![]()
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Source: Consulting Today Published: 2003 The departure of a nonprofit executive director signals a period of organizational upheaval, regardless of whether the separation was voluntary or involuntary. An executive transition is the time between the announcement of the departure of Executive A and the arrival and acclimatization of Executive B. This period can be unnerving and counterproductive for organization's staff, Board of Directors, and stakeholders. For the Board, the executive's departure may seem like a crisis, and how they deal transition may have lasting effect on the organization - for better or worse. We have observed the following human behaviors common to executive transitions: Increasing Conflict. It's common to see an increase in "acting out" and unhealthy, inappropriate behaviors as staff and boards struggle to find meaning in the departure, e.g., complaining, arguing, or absenteeism. Power plays aplenty. As the saying goes, "nature abhors a vacuum" and transitions provide fertile ground for those who pursue formal/informal power. Staff, boards, and stakeholders can be seen jockeying for positions of power, such as staff circumventing the chain of command or grabbing for territory, titles, and budgets. (Those individuals requiring a more structured environment may appear to be grabbing for power when, in reality, it's a coping mechanism designed to decrease their anxiety and increase stability.) Turnover: a near certainty. Changes in staff, board members, volunteers, and vendors increase during transitions. The loss of a CEO offers a relatively easy way out for individuals who are unhappy, feel undervalued, loyal to the CEO, or planned to leave anyway. One client saw 50% of their staff resign, while another saw several vendors terminate their contracts, because the client was too time intensive. Emotions run high. The Board, staff, and stakeholders have relationships with departing executives and the departure creates feelings of loss. It's common for people to go through the stages of grief similar to when a person dies: denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance, even if the relationship with the departing executive wasn't positive. Regardless of who is feeling what, emotions are running high and must be attended to and managed. If the executive was terminated, staff may experience survivor syndrome- feeling guilty about keeping their jobs. They may even wonder, "Am I next?" This can result in staff keeping a low profile and further reducing the organization's effectiveness. Fuzzy chain of command. The organization feels unstable to staff and they look to the board to make things feel "safe." Boards in their effort to support staff, run the risk of over-stepping their authority and create unhealthy dynamics for the incoming executive. In one client system, the Board felt badly about the departure of their CEO, whom they liked. Despite the Board hiring an interim executive director to manage its day-to-day affairs, board members began trying to resolve individual staff complaints. One staff person complained about her salary, title, and authority.
Rush to solve "The Problem." To the Board, an executive
departure is a crisis compelling them to replace the executive as quickly
as possible. This occurs in part out of fear, a desire to be done transitioning,
anxiety about managing the organization after the executive leaves, and
believing that Executive hires cost an estimated 15-40 times base salary in direct/indirect costs - making the right selection crucial. No matter how fast the Board would like to move, an executive search takes 5-9 months and often longer. Smart organizations use this time to take stock of where it is, where it wants to go, and what kind of executive it needs to help get there. Organizations that aren't so smart accrue a future debt that like a loan must be paid in the future. Creating "The Story." When an executive departs, the Board either implicitly or explicitly creates a story about the CEO's tenure - this is natural. In the case of a terminated CEO, the story may attempt to make the Board feel less guilty, and if the executive resigned, the story may attempt to help the Board feel less abandoned. The challenge, however, is that the stories are incorporated into the organization's culture, regardless of whether they are true. Unfortunately, boards are often blind to how their own dynamics affect the CEO's success. If the CEO was unqualified, the Board needs to review their selection, evaluation, and remediation process - was it fair, realistic, clear, or did they simply hire the wrong person. Conversely, was it the Board's perception that the CEO was unqualified when in fact they, consciously or unconsciously, chose not to hear what the CEO was saying. Consultants play an invaluable role by asking questions and making observations about these stories, thus, ensuring the stories don't unconsciously become the new corporate legend.
Boards must understand that during executive transitions, they are the lynchpins to the organization's success. Our job as consultants is to get boards, staff, and stakeholders to better understand the underlying dynamics of change and transitions and support them in turning the crisis of an executive's departure into a process of positive change, learning, and growth. Jackie Eder-Van Hook, MSOD is the Co-Founder and Executive Vice President of Transition Management Consulting along with Robert T. Van Hook, CAE who serves as its President. Transition Management Consulting places interim executives and provides organizational consulting to associations and nonprofits nationwide. They may be reached via email at Jackie@TransitionCEO.com, rvanhook@TransitionCEO.com or call 202-244-3163.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
Home What We Do Who We Are Resources Contact Copyright © 2005, 2006, 2007 Transition Management Consulting, Inc.
|