When the executive committee effectively assumes the responsibilities of the full board by acting as the only real and substantive agent of board governance, the governing board becomes dysfunctional; board members not on the executive committee are disenfranchised, and the board and president may never form the governance partnership necessary to achieve the strategic goals of the institution. So what can a board do once having identified the executive committee as the cause of the symptoms of its dysfunctional condition? How can the board stop using the executive committee as a band-aid that does little more than cover up the causes of its failure to perform at a high level? This article suggests that a board should construct a governance model that defines the role of the executive committee and sets clear goals and objectives for each board committee so that full board meetings can be devoted to substantive issues the committees already have vetted. It also suggests to consider organizing board agendas thematically so that each full board meeting deals with a specific group of topics. This will allow the board the time to develop a more collaborative and productive relationship with the president.