The Governance Shift: Rethinking Value, Purpose and Power

How Boards Can Lead Organisations That Drive — Not Harm — Long-Term Wellbeing

At the invitation of Envisia, Bucharest welcomed Dr. Victoria Hurth, one of the most influential voices in the global governance transformation movement, during the 2025 Future of Boards Gala. A governance expert and academic with a long-standing contribution to standards that redefine the role of organizations in society, Dr. Hurth has worked with 77 countries and 25 liaisons to develop ISO 37000 — the first global benchmark for good governance — and continues this work by leading the development of ISO 37011 on governance of purpose-driven organizations.

Her presence in Romania came at a moment when the local conversation around governance is shifting from formal compliance to value-creation, accountability and long-term wellbeing. In her own words, her mission is to help leaders “govern organizations, systems and themselves so that they drive, and do not harm, long-term wellbeing for all.” This philosophy underpins her latest book, Beyond Profit: Purpose-Driven Leadership for a Wellbeing Economy, co-authored with Professor Lorenzo Fioramonti, now available for pre-order.

Following her intervention in Bucharest, we spoke with Dr. Hurth about what it truly means to govern with purpose, how boards can evolve beyond traditional notions of performance, and why driving and not harming wellbeing may define the next chapter of global competitiveness.

1. In the panel at the Future of Boards Gala, you described governance as “the architecture of decision-making. ”How can boards practically redesign this architecture so that direction, oversight, and accountability align around long-term wellbeing?

Boards are directing, overseeing and accounting for the organisation – they are accountable for this, and it is the role of governance. However, it is usually not done consciously – and if it isn’t done consciously then that means it probably isn’t being done well and that it is probably being done in ways that are ‘normal’.

Yet normal is not best practice and the norm (as I will outline later) is to make decisions that harm society as a whole and don’t use the innovative opportunity to drive positive outcomes.  So, the first step is for a board to educate itself on what, really, it is to direct, oversee and be accountable and then what it is to do this well.

ISO37000 sets this out clearly. For example, recognizing that organisational direction is two key things – what value the organisation ultimate exists to generate AND the boundaries that the governing body believe shouldn’t be crossed in the process to protect important value. This includes not taking more than a certain about of risk, not breaching certain ways of behaving (values) and keeping within the law, and within certain levels to keep systems healthy e.g. CO₂ emissions.

These boundaries of value protection need to be turned into parameters for decision-making so that they can be overseen and accounted for – and so that organisational decision-makers can be free innovate with in a frame that is clear but also has as many degrees as possible of freedom possible.

2. You often say that “if direction is wrong, oversight only makes us better at doing the wrong thing.” What helps a board or leadership team recognize when their direction is wrong — and what can they do about it?

Organisational direction is the absolute core board responsibility – the foundation… the fundamental reason the organisation exists and what it wants to protect in the process.  Then the governing body communicates this to the rest of the organisation through policies – and how they act as a board. They can direct the organisation at the very outermost level of the organisational goal and parameters, or they can create a strategic layer below.

This involves making assumptions about HOW to achieve the goal within the parameters and turn this into the direction for the CEO and organisation to execute. This strategy is normally agreed in conversation with CEO or proposed by the CEO – either way it is the board who signs off on it.  But it is important to remember that there is a layer more foundational than strategy and this goal and parameters is what the board need to make sure is right as it affects everything else.

What then does it mean to have the wrong direction? Firstly, the strategy could be ‘wrong’ – in that strategy is merely ‘how, given the context I face, can I maximize the goal within the parameters’ – maybe the strategy chosen is wrong because it isn’t in fact the best option, but the organisation is now stuck on this path. This is why strategy should be enabled to be as agile as possible – because the context is constantly changing. But even if the strategy is optimal – if the ultimate value generation goal and parameters are ‘wrong’ then the strategy is also wrong.

Then what does it mean to have a wrong organizational goal and parameters? We can think of them as wrong if they harm and don’t innovate something good for the society and the environmental context that the organisation is enabled by. In other words, if the goal wasn’t to produce something that really made the lives of current and future generations better, and if this was generated in a way that harmed these lives in the process.

The problem is that many boards don’t even think about the fact that these aspects are their choice and responsibility and that they often start with strategy and assume the goal and parameters – taking direction from the CEO and rubber stamping it.

3. Many leaders still see profit as proof of good governance. How can they shift to a mindset where profit is a means, not the end?

The first thing we need to get straight in our minds is that profit is two things in organisations. Firstly, there can be profit maximization as the goal – here it is the reason the organisation exists and the goal that decisions are anchored to. Then there is always profit as the means to the end – health stocks and flows of financial capital so that there is enough excess of financial capital to 1) pay the bills 2) meet the expectations of stakeholders (including shareholders) and 3) to invest in the reason the organisation exists.

The second – profits as a means to an end – is always vital and a sign of good governance – for any organisation. Even NGOs, charities and households need an excess of financial capital to exist.

It is the first aspect – profit maximization – that has become THE marker of good governance, when this is highly problematic. To understand why it is a problem starts with remembering what we already know to be true – that money is a purely symbolic good. It has no actual value beyond the paper – and not even that these days. Its actual value in the real value that it represents. This means that, just factually, profits can only ever be a means to an end and not the actual end point of innovation.

We have created a huge problem for our boards, leaders, and ourselves as human beings on planet earth because we have de facto asked board to pretend that a goal of profit maximization is a valid and default ultimate reason for an organisation to exist and to innovate FOR this goal.

Ironically, we do this to be purpose-driven – because the only reason we buy into profit maximization is because we have accepted a whole range of assumptions about how markets and humans work to optimize wellbeing which rests on each person and organisation pursuing financial self-interest. However, by doing this we limit the scope of our strategic horizon to only those things that make the most money with the least risk – and the main thing we protect in the process is our stocks and flows of financial capital.

This means our human enterprising spirit and creativity has been channeled in ways that completely overlook massive opportunities to drive the goal of the economy as a whole (collective wellbeing over time) and we don’t value, count and strategize in ways that protect non-financial capitals inputs into the organisation, the health of stakeholders or the health of the social and environmental systems which underpin it all.

This is limiting what we are capable while destroying our shared assets. This is why we have an unsustainable world where scientists are screaming at us that our wellbeing is under existential threat. Hence, it isn’t an overexaggeration to say that if we want a positive future then we need to anchor the goal of any organisation to a contribution to the end goal of the economy – not profit maximization – and we better do it quickly if we don’t want to descend in command-and-control in a rapidly declining global system.

From ISO 37000 to “Beyond Profit”

4. You led the development of ISO 37000, which reframed governance around value creation and wellbeing. How does Beyond Profit build on that global framework?

ISO37000 was an extensive and long process to bring the world together to decide the core foundations of governance and how govern well. It actively involved 77 countries and 25 liaisons including the IFC and the UN and was signed off by 164 countries. This gives us the core language to be able to even think about asking the ultimate practical question humanity can ask – how do we govern organisations, of any kind, so that they drive and do not harm long-term wellbeing for all – in other words a purpose-driven organisation?  This is what the ISO in Purpose-Driven Organisations (ISO37011) is there is answer.

Beyond Profit is a book about how we transform to having this purpose-driven governance at all levels of the system we exist in – so at the MACRO level in terms of how we govern the economy as a whole, then at the MESO level how we govern organisations (including government) so that they operationalize the goal of the economy. Then at the most powerful level of the MICRO – ourselves as individual leaders. Governing ourselves to be purpose-driven is the energy source that drives the rest…

So – the book rests on the foundations of ISO37000 to show how good governance manifests at the MACRO, MESO and MICRO levels to drive long-term wellbeing for all.

5. What prompted you to co-author Beyond Profit now? Was there a specific moment that made you realize this message needed to reach a wider audience?

I have published many things over the last 25 years or so and while I was asked to write a book a few times it always felt like a bit of an ego project to just get something in book form with my name on it. I promised myself I would only write a book when it was clear it was THE strategy required. I had to figure out all the core questions I had had for three decades before I could be in a for it to be the right strategy.

I will never stop learning new things, but the learnings started to get very stable about 7 years ago and then I tested them far and wide across the world in conversations with many thousands of people since then. At that point I knew that if I wanted to get the message out beyond boardrooms and conference auditoriums then I needed to write a book.

Around the time I realised that I was having conversations with both my co-authors separately about two books – but it became clear that this was one whole system change – and needed one book. I believe the time is ripe for this book – the world is ready to face what they know already to be true and come together to lead for the transformation required.

6. What do you hope board members and executives will do differently after reading the book — in the boardroom, but also in their organizations’ cultures and strategies?

I hope they will commit themselves to a journey of deepened questioning about the world around them – what has been, and is happening to the world around us? What have we accepted to be true but now needs to be questioned? How of kilter is our relationship with other life on earth? How much power compared to most other people in the world do we have?

Wellbeing Economy and the Role of Boards

7. You and Professor Fioramonti spoke about moving from GDP to wellbeing indicators. What concrete role do you see for boards in shaping that shift — both in public and private sectors?

Across the world, countries are starting to measure the end goal of the economy – long-term wellbeing for all, rather than focusing on money as if it tells us whether the economy is successful or not. At least 70% of all OECD countries are estimated to be measuring wellbeing outcomes. We cover a summary of this progress in our book.

Normally these metrics are gathered through large scale surveying of the population and not surprisingly – because as humans we have universal needs which are achieved in a wider variety of ways – the foundational metrics tend to be very similar across countries.

These advances in country level measurement of economic success are merely a way of assessing if all the decisions in organisations are working to create the outcomes we want. It isn’t possible for countries to drive these outcomes without companies focused on generating and protecting this value (which is what a purpose-driven organisation is).

Equally it isn’t possible for countries to make decisions about what policy would be in the public interest to drive progress without companies finding ways to account for how far they are driving and not harming these outcomes.

In practical terms, boards do at least two key things to support this wholescale shift.

1) They can collaborate to lobby governments to become governed as the purpose-driven organisations we assume they are. This will support a system level flywheel that makes other action by boards much easier.

2) Regardless of whether they are purpose-driven or not, they can start to measure how they are driving or harming these wellbeing outcomes. This requires understanding of what drives the wellbeing of the society and nature – many of the key aspects are covered in our book. It then requires asking in ways they are driving positive or negative outcomes through the decisions and actions they take. This is what the ESG agenda is supposed to be leading to – but it remains irrational to organisations trapped in a ‘business-as-usual’ short-term self-interest approach (Logic 1).

3) They can all read our book and prepare for ISO370011 so that they can diagnose how far away with aligning a sustainable future they really – and how far towards alignment they want to be.

8. How do we measure “wellbeing for all” in practice? Are there governance indicators or design principles that boards can adopt right now?

In practice this means measuring two things:

• What value you are generating consciously as your purpose which improves long-term wellbeing for all AND
• Measuring any harms done to the environmental and social systems that underpin long-term wellbeing for all. Here actions to say become net zero are counted as a reduction in harm. Only once you get to doing not harm can you count beyond this as ‘doing good’. At this point, logically this would need to be your purpose otherwise it would be irrational to divert resources to doing good beyond a baseline.

The second aspect is essentially what ESG is working on. The basis of what and how to measure is starting to be detailed in, for example all the EU’s ESRS legislation. These standards don’t cover the full range of issues though and it is important that the governing body educated itself on all the systems we rely on, what state these are in and how its decisions affect them.  This also includes measuring harms to stakeholders and being clear what are the lines you don’t want to cross (which informs your values).

For the first aspect it is vital for the board to be continually educating itself about what is wellbeing, specifically for those it serves through its innovations and to understand its potential to drive (and avoid harm -aspect 2 above) through those innovations. Only by doing that can it make sure that its measures are useful and not getting in the way.

9. In your view, what distinguishes the boards that are already on this path — what do they do differently?

• They never talk about financial success without continuing to why that financial success matters in a meaningful sense that is anchored to collective long-term wellbeing.
• Understand it is their role to set and achieve the overall organisational direction and don’t defer that to the CEO.
• Understand that they exist because society allows them to. Hence if they aren’t properly aligned with the long-term best interests of that society, then they are breaking that social contract and the foundations of being a fiduciary acting in good will – regardless of the fact this is currently interpreted as maximising profits. As our environmental and social systems continue to collapse this is bound to change – and we are already seeing signs in high court judgements.
• See legal risk in a long-term broad sense and ensure their legal counsel has the same view – hence are willing to test the law where it works against collective wellbeing rather than interpreting it in a limited short-term self-interest sense.
• Ask different and deeper questions about why and what they are doing
• Have different information in the room – ensure that they are informed by and about all key stakeholders. They understand what good quality and inadequate information looks like but can take decisions based on the information they have – but work hard to improve the quality, diversity and accuracy of the information they use to take decisions.
• They have diagnosed where their, and the influential stakeholders in their orbit, are in terms of their core governance logic (we outline the 3 logics in our book).

The Human Side of Governance

10. You said, “Leadership means having the courage to shape a future that doesn’t yet exist. “Where do leaders find that courage — especially when change feels risky or unpopular?

Leadership is an act of courage. To enable and encourage others to move in a certain direction to a future that isn’t yet real – until we make it. I would highlight two key routes to courage for leaders.

Firstly, they can tap into their ability to be purpose-driven leaders where their actions are primarily about serving the good of others and not themselves. In our book we discuss how they can go on this journey and why this provides huge amounts of unlimited energy and courage to act in ways that previously seemed too scary. By tapping into what really matters we find that our fears become insignificant compared to the positive outcomes we could achieve. History (and books like Man’s Search for Meaning by Vitor Frankl) shows us that people are willing to be far more courageous for others than they would be if it was for themselves.

Second, and complementary to the first, they can build the foundations of courage in a more technical way.  In my assessment of behavioral theory there are two key things that can build courage.

Firstly community. The reason norms are such a powerful driver of behaviour is because we want to know we are acting in a way that aligns with others. We feel much more psychologically safe when this is the case.

However, people can’t unify around nothing – which is why, secondly, we need clarity about where we are heading. This drives courage, because it gives us the solid platform to lead from and if this clarity is gained collectively then it also enables people to come together and understand and test the depth of the shared norm.

For both community and clarity, leaders can lean on the book we have written which provides a solid foundation, drawing from decades of research about what is at stake, why acting to be purpose-driven governance provides a clear logical path forwards and evidence of the fact this is already becoming the new norm. They can join our LinkedIn book community to be part of a group with so many other leaders on this journey.  Connected to this they can rest on the standards in governance (ISO37000) and the forthcoming ISO37011) as globally credible clarifications of the new norm.

11. What qualities or disciplines help a board member stay anchored in purpose when short-term pressures dominate?

There are many – and these are covered in the book but here I would like to highlight that humanity underpins all of them. To be human is to be many things, but wanting to leave a positive legacy and to feel good about ourselves and our time on this planet are universal. So, if board members can remember they are, first and foremost, human beings with more power than most to change the course of the history of humanity and life on earth – that will help immensely. That might sound grand, but it is just facts that matter to all board decision-making – from what to pay the CEO, what markets to enter and what procurement decisions to make.

12. What does collective clarity mean in the context of governance, and how can boards cultivate it?

This means a shared sense of direction and of what needs to be protected in the process. This needs to be grounded in the practicalities of the organisation but always in the context of the ultimate governance frame (long-term wellbeing for all) that all companies need to operate consciously within if we are going to ensure that our companies do something useful and doesn’t just asset strip collective good for short term financial gain.

It can be cultivated by education of board members on this ultimate frame and the role of the organisation within in it – in a very scientific technical sense. This includes a deep understanding of the current economic system companies are operating in and providing spaces where boards can build their collective clarity together and then with stakeholders, about what needs to change about the system as a whole and how the company can be part of the vanguard.

Looking Forward

13. How do you envision the future of governance if the ideas in Beyond Profit are truly embraced — what would success look like in 2035?

All organisations would be governed by individuals who have developed themselves, through good self-governance, to be purpose driven. They would use their energy, clarity and focus to help lead high performing purpose-driven organisations where stakeholders were seen as being integral to how the organisation works and what the value of the organisation is, and can be, in the world.

To enable this, legislation would have taken the great starting point that legislative efforts like Public Benefit Corporations and similar have created, and move much further to require all organisations to drive and not harm collective long-term wellbeing and to situate profit firmly as a means to an end – with shareholder returns and wages capped at a reasonable amount (like OpenAI did) and risky ventures with massive wellbeing return potential de-risked by government.

This would mean one base constitution for all organisations (including government) which held this strong, innovative and safe outer frame. Within that we may have flavours of shareholding, like we do now, but all within an overarching purpose-driven frame.

With a government that is governed to be purpose-driven as we expect them to be (this governance system will be outlined in ISO37011) then the economy would naturally become a Wellbeing Economy.

The economy is the most powerful tool of society because it organises how we transform and allocate resources across society as a whole – and we delegate to government to govern on our behalf and to utilise the economy to achieve our collective long-term wellbeing.

They would not allow organisations to exist unless they had a plan to generate proper value and business model to do that which can operate within thresholds of healthy systems (e.g. health water cycles, ecosystem health, healthy climate, healthy soils, healthy societies)

14. What role could countries like Romania play in advancing the Wellbeing Economy, given their stage of institutional transformation?

Romania is in a strong position to drive forwards on this agenda.  It has already transformed from a communist country and the experience the country has of making such a big change means it has the social infrastructure and skills for further transformation that other countries may lack. It also means that many norms are likely to still be in flux and not set in concrete like they are for others. Romania is therefore in a great position to leapfrog its toxic problems of our current economic assumptions and set its own path based on what it means for Romanians to have high levels of wellbeing.

Chasing after financial income as the route to success isn’t even working for advanced economies – GDP has all but stagnated, high margins are very hard to get and as we chase money, we know we are loading massive costs that this income then needs to pay for. It is a road to no-where fast and I see Romania as a forward-looking country able to redefine a new path where it can succeed – in real terms.

15. Finally, if there were one question you’d like every board to ask itself at the start of each year, what would it be?

How will be make sure that this organisation is useful to the collective long-term wellbeing and how will be improve our governance to ensure this?

The event was made possible thanks to the partners who share Envisia’s vision for responsible leadership:

Visionary Partners — BRD Romania, ProTV

Ally Partners — Electrica SA, Transgaz

Contributor Partners — SAI Muntenia Invest, RomGaz, Ursus Breweries, Regina Maria, Evergent Investment, Moore Romania, Raiffeisen Bank, Adrem, Patria Bank, Electrocentrale Borzești, Returo

Institutional Partners — Bucharest Stock Exchange, General Secretariat of the Government, Family Business Network, Romanian Association of Fund Managers, Aspen Institute Romania, British Romanian and French Romanian Chambers of Commerce, ROREG – Association of Regional Development Agencies, ROPEA

Venue Partner — InterContinental Athénée Palace, part of the Ana Hotels Group

Creative Partners — InterAct, Future Station, Public Affairs Solutions, Enache Pirtea & Asociații, Positive Communication

Together, these partners contribute to strengthening an ecosystem of ethical leadership, sustainable performance, and trust.

About Envisia

Envisia is the first business school in Central and Eastern Europe dedicated to the professionalization of board members and governance leaders.

Its mission is to cultivate responsible leadership at the highest level — supporting chairpersons, non-executive directors, and senior executives to lead with purpose, ethics, and long-term vision.

Through accredited postgraduate programs, professional certifications, and international partnerships with Henley Business School – University of Reading (UK), the Romanian American University, and other prestigious institutions, Envisia develops the competencies, discernment, and vision needed to navigate today’s complex governance landscape.

Please follow and like us: