by Valyrie Laedlein-A search on the internet on the topic of succession planning yields considerable guidance and commentary for and from the corporate sector. Just this week, Forbes.com ran a story on the Chief Information Officer for Equinix, who has been with the company since 2008 and is already preparing his successor, even though the CIO has no intention of leaving anytime soon. Raising questions related to who will follow the CEO, the COO, the CIO or any other company’s leader is not considered impolitic in that sector. Indeed, it is expected and seen as exercising good business judgment. Grooming rising talent for executive positions is not disrespectful of those currently holding those positions. Failing to do so is considered irresponsible and short-sighted.
Alas, this is not often so in our sector. Growing talent from within is not a strong suit among nonprofits, and a number of reasons contribute to that.
Predictably, resource constraints make it difficult to consistently practice steps that develop talent. Built-in redundancy is difficult to achieve and has only gotten harder with the budget cuts of recent years. Cross-training requires some degree of flexibility in terms of staff time use, time that is particularly challenging to find in the current economic climate, as schedules and positions get cut and demand for services grows. Ditto for any other forms of professional development that would cultivate staff skills and experience to prepare middle managers for assuming more senior leadership roles.
The limited size of many nonprofits also makes techniques such as cross-training and career-laddering hard to implement. Building growth opportunities to prepare talent for senior leadership is tough in organizations under $2 million with limited middle and upper management tiers.
Finally, within what we all have come to know as “nonprofit culture,” we are, I believe less accustomed to thinking of staff members as interchangeable assets to be developed for the organization’s use. Lower compensation rates constrain us from demanding the overtime expected of staff in private law or consulting firms, which allows for more time in which to mentor and train and acquire professional experience. And the corporate “up or out” mentality is atypical in our world that prides itself on flatter hierarchies and more humane work environments. While Boards of Directors are often populated with representatives of the business world, it is only with reluctance (and dread) that most Boards open the question of when and how to prepare for the founder or Executive Director’s departure – in large part because it seems to suggest disrespect, a desire to “push the leader out the door,” or fear that it might even trigger the leader’s departure.
We need to get over this – and organizations who do demonstrate thoughtful staff retention, leadership development, and planned succession need to be recognized as models for how the sector can sustain the impending “leadership deficit” anticipated over the next ten years (see Tierney’s article of 2006).
Indeed, Community Resource Exchange has a Board of Directors who launched thinking about leadership succession for CRE a few years ago, even as its founder/director remained in place. And prior to the Board’s planning for executive succession, it had been an established practice to grow talent from within, with all of CRE’s program directors developed from among its ranks of staff consultants. In an environment that is highly conscious of time use and the maximizing of “billable” (= direct service) hours, CRE maintains a commitment to staff development, has challenged staff to rise to increasingly demanding responsibilities and roles, and has been rewarded with a high rate of retention of senior level talent.
Today CRE announces news that would suggest that this approach has worked. CRE’s founder/director, Fran Barrett, is announcing that she has accepted a position as Director of Capacity Building at The Atlantic Philanthropies – a position that will allow her 30 years of experience serving nonprofits and building CRE to be applied to the development of a significant new program at one of the world’s most influential foundations. Because of its preparation and planning for succession, CRE’s Board of Directors is also able to announce its decision to appoint my colleague, Holly Delany Cole, and myself as successors to Fran in co-leading CRE. We assume these new positions with a combined total of 35 years of experience at CRE and 7 years co-leading at the Deputy level. A program/organizational planning initiative that was spearheaded by us several months ago is underway and will provide guidance in terms of direction for the organization. And our Board members and we have years of experience working in partnership at the committee level, on special initiatives, and in Board meetings.
As one of our Board members pointed out at the meeting in which the Board voted to appoint us, there is something important for the sector to learn from this process for leadership succession. This blog post is the first to suggest what a few of those lessons might be.
- Don’t be stalled by sensitivities about succession; address them with needed sensitivity, then move on to discuss succession long before the announcement of a departure is in sight.
- Create opportunities for committed staff to develop and test their potential, and to cultivate their skills (both technical and leadership skills) and their perspective on leading.
- Foster the development of relationships between “next level” staff leadership and your Board members and leadership, as well as with external stakeholders.
Keep an eye on this column for updates on this transition and what can be learned by the sector about the challenges of succession, co-leadership, and – now with our experience - executive directorship!
Subscribe via RSS feed 
Comments
Post has no comments.