#242 Musings Beyond the Bunker (Friday January 7)
Good morning,
Warning…this is a single-subject Musing in a continuing series about nonprofit organizations…
I have served on many of their boards over the years and have developed a number of thoughts regarding their governance. It is my observation that most people join such boards a real dedication to the mission of the organization. To serve is selfless. But, in the words of Adlai Wertman, who heads the USC center on social entrepreneurship, people often “leave their briefcases at the door.” By this, he means people don’t exercise the same critical analysis with the non-profit as they would with their own business or in their own lives.
THE NON-PROFIT SEARCH
The other day I was interviewed by a search firm that is trying to find a senior executive for a beloved charity. We had a great conversation about the organization, its future, the challenges and opportunities that lay ahead, the job description for the position and qualities we should be looking for in our search. It was a great conversation with a principal at Morris & Berger, one of the preeminent search firms in the nonprofit area.
This conversation got me thinking about how important these searches are, not just for identifying a qualified candidate, but for allowing an organization to revisit its mission and priorities through the process. For most organizations, the search for a new leader offers the opportunity for reflection and reevaluation of mission and the pondering of the challenges ahead.
I’ve been through many executive searches in my over 40 years with nonprofits, starting with my participation as the only graduate student member of the USC Presidential search back in 1979. I’ve learned a fair bit in those years about searches.
Hire a Search Firm
Even if you think you have the best candidate already identified (for instance, a well-qualified internal candidate), a conversation with a search firm and/or interviewing several possible alternative candidates, can help solidify your thinking. Interview several search firms and make sure that the principals of the firm have prior experience with (a) your geographic region (even if you purport to be pursuing a “national search”), (b) with the type of organization (e.g., social service, educational, arts organization) (c) the target “audience” of donors, and (d) the needs of those for whom services are being provided.
The Job Description—Reaching out and Time to Reflect
It sounds trite, but this is important. This is not necessarily a “come one, come all” advertisement for the broadest swathe of potential candidates. The job description should be developed with the search firm, with wide buy-in of the Board and senior leadership.
Many boards find this is an opportunity for organizational “self-reflection” and recalibration. Those drafting the job description should candidly discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the organization and the current CEO. they should consider and what specific qualities may most be needed in the successor.
Formation of a Committee
This is more important than it seems. But the make-up of the committee is important. Experience with searches and with the organization is critical. Having close contact with the current CEO and the senior team is also important. The makeup of the committee should be discussed with the executive committee or other representative group, rather than entrusting the decision as to composition/membership to one or two people, in order to ensure nothing is missed.
Interview Key Board Members Early
There are some board members that are particularly knowledgeable about the internal workings of the organization. Some may be committee chairs with natural connections; others are particularly active volunteers. One should try to obtain, as soon as possible, the input of all board members, but especially those few who actually interact with the staff on a regular basis. Get their ideas for what the organization needs and what qualities the organization may be looking for—get the “inside dope.”
Interview the Senior Team
As much as the board may think they know the internal day-to-day challenges of the organization, they aren’t there day-to-day. The senior management team can provide a great deal of enlightenment about the organization’s “inner workings,” strengths and challenges. Most of them are dying to share with the board and/or search team their perceptions of the current CEO, the challenges ahead, and key qualities that should be sought in the new person. Plus, including them in the search in this manner creates a level of “buy-in” and participation that is so important to morale and acceptance of the ultimate result.
Establish a Timeline and Format and Communicate it Broadly
There should be as much transparency as possible with the board, the senior team, and important stakeholders. No one likes a surprise and everyone should be knowledgeable. The process should be agreed upon by the board (or its executive committee) and should not be left to one or two people to determine in a vacuum. Delegation to a few people to “carry the ball” is tempting but limiting and certainly not best practice.
Maintain Confidentiality; But Without Crippling the Process
This is important both for the obligation to protect the candidates and for avoiding turning the search into a community-wide discussion. The last thing one needs is for people to start shooting down candidates and politicking. That said, there needs to be trust in stakeholders. Eventually there will be challenges to confidentiality when finalists are identified. One search I was tangential to so prized confidentiality that the process became one of obsessively tight management—and that isn’t conducive to getting the best information, review or buy-in.
Don’t Just Seek Resumes—Actively Recruit
Most organizations are aware of the universe of potential candidates, either locally or nationally. This is a good time to reach out and solicit candidates. It is a good time to aggressively go to the top prospects and actively encourage their engagement. I will never forget a search where the top candidates were identified nationally and committee members got on planes and met with them personally. Everyone wants to “see the love” and be wanted. Many of the best candidates are already happily and productively employed and are not looking for a new position.
Interview in Person as Many as You Reasonably Can
Accommodation should be made for both structured questioning and a more free-flowing interchange. It is in unstructured moments that personality traits and expertise can best be gauged.
Don’t let the process drag on.
Extensions can be misread as indecision or lack of success. If more time is needed, announce a broadening of the search.
Identify Finalists Quickly and Have them Meet with Staff and Board
Some organizations will come up with finalists and have the senior team (or broader staff) meet with the candidate, not so much as an interview, but as a means of doing a check on interpersonal relations and “fit.” Plus, staff sometimes asks questions the board may have not considered. It is important in this to let staff know that they are not “interviewing” the candidate(s). It’s just that a good dialog will lead the candidate(s) to better knowledge and appreciation for the team and challenges.
The board involvement should be in small groups, so that conversations can be more intimate. Giant “all hands” meetings lead to little quality interaction. Every board member should be afforded the chance to meet the finalists in formal and informal settings. They should engage in a conversation with the committee and each other. After all, the board is the legally constituted body charged with being fiduciaries for the public trust. Trying to short-cut this by meeting with only selected groups is not best practice.
When the Board Votes, it Should Meet the Candidate
And when all is said and done, even if one bobbles some of the above “inclusionary” processes, at the very least the Board should meet with the finalist(s) in an open board meeting. Buy-in is critical and that means that, when in doubt, more people should be consulted and/or included, and not fewer.
Have a Plan for “Roll-out” and Transition
Once the choice is made, the incoming and outgoing CEOs should immediately have a series of meetings with staff, board members, stakeholders, basically anyone and everyone connected to the organization. This is a great marketing and PR opportunity, both for external relations as well as internal team-building and mission validating. Such an opportunity ought not be squandered. Further, the person chosen for the job needs a committee of “insiders” to help guide them through the rough waters of transition, learning about the staff, the board, and other stakeholders, and the “hidden history” of the organization.
And Be Prepared to Begin Again
Don’t settle. If the search doesn’t get you what you were seeking, don’t settle. Be prepared to ask the CEO to stay on and consider other options, including starting over.
These are just some of the “truisms” I’ve accumulated over years and searches (and consultations with professionals along the way). Of note, some of the good searches I’ve been involved with haven’t ended well and some of the worst searches have succeeded despite their ineptitude. But these rules are pretty tried and true to yield the best result…
Have a great day,
Glenn
From the archives: