remain important, the study suggests that a candidate's genuine connection to the mission may be the most critical factor in determining their future effectiveness as a trustee.
The researchers concluded: ‘Rather than prioritising professional experience or sector background, charities should focus on the intrinsic motivation of candidates during trustee selection.
‘The research indicates that mission-driven trustees make more effective decisions which are more aligned with the core purpose of the charity, regardless of organisational size or professional background.’
Trustees who are 'trophy hunting' or primarily seeking to enhance their CVs – concerns raised repeatedly in the qualitative research – may inadvertently undermine board effectiveness, even if they possess impressive professional credentials.
The voluntary challenge
The research also uncovered a generational divide in how the voluntary nature of trusteeship affects engagement. Older trustees, often more financially secure and frequently retired, experience less impact from the unpaid nature of the role.
In contrast, younger professionals may struggle with competing career and family pressures, leading to reduced engagement in board decision-making processes.
The data revealed that 60% of trustees agreed that the voluntary nature of trusteeship impacts the quality or speed of decisions. Respondents noted that ‘voluntary obligations are not as highly prioritised as their professional obligations’ and that the unpaid nature of the role makes it ‘morally difficult to demand time from members.’
Critically, the voluntary nature also makes it more difficult to recruit highly skilled professionals and to hold trustees accountable for performance – challenges that resonate across the sector.
Read more about the arguments for and against paying trustees.
Three key recommendations
Based on these findings, the research team offers three practical recommendations for charity boards:
- Foster intrinsic motivation through regular beneficiary stories, flexible governance roles that allow trustees to contribute according to their strengths, and concise board reports that make engagement rewarding rather than burdensome.
- Develop motivation profiling processes that prioritise intrinsic motivation during recruitment while ensuring cognitive diversity across age, background, and experience. The research suggests using structured interviews to assess candidates' genuine connection to the mission alongside their professional qualifications.
- Mitigate the voluntary burden by providing time flexibility through hybrid meetings and mentorship programmes, particularly supporting younger trustees facing competing professional and family demands.
Looking ahead
This study represents the first phase of ongoing research that will examine how individual trustee motivations impact collective board decision-making. The team plans to explore whether there is an optimal trustee board structure with the right balance of motivations and experience.
For now, the message is clear: the most effective charity boards are not necessarily those with the most impressive CVs, but those composed of trustees who genuinely care about the cause.
In an era of increasing scrutiny on charity governance, understanding what drives trustee decision-making has never been more important.
The full research report is available openly to organisations and individuals seeking to improve charity board effectiveness.
For more information, contact Nigel Kippax.
About the research
The study was conducted by a team of undergraduates at Bath University under academic supervision, with 242 survey responses and extensive qualitative insights from the Charity Excellence Framework.
The research employed mixed-methods analysis including linear regression, ordinal regression, and thematic analysis to provide robust findings on trustee motivation and decision-making.
The University of Bath research team were: The research team Thomas Batesonl; Jasper; Child-Broadbent; Olivia Corrick; Joe Linsky; Jasper Miles and Jenil Shah.