If it's a story about me, then I'll say so up front.

This is a blog about Truth, Justice and the American Way. The stories are true. No names have been changed to protect anyone's identity, including my own. If the story is about me, then I'll say so right up front. If I don't use a name to identify whom the story is about, then it's because it's not relevant. So please do not call me or e-mail me with your kind condolences or unwarranted congratulations about something that you believe is a cleverly disguised bio from my alter ego. These stories, like my photo, are unretouched.

Monday, December 14, 2009

The Biggest Mistake Employers Make When Filling a Top Job

Job Opening: Looking for an Executive Director. Must have minimum of 5 years top management experience. Prefer candidate be aprox. 5’7” 155 lbs. with dark red hair and a deep, throaty laugh. Send resume to: Blah, blah, blah.

Would anyone really place an ad like this in the Jobs Section? No. But they might just as well, because subconsciously that’s what they want.

There’s a mistake made by employers nearly 100% of the time when looking for a new hire. They seldom think of themselves as hiring a new employee. Instead, they seek to “replace” the old employee with a clone. They do this because:

1. That’s the way we’ve always done it (official company motto: “Live and Don’t Learn.”)

2. It’s easier that way.

3. If things go badly, the responsibility is easily diffused.

But I disagree with this philosophy. (You knew that I would.) And here’s my rationale: When an employee leaves, for whatever reason, if the employer just thinks in terms of replacing that employee they deprive themselves of an chance to wipe the state clean and begin anew. Perhaps, 12 years ago, when that position was first created, there was an excellent job description written. In fact, I’ll bet that they are still working from an updated version of that same job description to this day! Maybe that’s swell. I doubt it.

Nonprofits are particularly bad about this, by the way. Small staffs and volunteer board members who can’t afford to “waste their valuable time” tend to think in terms of the immediate problem rather than the big picture.

We all know the definition of insanity: continuing to do the same thing and expecting a different result. During this current lousy economy, everybody has to start thinking outside the box. What worked in 2007 probably won’t work in 2010. When a person leaves, it creates a remarkable opportunity to re-think the job with something that is more appropriate with the changing world of doing business.

By the way, this same axiom is true with Board members as well. There are a startling array of lousy practices that are used when replacing an exiting board member. But one of the worst (and most popular) among female-heavy boards is to let the person who is leaving nominate her friend or co-worker to replace her slot. That would work well if this were a sewing circle, but with a Board of Directors, not so much. Men do this to some extent, too, but with men the nominee is more likely to be someone that the outgoing member has worked with on another board. Men are more incestuous; women more friend-driven.

Frankly, ladies, it’s just this sort of thing that is holding us back in business. A Board of Directors isn’t about “friends.” It’s about who can do the job. A vacancy on the board is an opportunity to look at where the organization is at that moment and define what is required to take it where it needs to go. If an organization is having governance problems, then maybe a strong HR person is needed. If funding is the overriding issue, then the board needs to understand that each member has a responsibility to give or raise a certain amount each year. (This is a very common procedure in nonprofit boards.) If the organization is having branding and image difficulties, then you need to pack the board with high profile, heavy-hitters to create credibility within the community.

Whether it is an employee or a board member, the company must have a really clear picture of what it needs today, as opposed to what was needed three years ago; because the likelihood of them being the same is very low. And what better opportunity to reassess that situation than when an opening occurs.

Now where did I put that dark red hair dye?


  1. Another excellent post. Not quite as funny as you usually write but then this is a more serious topic. I must confess that the nonprofit board on which I sit recently had to hire a new CEO and we liked the old guy so much we tried to replace him with a "clone" (to use your expression). In retrospect, we have so many financial problems, we probably should have looked for someone with a stronger background in fundraising and finance. I wish I had read this back in February.

  2. Perhaps it is not a mistake, but a function of the "evolve or perish" process. You wrote previously the world did not need another non-profit. This is one way to redirect much-needed funds toward organizations that efficiently serve their customers.

    Enjoy your candor...

  3. Kay, I try to solve financial and accounting problems for a number of nonprofits (I also teach nonprofit accounting and grant writing at a local college). Your point is so well made that I have passed it on to every Board I interface with. The common problem amoung every one of them is a failure of the majority of the board members to accept their responsibility to raise more funds rather than just cut expenses.

  4. There's a huge difference between a non-profit and a non-profitable. I dare say there will be more of the latter in the post-recession New Normal if the industry (yes, I called it an industry!... an industry of helping or saving) does not borrow from the for-profit world.

    I've been in a board room meeting where an "academic" member was more concerned about the color and height of a bar graph than the bottom line substance of the marketing campaign report.

    Often, a nonprofit will be too inclusive: it will not bring in specialists --- either outsourced or as an employee --- to fix or consult on their problems. These nonprofit "leaders" would rather sit around a table in their own bubble to decide the best road to take on an issue without considering the bigger picture. If they do go outside for help, they usually bring in someone from the same niche in the nonprofit industry instead of looking for new blood and thinking. And, even if that disparate expertise is brought in, resistance to change is often huge: "We've been doing this for 20 years / using this vendor for 10 years, so why should we change now?"

    I've seen CEOs hired by boards of directors that, frankly, would be middle managers in in a corporation; they manage but don't lead. To be a CEO, you need to be a leader, not a project manager, widget supervisor or engineer.

    Often, if one person is not working out in a role, they will simply move in another person from a different part of the organization, even if that second person has no idea what they're doing. "Oh, but they know the business" is the excuse. Real businesses do not play musical chairs with shareholders' money, which should be the same with donors' or members' contributions.

    Or, they'll hire young people right out of college with zero business experience to be supervised by others that were hired the same way previously: the blind leading the blind.

    It all boggles the mind. I've seen these kinds of things occurring to an extent in the for-profit world, but not as much.

    Therefore, many nonprofits are much more difficult to change, which is a serious problem in times of economic strife, as they don't know any better, nor have the experienced people on board to make required adjustments.

    Jonathan Blaine
    Fortune 100 & Nonprofit Rainmaker

  5. Jonathan, I agree with everything you stated. I think the biggest thing I see in my non-profit field is lack of orientation of new board members and leaders (and lack of inculturation, if you will). New board members and new leaders come in not knowing exactly what their key functions are, expectations, roles and responsibilities, legal and regulatory matters (in general) they must be aware of, some of the key history and major decisions, partners. No one takes time to go through governing documents (i.e., by-laws) either. What I see happening are board members who sit around for 6 months twiddling their thumbs because they dont know what they are supposed to be doing and have no context for anything. They vote blindly without understanding...which exposes them and the non-profit. Leaders are in a similar fix - they work blindly without direction or coaching in their new roles, particularly on organizational culture. Lots of leaders fail because they simply don't understand the culture and don't know to adapt their management style or practices to fit where they are. Just my 2 cents!

    Kelly Cadman
    Director, Education and Training at Georgia Charter Schools Association

  6. I so agree with everything you have said. Also, considering the challenges so many small non-profits face attracting (and keeping) Board members many are just eager for "anybody", the warm body syndrome, forgetting that it should be an "honor" to serve on the Board rather than a "favor". Having a "warm body" on a Board is worse than having too few members. At least with few members you can manage your expectations rather than having expectations and the "warm body" repeatedly living up to his/her commitment.

    Eva Guenther, PMP
    Washington D.C.

  7. Great blog. I am also a nonprofit consultant. What you describes happens far too often, but Board members working for good companies would never let this happen at their companies. Somehow, Board members forget good management practices when they walk into a nonprofit. I urge my clients to hire an interim director so they can take the time to do a strategic plan with a new job description that meets their new needs. Besides, an interim can give the agency some time to allow the aura (or stink) of the old executive to fade so the new person won't always hear, "Well, Anne didn't do it that way"
    Barrie Segall, M.S.W.
    Segall Nonprofit Consulting

  8. As a CEO of an NPO and a board member (current and former) of several organizations, what you say is good stuff. @Eva for the fewer board members - just be mindful of the by-laws which state how many requires a quorum for voting. I have seen a fairly mature organization not be able to approve minutes because the quorum has not been met. Board members should consider it a privilege - and not resume building. The other thing to consider for board members is gifts: maybe no financial bottom line but "if you serve on the board, your gift should reflect the commitment you have made to this organization vis a vis other gifts you make". Allows good governance and good board members even if the $$$ isn't there. But the $ commitment still has to be there.

    Betsey Moran
    CEO DonorMarket, Inc.

  9. Many non-profits are really in trouble right now, but they fail to see where they need to change in order to "Stay in business".

    Too often I work with non-profits who fail to have a clear understanding of the role of each board member. Shouldn't they have job descriptions like everyone else? That would help clearly state the organizations expectations for them, instead of just warming a seat. A commitment in some way must be there - min. hours, $ raised, # tickets sold, etc.

    With so many loosing their operating budgets, they tend to pull back instead of reaching out to professionals who can help them meet financial goals.

    Shannon Pollacchi
    Sustainable Business Leadership Council
    Orange County, California

  10. I appreciate these thoughts, Kay. Jonathan's contribution is also enlightening, and everyone has added some very poignant thoughts.

    For two decades in NPO leadership, I've seen CEOs come and go, rise and fall. Board members often outlast CEOs, hence that we are usually defined as "volunteer driven". When I am serving on a board either for-prof or non-prof, I use two pillars when deciding to join -- can I serve as a passionate advocate and can I be a shareholder (owning stock or as a donor)?

    Our current economy abounds with opportunities for NPOs -- cities and states are severely cutting human services. It takes leaders to see the opportunities.

    To sum up what has already been expressed: if you want your organization to grow, recruit a leader, if you want your organization to survive, recruit a manager.

    Michael Cassidy
    Executive Director
    Valley of the Sun YMCA
    Phoenix, Arizona

  11. Boards are too scared to hire a real leader in this economy.

    Richard Wong
    VP Institution Advancement
    Union Presbyterian Seminary
    Washington, D.C.

  12. Richard, you can't just say that and let us hang! Please elaborate on this fascinating thought.

  13. Good boards have a fiscal and social responsibility to hire real leaders. Otherwise, they don't belong on their respective boards!!

    And, having worked primarily in the high tech sector, including very early stage companies, the issues of private/public/nonprofit organizations always come back to leadership - clarity, courage, character - I'm sure I could find more 'C's! As I'm interviewing indicuals who have transitions from corp to nfp, those in the nfp who has had to deal with sector switcheres, and the board members who have governed orgs with sector switchers, issues, conflicts, etc, all come back to leadership, regardless of the sector.

    Paradox management is a great competency to master to become a good leader.

    Teresa Dahl
    Principal at Dahl & Associates
    Seattle, Washington

  14. One of our biggest challenges has been to get a Board that reflects the multi-cultural population we serve. It is a hard nut to crack and is one of our goals for 2010. To the surprise of many, here in NYC some nonprofits are making significant investments in marketing. It is an exciting and upbeat time in this area.

    Sharon Fenster
    Shoestring Creative
    New York City, NY

  15. Kay and All, Interesting discussion! One of the biggest mistakes I see boards making--both those on which I serve and those with whom I consult--is age-ism. Most board members are in their 40's-60's. NPO's miss the chance to tap the wisdom of retirees, many of whom were successful leaders of other enterprises and have invaluable community connections and more time to tap them.

    They also miss the contributions of folks in their 20's and 30's, who are more comfortable using social media and other new technologies to "market" the nonprofits they serve to their own communities.

    Amy DeLouise
    Communications & Branding Consultant
    Washington D.C.

  16. Organizations often place exclusive emphasis on work experience and too little emphasis on "how" someone gets the work done which impacts cultural fit. A replacement position represents an opportunity to top grade your talent, yet understanding of the culture and future workforce needs are often overlooked in an effort to hire some to address today's needs. The interpersonal skills and style of someone hired to introduce new ideas and cultural transition is often the difference between organizational evolution and revolution.
    Kelly Rietow
    Principal at ROO Solutions
    Greater Minneapolis-St. Paul Area

  17. Kay, you certainly seemed to hit a nerve with the non-profit community. But these points are just as valid in the for-profit business. Everything has changed, and your theory that businesses go looking for a replacement rather than rethinking the job is every bit as important in the normal business world. Don't get off-track.
    Bob Baldwin

  18. Kay, I really agree with the corporate culture. From what I hear, some of the mistake may come from the interviewing process itself, where the interviewee is not introduced to all members of management before the job begins (perhaps this is deliberate on the part of the company). HR is faced with the difficulty of hiring top execs with the courage to change the culture. I think they're out there, though. I agree, women can be some of the worst offenders

  19. I've enjoyed these comments and I want to add a few from the perspective of a lawyer who has worked with small to medium sized NPO's for approx. 25 years.

    1. I feel that boards handicap their organizations by hiring someone with ZERO knowledge and sometimes no interest in learning about the legal issues, especially pertaining to developing tax-exempt funding opportunities. The lack of interest and awareness of the legal restrictions on nonprofits seems to me to be the cause of a lot of problems made by uninformed decisions and could so easily be avoided. Boards do not seem to realize that the lawyer on the board may not know anything about nonprofits and will not know how to guide the board or staff. Result is that money is spent resolving a problem instead of into a program.

    2. It seem clear that the days of living solely on grant funding are over, but so many of the newest ED's and board members(even “experienced” ones) I meet, are folks who cannot give up that old time thinking or just want to ignore the fact that NPO's must start developing alternative funding that is also purpose related so it will be tax-exempt.

    3. With a few exceptions, board members also seem to lack the most basic understanding of the applicable legal restrictions. Neither are they actively involved in fulfilling their duties through revenue development projects, including traditional fund-raising ventures.

    4. Perhaps it will just take a few more years of this new economy to persuade staff and volunteers that the old days of grants and charitable gifts are not coming back anytime soon, before boards and staff start thinking about diversification of revenue as a best and necessary practice if NPO's are going to survive. They need to select leaders and board members who are up for the challenge and accept the fact that the sector must change.

  20. NPOs could benefit from training their Board and committee members on certain "best practices" of fundraising, leveraging their Board's professional capabilities to uncover means of becoming more sustainable, and treating their Board members a bit more like valued and respected customers.

    Elyse Germack, Esq.
    President, Avant Financial Nonprofit Law
    Detroit, Michigan

  21. NPO's are so in need of leadership that they don't take the time to do their due diligence when filling a board seat. I have seen many a board appoint a board chair that has never had experience raising money, holding meetings, or leading the charge for an npo. As Elyse says above, NPO's could benefit from training - and especially training a nomination committee.

    Lisa Benson
    President, Benson Consulting
    Phoenix, Arizona

  22. I appreciated the comment about the benefits of "wiping the slate clean" when there's a board or job vacancy. I think it's very tempting to want and expect an incoming person to be all the things the previous person was and have the same kinds of strengths. It may be asking too much for all of that in one person.--better to step back and look at what key qualities and strengths are needed and look for someone who can bring these into the org.

    Megan Keane
    San Francisco, CA

  23. I have initiated aggressive efforts in the sector for both the Los Angeles and Ventura Counties to promote an operational frame of mind that is professional, efficient, accountable - and more importantly, ethical. I can only hope that somehow I am able to make a "dent" on the practices and mindsets that can use some improvement. After all, all sectors of society are ultimately dependent on the success of each other - and the success of society in general is dependent on each sector's success.

    Controller, United Care, Inc.
    Los Angeles, California

  24. Eric, I share a similar background and experience as yourself and could not agree more with the comments. It brings to mind an old Sir Arthur Conan Doyle quote from my business mentor in the for profit sector: “Mediocrity knows nothing higher than itself.”

    Wayne Gregory
    Director of Industry & Labor Relations
    General Building Conntractors Association
    Philadelphia, PA

  25. One key to Board recruitment is to recognize that any valuable and effective Board member is a circle of influence with many contacts. So we need to use that power when finding new board members and especially not recruit our friends. You want to recruit people one level removed from current board members to expand the board's reach into new communities.

    It is a simple concept but one that is often ignored.

    For example, if you are trying to get board representation from a specific corporation to leverage an opportunity connection that corporation, reach beyond the people you know (who should already be your supporters) at that company and ask them to find you a suitable candidate. You engage them (and once again connect them with your organization) and you make new friends for your nonprofit. It's a double play!

    As noted in Kay's original piece, it does take more time. But the rewards are long lasting and our job as Board leaders is to guarantee the long term success of our organizations.

    Paul Mellblom, Principal
    Meyer Scherer & Rockcastle Architects
    Minneapolis, MN

  26. There are several competencies that every Board needs: Financial management/accounting, Legal. Variety of ages, gender, ethnicity, etc., and finally at least three consumers of services or family members.

    It should be clear in the by-laws that everyone needs to contribute, even a minimal amount so you have 100% participation, when you ask for more money from other sources. It should also be clear in the bylaws the requirements for attendance.

    I would further recommend representation from referral sources and organizations to which you would refer your consumers for further services--let it build a network for you. I did not mention people who have access to money--because it is too often our only criteria for Board membership. You may also need expertise in specific areas, like historic tax credits, management of one your programs, like a camp, day care center or music or people who are linked in to secific resouces, like mental heatlh services or alternative programs.

    I guess I would also say, "make no little plans" seek out Board members who can help you in many ways - big ways.

    Stoll and Associates
    Cleveland/Akron, Ohio

  27. As the by-laws made no provision for filling a mid- term President position, the director appointed a senior corporate executive friend. A month later, I was hired to fill the director position. I came in to a hostile situation where the board felt they were serfs who no longer had ownership in the organization. The culture had changed and sharing interaction had been eliminated.

    Experienced board members understand that the board is like a family; a constructive partnership, sharing decision making for a given mission. The difference is that there can be a sensible selection process for inviting in members. The existing board can create a survey of organization needs, then note their own skills. Now you know what skills would be helpful to you in selecting a new board member.

    Know what your expectations are and articulate them!

    You do need capable people who can be leaders who will create a culture of inquiry with mutual respect. It is important to assess temperament as well as qualifications.

    Online: BoardSource has resources to help.

    Book- "Chief Executive Transitions: How to Hire and Support a Nonprofit CEO" by Don Tebbe

    Amalia Leubitz
    Building Strong Relationships for More Productive Development and Fundraising for the Non-Profit Sector
    Greater New York City Area

  28. How a Board is staffed really depends on the nonprofit's philosophy for recruiting, whether explict or implicit. For example, a philosophy could be to get people who:

    1. Are passionate about the mission (that usually only leads to passionate meetings);

    2. Are representative of a various stakeholders (they usually don't feel they have anything to do unless representing their group during strategic or program planning);

    3. Are diverse (so they represent various groups -- ethnic, racial, gender, etc. -- that often doesn't lead to active Board members);

    4. Are bringing skills needed to address strategic priorities (this often makes for the most active Board members).

    KEY LEARNING FOR ME OVER THE YEARS: We can talk about "leadership" all day long, but the best way to get and keep good Board members is to make sure they have something to do. The best way to get rid of Board members you don't want is to make sure they have something to do :-)

    Carter McNamara
    Authenticity Consulting
    Minneapolis/St. Paul

  29. There are basically 2 types of not-for-profit organizations.

    Those that represent a trade or industry and those with a "mission". 20+ years of experience working for not-for-profits has taught me that the trade associations understand that they are a business because they represent business sectors.

    The NFPS that are mission driven are driven by a great group of very dedicated people who incidentally don't know a thing about business. In order to accomplish your mission you need to stay in business...its all about sustainability.

    Peter Drucker had it right...Leadership is key and it comes from the Board and executive leadership. Each has a role and hiring the right people to serve in those very key roles (and then listening to their guidance/insight!) should be the guiding light for filling those positions.

    Just my two (common) sense.

    Deborah Holston
    Board of Directors
    PRS Nonprofit Managers, Inc.
    Washington, D.C.

  30. Great observations, Kay... thanks.

    To your point about the desire to simply replace the previous leader... I'll just add that we often see selection committees and individuals trying to overcompensate for the weaknesses of the previous leader. The outgoing CEO had difficulty building support for decisions, so the committee might exaggerate that criteria and over-screen for a purely consensus based approach to management. Learning from the past is good, but we tend to see a slight overreaction in the selection process and work with our clients to stay aware of this tendency.

    Our firm specializes in non-profit executive search (retained), so I'm of course inclined to say the biggest mistake made is not enlisting the support of people that do this for a living. While this may be self serving, I do believe it's often true. Exceptions to this are when organizations have well developed succession practices and have successfully developed successors for key board or staff roles, or when selection or nominating committee members have significant professional recruiting experience (and personal time) to lend to the cause. The process is simply too important, and too complex for most people to manage, along with their preexisting commitments.

    For senior executive recruitment, I would say the critical ingredient that is often missing is a clear picture of where the organization is going, and what type of talent is needed to take it there. When we're talking about the CEO, a selection committee needs to have a clear picture (shared with the full board) of what skills, traits, and experiences the new leader will need to navigate the organization through the short and long term environment. We accomplish this with our clients by doing a comprehensive backgrounding process involving interviews with ALL key stakeholders, including board members, donors, key staff, volunteers and anyone else who might have information that will help inform the picture. Out of this process comes a detailed position specification (see http://www.waldronhr.com/currentjobs/jobs.asp for examples) that then serves as the basis for selection throughout the process.

    The other key ingredient that is often missing is effective involvement of all stakeholders later in the process. We engage a broad cross section of organization stakeholders in the selection and interview process. Managing the participation of large numbers of people in this process is challenging, and often avoided for that reason. Effective engagement however builds ownership and support for the eventual decision - the absence of which is enough to thwart the success of even the most capable leader. Effective engagement requires highly skilled and professional process facilitation. It's also worth noting that the experience each candidate has throughout the process is critically important to manage. Candidate pools often include key constituents for the organization so the more thoughtfully managed the process is, the better their experience of and connection to the organization will be.

    Board recruitment to me presents some very different challenges. While the key ingredient of a shared vision/strategy is still there, the difference is that in non-profits these are volunteer leadership roles that require unique skills, patience, and significant personal commitment to the mission and work of the organization. I'm very mindful of this challenge now as chair of the board development committee for the agency I volunteer with. Generally speaking, we look for the 3 T's (time, talent, and treasure). As a board we are in the midst of significant strategic work now and I am looking to thoughtfully connect our board composition strategy to that work as it evolves going forward. The more specific I can be (beyond the 3 T's) the more effective my fellow board members can be in helping us identify and reach out to possible new board members.

    Kevin Osborne
    Senior Consultant, Executive Search
    Waldron & Company
    Seattle, WA

  31. What an interesting discussion. Eric, your comments are so often the case - the "who knows who" premise for selecting board members is a poor method for developing a board. Many nonprofits make the mistake of recruiting high profile individuals who they hope will influence others, but have no understanding or commitment to the organization's mission. They often do not even show up or are simply seat fillers for a period of time.

    It is important for Nonprofits to be strategic in their board selections. What type of organization is the nonprofit and in what stage of development/growth? is the nonprofit an early stage or mature organization? Entering a capital campaign phase or in a critical need phase?

    As stated earlier in this comments thread, leadership must understand what skills are needed to move/grow/sustain the organization. One method of accomplishing this is to identify needs and roles with job descriptions first and then develop a matrix of the types of individuals that should be considered to fill those roles.

    Board recruitment should include a discussion of identified roles with prospective board members to fill them. That way there are few to no surprises and expectations are set at the outset.

    Robyn Tucker
    Tucker Consulting Group
    Capital & Philanthropy Avdisors
    San Francisco, CA

  32. The Nonprofit Sector is still evolving in its science, practices, legal parameters - and I always term it "frame of mind". Nonprofits have already taken great strides through self regulation/governance, learning, as well as in collaborations and strategic alliances with Government/Regulators, for-profit professionals and other nonprofits. There is still a lot to learn and do - and it may still take quite some time before "we get there" but as evidenced by the comments/discussions in this thread alone, I know that we will get there soon enough.

    Eric Catalan, Controller/CFO
    Los Angeles, CA

  33. I want to thank everyone for participating in this discussion. It has been gratifying for me to see people from all over the country involved in a conversation about this common problem. I had not intended for this to be a post targeting nonprofits, but it clearly has (as Bob so aptly put it) "hit a nerve."

    I haven't posted anything new in quite a while. My next post will explain that. Thanks again, everyone!!! I always learn so much from your comments and discussions.

  34. Again, I may have mentioned this weeks ago in this dicussion blog, that the litmus test for recruiting an "emotionally and financially" invested board member is to ask them to support the yearly fundraising campaign. I would also like to add that the board contribution to the annual campaign should be 30% of the organization's total annual campaign. Therefore, if a board prospect chagrins at the opportunity to make a charitable gift, at the leadership level, you might reconsider the recruitment of this individual to the board of directors. This is my proven method! Many good people have a place in the organization as an advisor and not as a policy maker (board member). This is particularly true for individuals who have talent to share and not financial resources.
    You might also consider an HONORARY BOARD where people lend their coveted names; sometimes a name is as good as the dollars.


    Lisa Benson
    President, Benson Consulting
    Phoenix, Arizona

  35. Completely agree with your post. I saw how an organization replaced board members based on friendship more than their knowledge about roles and accountabilities Board members need to be trained about what are their financial, strategic and social responsibilities. If they don’t have the previous knowledge, the organization must provide this orientation assuring that its governance body is well prepared to take the best decisions.
    Every board needs to create position descriptions, so when they have to look for a candidate, they have an objective guidance in the process.

    Maria Alejandra Gomez
    Program Manager
    Girl Scouts of Western Washington
    Seattle, WA