We Always Have Choices

Many of us have been there — or at least know of a situation like this. The specifics of how and why the founder had out-stayed his effectiveness really don't matter. The crux of the issue was what to do.

Folks who really mean well and seek to do good work staff most nonprofits. They really do. They may have even given exemplary service or provided a singular vision — past tense. Because of this, there is often a great reluctance to confront a situation that has gone south and make the hard choice.

The difficult option is, of course, to remove the executive who has now become an impediment to the fulfillment of the organization's mission. I unabashedly assert the need for this whenever the delivery of the mission and the impact of the organization in the community it serves begins to suffer.

Such a choice is made far easier if the organization has a history of clearly understanding the role of its donors. Donors are the investors in a charitable organization. By extension — and specifically in the policy governance model — they are its owners.

The board's role is to keep faith with the investors while being true to the organization's mission. Donors make gifts to see their personal values and visions realized. They do not make investments simply to provide employment or to further the dreams and values of others.

When these dynamics are understood, the likelihood of confusing sentiment and loyalty with keeping faith with the vision becomes a lot less likely.

As you would expect, there was a lot of emotion tied up in the particular situation — among everyone. There was even the threat of legal action should the board remove the executive.

My role was to examine the details, define the options open to the board and let them make the choice. Fortunately, they made the correct one.