Association Governance Insitute (AGI) logo
American Society of Association Executives (ASAE) logo

Resources

Grooming an Internal Candidate to Become the Next CEO

Succession

In many associations, especially when there is an unexpected CEO departure, member leaders feel pressure to quickly find and hire a replacement. In some instances, it might make sense to bring in an outside leader with fresh perspectives and expertise. But there is also a risk that an outsider, previously unknown to the association, may not be a good fit, culturally and in other ways.

Sometimes there are “diamonds in the rough” inside your organization—people with great leadership potential but perhaps in need of a little polishing. That was the case for the Water Quality Association (WQA), which faced an executive director transition three years ago. When the unexpected vacancy occurred, I was brought in to serve as interim staff leader until an external search process could be carried out. Within a month of entering this role, I identified Pauli Undesser, CAE, as a possible candidate.

She had nine years of experience with WQA and was well respected for various technical, regulatory, and governance roles she played on staff. However, she had limited leadership experience in some core areas such as finance, marketing, and membership. In spite of these gaps, I could readily see her transitioning to the executive director role after a few years of active mentoring. 

The WQA Board of Governors considered this recommendation and unanimously agreed to move forward with the mentoring plan. Much to their satisfaction and the association’s benefit, the process concluded two years later with Pauli becoming executive director.

The following are three key features of the mentoring experience that could have implications for another association thinking about grooming an internal candidate for a leadership role:

Construct a comprehensive plan with defined milestones. The WQA plan was segmented into three-month blocks with a mixture of education, new leadership experiences, and multifaceted mentoring. As WQA Immediate Past President Don McGhee explains, “The overall mentoring program was so comprehensive that it is difficult to identify which elements were most helpful. One key was giving Pauli an opportunity over a two-year period to rotate her direct reports—at least six months to serve as the primary supervisor to every direct report into the executive director position.”

Provide as many mentors as possible. It’s great to have an experienced interim executive director in place. However, it’s even better to provide a CEO mentee with a variety of leaders to learn from. “We put in place a significant support tool for Pauli in the creation of two groups that were coined ‘kitchen cabinets,’” says Don McGhee. “One cabinet included a broad range of industry leaders who could advise Pauli and act as a sounding board for challenges, concerns, as well as successes.”

Sometimes there are “diamonds in the rough” inside your organization—people with great leadership potential but perhaps in need of a little polishing.

Meanwhile, the second group consisted mostly of female association executives from a broad range of associations identified as male-dominated. This gave Pauli support from several seasoned executives who were experiencing or had experienced the same leadership and management challenges but also brought unique perspectives.

Be patient as a mentee. In Pauli’s words, “Within six to 12 months of initiating the mentoring experience, I personally could feel increased confidence from validation and acquisition of knowledge.” She notes that the most valuable time came in the second year of mentoring when WQA focused on incrementally transitioning staff and responsibilities to her. She gradually took over control of operations while her mentors were still available to answer questions and fill knowledge gaps. “It was the best part of the plan for success,” she says.

Could this approach work for another association experiencing a leadership transition? McGhee thinks so. 

“The entire process went smoother than anticipated, with results exceeding most of the board of governors’ expectations,” he says. “Having a highly skilled interim executive director allowed the association to address a broad range of staffing, structure, and operations issues. Many difficult decisions that needed to be made at WQA would have hindered a permanent executive director’s ability to build a strong, positive culture in the association.”

Based on the experience, McGhee recommends assessing potential in-house candidates at deeper levels. “It becomes a real possible source of candidates and should always be on the table when leadership CEO transitions take place,” he says.

Associations Need Better Orientation for Board Members, Study Says

Board members are increasingly attuned to the importance of setting strategy at the associations they serve, according to a new study, but weak onboarding processes may not be adequately preparing them for that task.

“Association and Nonprofit Boards: Maximizing Effective Service,” published by the consulting firm Heidrick & Struggles, in collaboration with George Mason University, is based on a survey of 509 board members conducted in January and February 2017. Among the key findings:

  • Only 45 percent say their organization had a “defined onboarding process” when they joined the board.
  • Only 46 percent say their onboarding experience prepared them to be an effective board member.
  • While a large proportion of respondents say those orientations effectively cover matters such as the mission of the board (92 percent) and board responsibilities (83 percent), a substantially smaller proportion say they were trained on the strategic plan (67 percent), the board decision-making process (60 percent), and evaluation of the CEO (32 percent).
  • 68 percent of respondents say the board focuses on where the organization should be in five years’ time.

A lot of people haven’t really focused on orientation beyond just, “Hey, let’s get together so we can all meet each other.”

Dr. David K. Rehr, a former association executive, professor at the Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University, and coauthor of the report, said that more board members are recognizing their strategic role at associations, but that orientation processes haven’t caught up with that recognition. “A lot of people haven’t really focused on orientation beyond just, ‘Hey, let’s get together so we can all meet each other,’” he said. “We need to set the right expectations for these really important people who are going to guide the future of the organization.”

That lack of orientation may stand in the way of boards taking the riskier actions that can help support the organization in the future. “When people are uncertain about what’s expected of them, they probably tend to be reluctant to be more engaged,” Rehr said.

Association governance consultant John Barnes concurs with the conclusions of the report. “Too many associations take a ‘checkbox’ approach to their onboarding process,” he said. “They hit on the duties of care, loyalty, and obedience on a phone call and consider their board members oriented.”

And Leigh Wintz, FASAE, CAE, principal consultant at Tecker International, said that good onboarding is essential to give board members confidence to do their work. “Having a one-hour meeting of the new people prior to their first meeting to tell them how to submit their expense forms and meet the staff doesn’t do that,” she said. “Board members want to know how the agenda is developed and strategies are implemented, what units are responsible for what activities, how decisions are made, and what values drive decision-making.”

The process, says Julian Ha, partner at Heidrick & Struggles, needs to be a formal one that establishes an understanding not just of the financial and strategic goals of the organization but also its structure. “A comprehensive orientation package would entail not just financial materials and paperwork, but a thoughtful introduction to the organization and the senior leaders,” he said. “So that when you’re coming in you’ll know who does what and why.”

Regardless of how associations do it, Rehr says, they should feel more motivated to get boards up to speed faster. “If you’re running a business and only 51 percent of your board knows really what you’re doing and feels good at it, that’s a problem,” he said.

Realigning the Board for Successful Strategic Planning

When two associations—the National Stone Association and the National Aggregates Association—merged to form the National Stone, Sand and Gravel Association, the organization gave little focus to governance. The governing documents of the two associations were merged to create NSSGA’s initial bylaws, with a heavy emphasis on ensuring that only members with “decision-making authority” for their respective companies were involved in association leadership.

Those bylaws remained untouched for years, and over time they hindered our ability to recruit new members and increase engagement and participation of our membership. When I came to NSSGA four years ago, my job as president and CEO was to ensure that we were effectively advocating for our members. Our bylaws, though, stood in the way, so we created and implemented a new strategic plan to revitalize the organization’s governance structure, which ultimately serves our members and the industry better.

For years, the way that the board of directors was set up and functioned was unclear. NSSGA’s primary job was advocacy, but our ability to create a national grassroots network was limited. Without ways to stay involved, members of our active young leaders group faded away once they turned 40. We also realized that many members of our board were not fully engaged and motivated to achieve broad strategic goals, instead fixating on short-term issues.

It became clear that NSSGA’s governance structure was not aligned to execute against our strategic goals and objectives. To solve this problem, we launched an effort to capitalize on our assets and address our deficiencies in achieving the goals we set for ourselves. This took time and resources, but in a relatively brief period, we made major improvements to our board structure, reenergized our leadership, and built a pathway for younger generations to stay involved.

Having specific topic-based committees with targeted subcommittees allows us to engage volunteers who would not have otherwise had a chance to get involved in national association leadership.

As we progressed, we addressed some fundamental flaws in our governance structure to broaden the scope of our board of directors, so that we could involve more than just company CEOs. A past chairman created the Board Evolution Initiative Task Force, which was charged with building a governance structure that could ensure NSSGA would thrive in an ever-changing business climate, while harnessing the expertise of our industry’s most senior leaders.

The command-and-control function is now in the hands of our executive committee, including our officers (chair, vice chairs, treasurer, secretary, etc.). This 22-member group represents the various functions and activities of the individual NSSGA departments and interacts with the board committees. The larger board is now more clearly focused on recruitment, activation, and participation.

The leadership is further broken down into issue-focused committees, like communications, education, government affairs, and membership. Having specific topic-based committees with targeted subcommittees allows us to engage volunteers who would not have otherwise had a chance to get involved in national association leadership.

To keep young leaders involved throughout their career, we created a clear pathway for them to get involved in ways that capitalized on their skills and expertise. A young leader was placed on each standing committee, and the chair and immediate past chair of the young leaders group serve as voting members of the Nominating and Leadership Development Committee, which recommends individuals for board membership.

A year after implementing these changes, we’ve reenergized our executives and brought new leaders into active roles in our association. We see that the business of the association is being conducted more quickly. Our meetings and education committee members have helped us select speakers for upcoming events, and the members on our safety and health subcommittee are focused on preparing comments for our primary regulators that seek to improve safety.

Most recently, at our annual convention in March, our board approved a new three-year strategic plan that builds off this new board structure. So while it took a lot of effort to create a new structure, the positive results of realignment have been immediate and tangible. By 2021, we will fully implement all the new bylaws.

If you are concerned that your governance structure may be hindering your association’s growth and success, it might help to focus on a realignment effort guided by a strategic plan.

Cultural Differences on Your Board? Set Some Ground Rules.

oard members don’t have to agree on everything. But they do have to agree on the terms by which they’ll be disagreeing.

That’s something Magdalena N. Mook, executive director and CEO of the International Coach Federation, has thought a lot about when working with her board. ICF has broad global reach—30,000 members in 140 countries—which has plenty of upsides. But with its nine board members hailing from seven countries, coordination can be a challenge both logistically and culturally.

“[The diversity of the board] is great, because we have a variety of opinions and inputs,” she says. “But at the same time we noticed that for the board to be performing as a high-performing body, we need a little structure influenced by culture.”

We give each other permission to call each other out on not operating in the same way.

That’s no small task—culture is a word that encompasses a variety of backgrounds and differences. “We’re talking about gender, we’re talking about sexual orientation, we’re talking about economic position,” she says. “In our case we have a couple of board members working at large corporations, other are entrepreneurs. It all really influences the way they see the word, and how they work with each other, and how they represent the organization.”

To help get that variety of board members to work together, ICF instituted some practical guidelines. For instance, it makes its board seats at-large rather than region-based, to emphasize that board members serve the entire organization, not just the area they hail from. But Mook has also helped the board establish a straightforward six-point set of working guidelines—called “board promises and agreements”—that it revisits each term. To wit:

  1. Remember who we serve and why
  2. Think systemically, speak and act courageously
  3. Listen to learn, and express to explore with an open heart, mind, and gut
  4. Embrace our similarities and differences to embody a global mindset
  5. Make decisions and progress towards agreed priorities and keep commitments
  6. Be intentional in mine and our participation

Those six guidelines were whittled down from an original 48, and while some of the six that remain seem straightforward enough on the surface, they actually reflect serious challenges with diverse boards, particularly global boards. “A big part of [the challenge for the board] is the style of working together,” she says. “Our American colleagues are never shy about voicing an opinion. An Asian colleague might not speak until being asked. We conduct business in English, but for many of our board members English is not their first language, and not the language they normally work in.”

That means the ICF board spends a fair amount of time checking in on itself to confirm that everybody’s on the same page regarding the details of a point under discussion. “We have to be sure to indicate in a clear way so the understanding is the same,” Mook says. “Many times when the board makes a decision, and especially when the board is voting on something, we restate and make sure everybody understands the motion on the table.”

But though Mook is working with an international board, the issues she faces are common to boards of all types. (Indeed, she’ll be leading a Learning Lab on that point titled “Culturally Diverse Boards Drive Results” at the ASAE Annual Meeting & Expo in Toronto in August.) Every board, she says, could stand to pay attention to the blind spots and different approaches they bring to the boardroom. “We do training around different cultural norms,” she says. “Our members are typically quite experienced, cosmopolitan individuals, but sometimes it’s good to see those differences. We also have a very open conversation about personal biases and preferences that they may have. We give each other permission to call each other out on not operating in the same way.”

That may be a relatively labor-intensive way of managing a board, but Mook says ICF has reaped the benefits of a considered approach to every board member. “The fact that we have an international board is an enriching factor,” she says. “It means we have a very diverse and complex organization. The voices and knowledge the experience of the board, help make decisions that benefit the entire the system, rather than favoriting one [region] over the other. It is also very educational for our board members to be able to work hand in hand with colleagues with other cultures.”

What does your association do to promote diversity on your board—and to address the cultural differences that are part of that diversity? Share your experiences in the comments.

5 Ways an External Interim CEO Can Improve Leadership Transitions

Similar to death and taxes, CEO transitions are a given for organizations. Whether the departure is planned or unexpected, all associations will likely eventually face a leadership transition. Understandably, boards may want to move quickly in finding a replacement. But there is a danger in moving too quickly. 

The result can be an insufficiently vetted successor who is culturally unsuited for the organization or overwhelmed with a plethora of strategic and operating “fires” to address. A corresponding danger is an association that is just not ready for a new executive. Executive search is a two-way street. The organization may be better served by slowing down the search process in order to assess the current status of operations and governance and fix issues before bringing in a successor.

Regardless of how quickly the CEO position is filled, there is also the issue of interim staff leadership during the transition. Association boards frequently rely on a board leader or current staff leaders to fill this role. Although these options may involve the smallest out-of-pocket expense upfront, they can prove costly in other ways. Such individuals, given the commitments of their other jobs, may not have sufficient time to handle the full-time role of a CEO, especially if the association is facing a highly competitive or turbulent operating environment. 

Executive search is a two-way street. The organization may be better served by slowing down the search process in order to assess the current status of operations and governance and fix issues before bringing in a successor.

Many associations find that engaging a professional interim CEO is a good choice for a transition. Such an individual is experienced in entering organizations during transition and not encumbered with a permanent role. Professional interim CEOs have a job to do, they do it in a relatively short time, and then they move on to a new role with another organization. Here are five ways that an external interim executive can add value during leadership transitions: 

1. Conduct independent organizational assessments. Any incoming CEO would find it helpful to take the pulse of the current operating environment from the perspective of stakeholder groups. An interim CEO can offer the tools and independent perspective to assess:

  • governance structure and operations
  • member perceptions
  • staff morale and engagement
  • external stakeholder perceptions, including corporate supporters, advocacy partners, and entities teaming with the association on educational content development

2. Expedite governance and operational improvements. Interim CEOs bring previous experience in the CEO role and significant consulting experience with similar organizations. They are well-positioned to extinguish fires and identify opportunities for structural and performance enhancements that can be expedited during the transition period. 

3. Make tough staffing decisions. Some executives leave their organizations with one or more poor-performing staff members. An interim staff leader is highly qualified to undertake independent staff assessments and make tough decisions when necessary. This allows the successor to start with a clean slate rather than wasting political capital on difficult staffing decisions.

4. Identify and groom the right candidate Many organizations focus only on external candidates. During one of our recent interim CEO assignments, we early-on identified a “diamond in the rough” and convinced the board that they had a CEO candidate in-house. This individual was well-respected but lacked leadership experience in several critical areas. The board embarked on a two-year mentoring program with specific development activities and milestones for the candidate.

5. Spend time on the executive search. Rather than rushing an executive search, an interim CEO can give an association the luxury of time. Within a three- or four-month period, associations can

  • initiate changes to make the organization more attractive for potential candidates;
  • have thorough discussions and reach true consensus on the ideal candidate profile; 
  • consider both internal and external candidates; 
  • be confident with an important decision for the organization.

Depending on the circumstances, the interim CEO may be well-positioned to provide input to the search committee regarding the CEO position or about specific candidates and their perceived fit with the association’s needs. Although external interim executives are not the right solution for every transition, they should be considered and may pay dividends beyond their service.

How Associations Can Create a Risk Report

Who is responsible for monitoring and mitigating potential risks inside your association?

That’s a question that came up at a recent audit committee meeting that I attended. The association’s senior management team is not only responsible for identifying risks and developing processes to mitigate the occurrence of risks, but they’re also responsible for educating their board of directors on the risk-monitoring process.

Although it may be debatable which committee is best equipped to monitor and review an association’s risk-assessment process, it’s critical that this responsibility is clearly assigned and executed as an element of a good governance structure. But even before this responsibility can be assigned, the association’s senior management team must know how to define and classify risk.

What Is Risk?

Risk is defined as the potential for gaining or losing something of value. Something of value can be gained or lost by an association that takes, or fails to take, certain actions. Every action has the potential to affect the association’s reputation in the community, as well as its members and constituents. Reputational risk is a common element shared by all other risks, as shown in this diagram:

Figure 1: Risk Categories

diagram showing the different types of risk

Risks cover the following broad categories, but any one risk can cross several categories:

1. Operational risks impede an association’s ability to conduct business and accomplish its program objectives. Some of these risks include the absence of a tested business continuity plan; lack of a good succession plan for key executives; outdated policies, procedures, and personnel manuals; and insufficient insurance coverage.

2. Financial risks jeopardize the security of an association’s assets and can include insufficient internal controls over high-risk areas, such as expense reports and corporate credit cards, bank reconciliations, contracting and vendor relationships, wire transfers, and other cash disbursements. Inadequate financial reserves, the lack of available lines of credit, and outdated investment policies are circumstances that create additional financial risks for an association.

3. Compliance risks affect an association’s nonprofit status and can result in governmental inquiries. These include engaging in activities that may be contrary to your tax-exempt status, inaccurately or failing to report unrelated business income, and not complying with the Department of Labor’s rules and regulations around employee benefit plans.

4. Strategic risks are present when members or constituents don’t see the value proposition in your programs or activities, which can erode an association’s relevance, or when programs are ineffective and operating at a significant financial deficit. Competition, as well as political and social influences, can also present strategic risks to an association.

5. Legal risks can distract an association and its leadership from executing on mission, and they can also result in substantial costs to the association. These risks include an outdated employee manual or lack of enforcement for whistleblower protection policies or a code of ethics. In addition, loss of personal data, discrimination claims, antitrust activity, and breach-of-contract terms are additional areas of legal risk.

6. Information technology risks include a lack of enforced policies on data backups, failure to replace and update system hardware and software, and an absence of controls over access to your financial and operational systems. Other common risks covered within this category: failing to require complex passwords, as well as the periodic changing of passwords, neglecting to update software patches, and failing to train staff on the appropriate use of email.

The Responsibility to Monitor Risk

An association’s risk-assessment process should involve the identification, classification, and reporting of all potential risks. Although there are numerous ways to accumulate and report on this data, one commonly used method is the “stop light” method.

Management’s goal with this report is to provide a transparent view of the association’s current evaluation of risk to the board of directors, who are the responsible for reviewing and/or challenging it.

Once a risk is identified, its disposition—mitigate, accept, transfer—must be determined through an action plan. For example, the action plan may include the following steps:

  • Increasing the use of specialized consultants in the areas of IT, HR, legal, accounting, and/or tax
  • Implementing enhanced internal controls over contracting, cash disbursements, credit card transactions, and payroll
  • Refreshing the association’s strategic plan to adapt and adjust to a changing social, political, and economic environment
  • Instituting a standard process for reviewing and updating job descriptions, personnel manuals, accounting policies, and procedures manuals
  • Establishing a semi-annual schedule to review and test your association’s business-continuity plan
  • Ensuring an annual review of your insurance coverage is performed and that your coverage is aligned with current risks, for example cyber liability coverage

After the action plan is executed, the residual risk is concluded to be:

  • Green: Risk has been substantially transferred and mitigated (by insurance or contract, for example). Minimal risk remains.
  • Yellow: Risk has been partially transferred and mitigated, but an acceptable level of business risk remains.
  • Red: An unacceptable level of risk remains after all actions have been executed, and immediate attention is needed to address this high-risk area.

Management’s goal with this report is to provide a transparent view of the association’s current evaluation of risk to the board of directors, who are the responsible for reviewing and/or challenging it.

Some associations have the entire board review the report, while others may create a risk or compliance committee or make risk review and mitigation a part of the finance or audit committee’s charter.

Regardless of who is charged with monitoring risk, it’s critical that a healthy discussion ensues on the risks, management’s mitigation plan, and resulting residual risk conclusion. In addition, the composition of the committee should include those individuals who have experience in assessing risk. This team may also include business owners, financial executives, and other members in and outside of your industry.

Each risk assessment should occur on a predetermined basis throughout the year and be updated as association- and world-related events occur. Leveraging the collective experience of your leadership team is important to developing a comprehensive risk response that has buy-in from both management and the board.

CEO to CEO: Preparing for New Volunteer Leadership

Ideally, the incoming chair will have spent a few years as the vice chair and engaged in all major decision making. About six months before the new chair takes over, we begin to include them in regular calls with the outgoing chair to help them understand the role. This also allows for opportunities to figure out their preferences, as I am always flexible if they want to structure the relationship differently than their predecessors in terms of how often we speak or what updates they want.

—Scott Lynch, CAE, president and CEO, American Boiler Manufacturers Association, Vienna, Virginia

The partnership requires mutual trust. Because my association’s leadership development system emphasizes collaboration and strategic continuity, conversations with the incoming board chair focus on communications—to what level of detail does the incoming board chair expect to be informed or what mode of communication does he or she prefer. I also stress that I am here to make the board leadership look good. We also attend ASAE’s CEO Symposium or Exceptional Boards seminar.

—G. Larry Merrill, CAE, executive director, Michigan Townships Association, Lansing, Michigan

At my previous organization, onboarding a new chair simply involved walking down the street to their office a few times to discuss the organization, their role, my role, and what they wanted to achieve. I continue this tradition with the incoming chairs at ARCSI during a three-day “mini-retreat” in their location. I learn about the daily challenges they face and what’s important to them, and they learn about me and my management style. While the cost of the annual trip can be challenging, it is far outweighed by the benefits.

—Ernie Hartong, CEO, Association of Residential Cleaning Services International, Columbus, Ohio

Once the chair is elected, we ask, “What do you hope to report to members in your outgoing message a year from now?” This question helps chairs identify specific goals they want to accomplish. While each chair brings a unique personality and perspective, they must exude confidence and commitment to the organization. We hold one-on-one meetings with new chairs to discuss leaders and leadership styles they admire, help them articulate their goals, and, ultimately, set the stage for their “year in review” speech.

—Lynda J. Patterson, FASAE, CAE, president and owner, AMPED—Association Management Partners and Executive Directors, Madison, Wisconsin

Is Your Board Ready for a Crisis?

How well-prepared are boards for surprises? Bad news coverage, social-media flareups, questionable legislation?

If we’re being honest with ourselves, the answer is likely not much at all. Boards meet so intermittently, and focus so much on strategic issues (one hopes), that training them in crisis management is a relatively low priority.

But that doesn’t mean they can’t get up to speed quickly. I’ve thought about this in the context of my cover story in the latest Associations Now magazine, about how a pair of associations responded to statewide legislation that prompted them to contemplate moving or cancelling their meetings. For the American Counseling Association, Tennessee legislation that countered the profession’s code of ethics moved ACA to consider moving its next conference out of Nashville; the American Public Transportation Association pondered moving a meeting out of Charlotte after North Carolina passed a law diminishing LGBT protections.

ACA left; APTA stayed. Both associations’ stories are worth reading about. But I want to focus on ACA’s case here, because it spotlights three lessons about how a strong relationship between a CEO, board chair, and board, can lead to an effective result.

Before anything else, listen. ACA has a large board—30 people—and getting all of them to get together on a conference call in an emergency was a challenge from the start. So executive director Richard Yep, FASAE, CAE, stressed the importance of making sure that once everyone was gathered that they didn’t feel pressed to make an immediate decision. “[ACA’s board president] said, ‘Look, we’re going to go around the room, although we’re on the phone, I want each of you to share where you are on this issue right now,’” Yep says. “‘Take two minutes, just tell us all, and nobody’s going to interrupt you. We’re just going to go around and find out where we’re all at.”

ACA’s board turned out to be quite split—the new law was a black eye for the profession, the consensus went, but what did leaving Nashville say to ACA members in Tennessee? Would they feel abandoned? For Yep, that conversation clarified the message it needed to be sending, regardless of whether it stayed or left. “Our job was to reassure those board members, as well as our folks in Tennessee, that what our goal is to send a message to the governor and to the legislature. We are not abandoning you. We still want to work on advocacy issues to repeal this law. We’re going to do whatever we can.”

Keep the conversation high-level. Abandoning a meeting is costly—there are penalties from the hotels and other venues, and that force majeure clause in your contracts likely won’t apply if the issue is a law that runs against your association’s mission. Every association will have to decide for itself what expense it can absorb. But ACA stressed keeping cost considerations out of the conversation, at least at first.

Yep recalls that the first board conversation deliberately avoided “how this is going to cost us. Let’s discuss the actual issue relative to our code of ethics being challenged.” For a group of counselors, it was more important to get the emotional tenor of the conversation right, Yep says. “Counselors move a lot on how somebody feels, what their emotions are, where they’re at. So [our board chair] did that. She still, in that first conversation, limited them to not necessarily talking about how much it would cost. We did eventually brief them on what the potential penalties might be and how much we have to scramble to get this done.”

Think about what your board needs next time. Every board has its own particular mix of interests and expertise—technology, finance, communications, and so forth. That’s a good thing. But ACA’s experience was a reminder to Yep that you can’t have too many discussions about the importance of strategic focus. “It struck me that when we were having those conversations with the board, some of them really spoke from a deep feeling of emotion and others spoke of it from the perspective of ‘Was this a good business decision?’ We need to get people on a level playing field relative to, ‘Here are your roles and responsibilities. This is a strategic plan. This is how it aligns with what we’re doing.’ What it says to me is I need to do a better job of making sure they understand those things.”

Likely no CEO could ever feel like he or she has done enough.

How have you helped your board guide your association through a crisis, and how do you prepare them for the next one? Share your experiences in the comments.

Breaking Up With an Out-of-Sync Chapter

In 2007, Liana Watson was managing a state chapter of the American Society of Radiologic Technologists that didn’t support one of ASRT’s legislative initiatives. That was fine; it happens. What wasn’t fine was that the chapter was being publicly vocal about its disagreement.

“We didn’t say, ‘You have to agree with us,’” says Watson, ASRT’s associate executive director of operations and governance. “We said, ‘If you disagree with us, we’re going to ask that you don’t promote that you are disagreeing with us.’” The chapter didn’t comply.

What to do? It can be tempting to speedily sever the relationship with a “rogue” chapter. But ASRT pursued a more patient approach to avoid exacerbating matters. It sanctioned the chapter by systematically removing the benefits it received. Free approval of continuing education credits—gone. Financial incentives—gone. A seat on ASRT’s house of delegates—gone. After two years under this probationary status with no change in course, the chapter became inactive.

“They basically become unchartered because we no longer have contact with them, and it looks like they don’t have a leadership structure in place any longer,” Watson says.

“Low numbers don’t mean automatic closure, but those numbers can help prompt more focus from chapters.”–Bryan Harrison, Specialty Equipment Market Association

Of course, not every chapter-related problem is born out of overt conflict. Bryan Harrison, networks director at the Specialty Equipment Market Association, says better data gathering about components can help reduce high emotions in chapter conflict. When making decisions about sunsetting a chapter, for instance, engagement data is particularly relevant. Among the key performance indictors he recommends monitoring: event registration, revenue, and membership retention, as well as impact of benefits and growth in emerging markets.

“Ultimately the question we seek to answer is, are we delivering on the goal of chapter membership directly enhancing career or company growth?” Low numbers don’t mean automatic closure, but those numbers can help prompt more focus from chapters. And if “there’s no solution, unfortunately dissolution may become the only viable option,” Harrison says.

A shuttered chapter needn’t be closed forever, though. In 2012, a new group of ASRT members in the state with the inactive chapter approached headquarters to express interest in becoming rechartered. In 2015, after meeting ASRT’s compliance requirements, it’s back on board.

“A component may be at the point where they just can’t be affiliated with the national anymore,” Watson says “but it doesn’t necessarily mean that they will never be able to come back to the fold again.”

[This article was originally published in the Associations Now print edition, titled “Cutting the Cord.”]

Navigating the Transformation to More Diverse Committees

Associations, by definition, support targeted communities, representing and serving specific industries and professions. But, within those communities, a diverse volunteer base is critical to generate the insight, perspective, and cultural awareness required for organizations to stay relevant in the 21st century. 

Your organization may have recruitment processes in place to ensure a diverse staff, but does it apply the same effort to volunteer committees? How do you think about and define diversity in the committee context? How do you recruit to create a balanced yet diverse group of volunteers? 

If you make the effort to diversify your pool of volunteers, the process will provide invaluable benefits for your organization. Diverse volunteer committees yield

  • dynamic discussions and a range of opinions 
  • role models for members who can identify with the volunteers
  • access to an informal focus group whose members can offer perspectives on new programs and services 
  • a wider network and set of connections to use as a launching point for expanding your membership
  • evidence of your organization’s commitment to inclusivity for all members

A diverse volunteer base is critical to generate the insight, perspective, and cultural awareness required for organizations to stay relevant in the 21st century.

In one example, the Optical Society experienced many of these benefits after implementing a recruitment effort to broaden its volunteer pipeline. In strategic planning discussions, OSA determined that a well-rounded corporate committee would provide the input the society needed to accomplish its goal of increasing industry participation. 

“This focused change in our corporate-committee makeup resulted in a diverse volunteer committee body that reflected the community that we wanted to serve,” says OSA Chief Industry Relations Officer Melissa Russell. “The existing corporate committee consisted mostly of seasoned executives based in the U.S. After the evaluation, goal-setting, and the deliberate recruitment effort, we had a whole new dynamic at the table—exactly what we were looking for.”

Goal Setting

In thinking through what you want to accomplish with well-rounded committees, consider scenarios like these: If a significant proportion of your members are executives, do you want to mirror that proportion in your committees, or do you want to target young professionals for some committee seats to build future engagement and next-generation leaders? If your organization represents an international community but most committee members are based in one country, should you assign a predetermined number of committee seats to other nations to increase geographic diversity?

Even in an organization that serves a targeted demographic group, there is still room for diversity. For example, a women’s medical organization might ensure that committee members represent different races, locales, or levels of experience. In shaping balanced committees, consider these volunteer characteristics:

  • level of work: leaders who focus on strategy versus doers who implement tasks and projects
  • professional experience: early career versus seasoned executive
  • demographics: age, gender, and race
  • job function: varying job types in the community the association serves
  • geographic distribution: U.S. or global representation

It also helps to think about why you want diverse committees: To represent the makeup of your membership? To attract more members of a particular group to your organization? To bring more perspectives to the table or to evaluate program ideas? 

Documenting your goals and committee criteria in writing will ensure that staff and volunteers are moving forward together with the same vision and a consistent strategy.

Getting Started

Although every organization will have a different process, here are a few steps to get started.

Obtain internal buy-in. Depending on the scope of the change to the makeup of your committees, you may need a mini-campaign to secure internal buy-in and to justify the effort. Who is going to advocate for this change? Staff, department leads, committee chairs? 

Get formal approval. If your committee scope or bylaws are affected by the changes, you will need to consider updates to or votes on these documents. How does the timing of the approval affect your recruitment plan? 

Identify recruitment tactics. Map out your approach for this new recruitment strategy. Because the candidates you seek to engage may not be in your typical sphere of outreach, you may need to adopt some new communication and recruitment tactics.

Review the nomination process. Be prepared to submit new volunteers’ names for consideration at the appropriate opportunity. Is there an annual process, or is the cycle ongoing?

Don’t expect to achieve success overnight. If you make this a proactive effort year-round, it will, over time, seamlessly integrate with your committee recruitment process. Ideally, a cultural shift will also result, creating a more inclusive, diverse organization.