Most incorporated associations are required by law to have a board of directors, with at least three elected members. It's possible to have an official board and follow Future Governance, but only if the board is dedicated to the model and willing mostly limit their role to being a "rubber stamp" approving of Executive decisions, and ensuring the by laws are followed. Oversight of the Executive is provided by the Reporter and regular evaluation panels, of which board members could participate, along with randomly selected members. Board meetings would be minimized and board member activities would otherwise be equal to that of other members, along with providing any officially required signatures.
There is a question of legal liability that still needs to be resolved.
There are steps an association could take to experiment and move towards a full Future Governance model, while maintaining their existing board governance system:
That said, the efficiencies and clear independent accountability of roles from the Future Governance model that come from not having a board of directors will not be gained while the board remains in active authority.
Additionally, a board is by definition the highest authority with little to no obligation to conduct or heed the opinions of members beyond at an annual meeting or perhaps receiving a petition, depending on by-laws. As long as there is a board, there is no requirement or guarantee participation will be taken seriously. Inertia and "natural" political forces will most likely return governance to old exclusive/representative/non-participatory models.
It entirely depends on the size and context of the association and the expectations of the roles. There would be a big difference from little school or neighbourhood association to an international professional organization. At a minimum one could expect the following: