A leader of a board of trustees submitted their resignation and left the board, without specifying their reasons for a mid term departure.  The trustee did not give any reasons verbally to any board or staff members regarding a reason for departure.  Given some of the recent exchanges of communication involving this board member, it is certainly possible to guess at a reason or two.

Knowing a real reason would perhaps spotlight a problem or issue that required attention.  This points out the value of having a policy that requires exit interviews for trustees.  Whether an individual leaves on schedule, such as end of a term, or makes an abrupt departure, this can be an incredibly important source of information on how the board/organization is doing and where improvements might be needed.  As is usually the case, you don't miss a policy until you realize it is missing.

Many of us have heard about the four stages of group development:  forming, storming, norming and performing.  What never ceases to amaze me if how true it is that, when even one new vocal member of a group is added, the whole group re-enters the forming stage (although, in theory, it doesn't need to last a long time!).

The need for patience to allow new members to settle in and bond with the existing group is even more apparent in the all-volunteer organization, where the board is also the primary staff.  I am pleased to report that, in a recent work meeting of such a group, I had the opportunity to give a new member needed space for the re-forming to take place.  In fact, the elected leader of our entire group and myself (the group leader) just stepped to back of room and allowed to new voice to speak. 

We know it will take time to re-bond everyone and we already feel our feathers ruffled regarding previous decisions, declared values and priorities for the group (bit of a storm-wind being felt here) but if Job can do it, we can.  With a little patience, we can see a stronger team and improved outcomes for stakeholders just a few months away.

Many executive and development directors feel that their boards don't perform adequately in the fund raising department.  But what happens when board members actually threaten to ask for funds in a way that staff members perceive as inappropriate?  This is a problem many E.D.'s and D.D.'s would like to have, I suppose, but what IS inappropriate fund raising?  If fund raising activity is not on the "not" list (illegal, unethical, unreliable, impractical, unsupportable, unseemly, results-not applicable), should staff find methods chosen by  board members to raise funds "acceptable?"  To be a bit more specific:  when is it appropriate for an E.D. or development director to censor the "way" that a board member develops and solicits for a major gift to cover an expenditure for an activity planned by staff and approved as part of the annual budget?

When do fund raising methods deployed by board members cross the line so that these activities undermine the operational control of staff?  At some point, shouldn't board members be trusted to portray the community value of an organization in their own words and tap into their own passion?  If staff have been unable to motivate board members to take risks to meet strangers and ask them for doncations, shouldn't board members be supported in finding their own motivation?  Can't board members have the freedom to find the best way to connect operational funding needs with the passion and perspective of individual prospective donors?  OR, should board members only perform fund raising actions in a way and manner that is highly scripted and controlled by staff?  I am reminded of an old abortion rights slogan:  "If you can't you trust me with a choice how can you trust me with a child?"   In this case, the question is:  if you can't trust in my discretion then how can you trust me with your mission?

Earlier this month I learned that all executive directors (and this could be extended to board chairs) should have a will.  I thought that only people who wanted to divide their assets after death and taxes needed one of these.  Many of you reading this (come-on, look in the mirror and nod, will 'ya?) should have one of these to spare your organization, its valued stakeholders and the community that you claim you care so much about, from unnecessary pain and suffering due to an unplanned "demise."

OK, I am being overly dramatic but do I have your attention now?  Just type on a sheet of paper your best advice on how the organization should carry on, or at least, who should take over your role temporarily, should you burn-out one weekend and never return to the office or if the United Nations or the U.S. president (or one of those Gates people) calls you to serve them in a moment of crisis.  Just name names:  those people both within and outside of the organization who get the mission, can honor your approach competently and buy the board time to conduct a recruitment process without going into a three alarm panic. 

After you have finished typing this sheet, put it into a sealed envelope in your bottom desk drawer and a copy in your safe deposit box next to your IRS determination letter AND tell a staff member and your board chair that you have done this.  Maybe your board will raise the funds for a real live succession planning and successor mentoring process but then again …..The executive will:  it's a GOOD thing!