A cordial CEO and chair relationship can conceal significant operating ambiguity. Both people may be committed to the organization and still hold different assumptions about who frames the agenda, when directors should be consulted, and which concerns belong between meetings.
The board reads the relationship continuously. When the signals differ, directors hedge. They defer matters they should settle, second-guess matters they should not, and route work toward whichever office seems more receptive.
An operating agreement does not make the relationship bureaucratic. It makes the informal practice visible enough to survive pressure and transition.
The useful questions are concrete: Who decides what reaches the agenda? What information does the chair see before the packet? When does a management issue become a board issue? How will disagreement between the two offices be handled without recruiting the board into it?
Goodwill lowers friction. It does not define authority.