Its not about teaching what to do or not to do.

Its about teaching how to evaluate what your company needs and what your board can provide. It's about vision and evaluation rather than correctness.

Typically we pragmatists consider guiding the company to avoid implosion as a criterion for a successful board.

Once you've got a company with no product and you're committing fraud to stay alive, what would the point be of staffing a board to tell you to kill yourself? What would you get out of that?

Do you think Theranos just didn't realize anything was wrong because the board didn't tell them?