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

Resources

Women CEOs Earn Less Than Male Counterparts in Associations

Equal Pay

March 12, 2024, is Equal Pay Day, the point on the calendar, according to the National Committee for Pay Equity, that symbolizes how far into the year women must work to earn what men earned in the previous year.

And When It Comes to Associations …

ASAE’s executive compensation team, which consults with associations and boards of directors to benchmark salaries in associations, analyzed data from 2,868 national associations that had paid a full-time CEO.

They found that women association chief executives continue to earn less than men in the same positions in nearly every organizational category. In trade groups, women earn a median of 12 percent less. In professional societies, it is 10 percent less.

A surface look at the data reveals female leaders earn 27 percent less than their male counterparts—though that figure doesn’t tell the full story. Due to what’s called an “uncontrolled pay gap,” it doesn’t account for the complexity and variety of associations or the backgrounds of the executives. It also overlooks the factors that influence CEO pay in associations.

While no two organizations are identical, certain organizational characteristics have a predictable influence on salaries, including the sector represented, member type, geography, and the group’s major activities.

Annual revenue in particular, consistently has the most significant influence on CEO pay because revenue is a proxy for complexity. Organizations with higher revenue generally employ more staff and have more programs and activities. Filtering analysis through that lens allows for a more controlled, accurate compensation analysis.

Doing so showed that men lead many more large organizations than women, which contributes to the big uncontrolled gender pay gap. In the dataset, men lead associations with a median $5 million in annual revenue, where median revenue of organization’s that women lead is $3.1 million.

Organizing CEO salaries by annual revenue helps identify gender differences in compensation at similar organizations more accurately.

In nine distinct revenue categories—ranging from associations under $500,000 in annual revenue to those with more than $25 million—women CEOs earned less in each category. In the $5 million to $7.5 million revenue category, women earned 13 percent less than their male counterparts. And the biggest gap is found in $25-million-plus revenue associations, where women earned 30 percent less.

Trade Versus Professional

In professional societies, women lead nearly as many associations as men. In fact, among professional societies with revenue under $7.5 million, women hold 56 percent of all chief executive positions.

As revenue goes up, men steadily occupy more corner offices topping out at 68 percent of CEOs in the largest associations.

The pay gap in professional societies ranges from a 5-percent gap in the $1 million to $2.5 million revenue category to a 28-point difference in pay at groups with more than $25 million in revenue.

In trade groups, women CEOs are a minority at every revenue category. Overall, women hold one-third of trade association CEO roles. Female CEO compensation trends in trade groups followed the same trends as every other area analyzed, except in two cases.

Pay gaps generally grow larger with annual revenue, except it reverses course among groups with more than $25 million in annual revenue. At these groups, women earn 85% of the median men’s salary. That’s half as much as the wage gap in professional societies in the same revenue category.

Another curious anomaly occurs among CEOs leading trade groups with revenue between $7.5 million and $10 million, where 69 of the CEOs are men and 22 are women. In those organizations, the median salary for women was 13 percent higher than their male counterparts. This is the only category of 42 analyzed to show women with higher median pay.

Researchers carefully analyzed that group to identify contributing factors. Among the 91 groups in this category, women were more likely to lead slightly larger associations. But that alone is not enough to explain the difference. Women lead more groups that are public policy focused, which is a factor that contributes to higher wages. Additionally, a larger percentage of male-led groups were outside areas with a high cost of living, like Washington, Chicago, and New York City.

While all three characteristics contribute to higher median salary for women in this category, the biggest factor may be that smaller datasets produce less predictable results. Salary analysis can only drill down so far before limited data results in anomalies.

About the Data

The ASAE compensation team looked at 2,868 national or international-focused organizations based in the U.S. that had a full-time paid CEO. Because executive compensation disclosure occurs at a different cadence among tax-exempt groups and can lag by more than 12 months, the compensation team normalized the data to ensure accurate comparison.

First, the research team used proven algorithms to address part-year salaries and missing data, which is a common occurrence with the IRS Form 990. Then, when needed, the compensation was aged to reflect the same reporting year.

The Three Pillars That Forward Governance

To improve is to change, so to be perfect is to change often.” In this statement to the House of Commons on June 23, 1926, was Winston Churchill speaking of association governance? Although he was actually responding to criticism about changing political parties, his words still ring true for our purposes. While we haven’t witnessed perfection in association governance, we have recently seen a considerable appetite for change. 

Organizations of all sizes are reexamining their election methodologies and the necessary competencies to advance leaders into their board rooms. Through this process, they may develop new nominating procedures and committees to implement desired changes. Additionally, associations are working to align their board’s responsibilities by moving authority of organizational components (e.g., house of delegates, divisions, assemblies, etc.) to the board. 

Despite the changing environment, boards must not lose sight of the three pillars of good governance: strategy, structure, and culture. Understanding these building blocks and how they intersect with one another will ultimately help boards elevate association performance.

THE ROLE OF STRATEGY 

In business literature, strategy is often characterized as the plan for advanc-ing the organization forward. To advance, associations must focus on their changing environment to inform strategic organizational objectives, while concentrating their financial and intellectual resources effectively. In a 2005 article in Nonprofit

Management & Leadership, author William A. Brown wrote that a board’s time focusing forward on purposeful strategy is “… one of the most salient features associated with organizational performance.” 

That work becomes even more pertinent as associations face a market-driven space where they are competing with numerous for-profit, nonprofit, and online communities for attention and transactions. To be strategic, board members should understand from where they have come (i.e., building on the backs of the organization’s founders), respect where they are (i.e., knowledge of limitless opportunities and limited resources), and focus on where they are going and with or for whom (e.g., current or future members, not former leaders). 

However, many board members do not have the discipline of, or exposure to, strategy development, leading to a “learn on the job” environment. To overcome this, it’s necessary that boards receive training on their duties in strategy development and oversight.

THE SHAPE OF STRUCTURE 

Structure includes the framework, mechanisms, or systems that enable or disable an association to accomplish strategic objectives. They are often designed to engage members and provide a level of expectations, and sometimes authority, to focus on functions, issues, or programs. As part of their role, boards must recognize that structure has unique implications for associations. 

For instance, structures are often codified in bylaws and in policy and procedure documents, some of which can be difficult or time-consuming to change depending on who has the authority to change them. 

Most association structures were also created before current communication methods existed and are steeped in historic practices of representing various membership segments. In addition, these structures are typically modeled after the leadership structures of the industry in which they serve. For instance, many associations have embraced structural elements modeled from universities, Congress, and other bureaucratic entities. Because of this, structures tend to be dysfunctional and counterproductive in meeting the needs of members and the community, especially given the competitive environments facing associations today.

While published in 2013, Association Forum’s “Professional Practice Statement: Governance Structure” is still a tried-and-true document that offers ways to build more flexible governance structures. Among the changes to consider: 

• Designing or reconfiguring for flexibility to allow continual, ongoing change that mirrors both the rate and nature of change in the industry or profession, member service needs, and organizational efficiency.

• Moving away from the traditional, hierarchical array of governing bodies to more flattened structures with fewer, more tightly focused units.

• Limiting large, formally constituted bodies to the minimum required for direction setting and oversight, augmented as needed by smaller, temporary, strategically focused, action-oriented units.

• Viewing staff as a governance partner by giving them more active roles in strategy development. 

Although association structures are often steeped in tradition and made to be inflexible, boards must do their part to advance necessary structural change that facilitates achieving the organization’s mission, goals, and strategic objectives.

THE ULTIMATE RESPONSIBILITY
FOR THE ASSOCIATION’S WELL-BEING LIES WITH THE BOARD

THE NECESSITY OF CULTURE 

The final pillar—culture—refers to how things get done. It involves the organization’s people and history and either enables or inhibits setting strategy, allocating resources, and aligning leadership teams to advance the organization. While it takes years to develop a productive and supportive culture, it can be defeated in minutes, even by one person. 

As volunteer leadership changes, the culture in the boardroom also changes. However, its key influencers are often past leaders who remain periodically engaged. 

In the boardroom, cultural norms include how members treat each other—providing psychologically safe environments to forward meaningful dialogue and deliberation driven by trust, teamwork, candor, and constructive conflict. As Nancy Axelrod wrote in her timeless article “In the Boardroom Culture Counts” (Journal of Association Leadership, 2014), a healthy boardroom culture is essential to advancing strategy.

Trust is a critical element for board culture and is measured in four sets of relationships: within the board, between the board and staff teams, between the board and either a formal or informal body (such as a house of delegates), and between the board and past leaders. 

In a 2017 Academy of Management Journal article, Daniel J. McAllister discussed how trust plays out in each set of relationships. According to McAllister, within the board and between the board and staff members, exhibiting both competence and caring are respected nearly equally. However, caring is a higher value for relationships between the board and past leaders and between the board and a formal or informal body. For instance, when considering legacy issues, such as changing the governance structure or terminating a program, many past leaders can’t imagine that current board members care about the organization like they did (and still do).

Oftentimes, boards face cultural challenges due to the following factors: 

• Rewarding longevity of service versus competency as the heaviest influencers are often past leaders who are not knowledgeable about current dynamics.

• Underappreciating the role of trust in relationships and how trust affects decision quality.

• Adopting group dynamics that reduce decisions to the proposal that is easiest to pass instead of making bold, timely decisions. 

To head off these challenges, boards are starting to identify key competencies in association leaders and board candidates that will help advance the desired strategic objectives. As a result, boardroom conversations are becoming more focused on strategy.

THE INTERSECTION OF PILLARS 

Governance is the fiduciary responsibility of the current board, and while some authority can be delegated to committees, the ultimate responsibility for the association’s well-being lies with the board. To ensure the organization’s well-being and advance its goals, boards need to understand each pillar of governance and how the pillars can work together effectively.

WHILE IT TAKES YEARS TO DEVELOP A PRODUCTIVE AND SUPPORTIVE CULTURE, IT CAN BE DEFEATED IN MINUTES.

As associations face ever-increasing competition, boards need to flatten structures to distribute decision-making and empower available talent, while preventing cultural obstacles from derailing the pursuit of organizational strategy. As they develop their organizations’ strategies, boards should also work to ensure that the appropriate structure and culture are in place to move those strategies forward. Ultimately, staying mindful of how these three pillars intersect can help boards make meaningful decisions for their associations. 

As you get ready for your next board meeting, consider setting an extra chair at your board table for Churchill. What dynamic impact might he make in advancing your organization?

CEO Strategies for Building Board Trust 

If you want to get a sense of the trust level in an association boardroom, just listen. If you’re not hearing much, that could be a sign of a problem.

“When I walk into a room and people are either not willing to share or are only half-sharing, that’s a problem,” said Lowell Aplebaum, FASAE, CAE, CEO of the leadership consultancy Vista Cova. “You can tell they’re holding back, not asking questions, or not listening.”

Trust among board members is harder to come by in the long-running pandemic era. On the cusp of a fourth year of pandemic-related change, boards have experienced extended periods without in-person meetings, had divisive conversations about how an association should act during a crisis, and worked to navigate economic hits from reshuffled meetings and other disruptions—all of which can make it more difficult for board members to find common ground. These conditions can also have trickle-down effects on an organization’s ability to fulfill its mission: According to a 2021 BoardSource report, nearly half (49 percent) of nonprofit chief executives said their boards lack the members they need to “establish trust with the communities they serve.”

Every board should have a handful of board champions who encourage their colleagues to focus on mission. 

Virtual meetings in particular have exacerbated the problem, says A. Michael Gellman, cofounder of Sustainability Education 4 Nonprofits. “Boards have been moving quicker with change than they have been accustomed to over the past three years, and they understand that things will continue to change and that we can’t keep doing things the same way,” he said. “But they’re sort of overwhelmed because of so much continuing change. These things affect trust, especially if board meetings are going to stay virtual, with compressed meeting time and reduced opportunities to connect in person.”

Glenn Tecker, chairman and co-CEO of the consultancy Tecker International, says that the lack of in-person engagement also softens boards’ commitments to the decisions they do make.

“We’re seeing some boards feeling less confident about a decision,” he said. “Intellectually they supported it, but they didn’t trust it. They didn’t feel engaged. More than ever before, we would find board members and boards backing away from a decision that they had made, [saying] ‘I never supported that,’ and then internal politics boiled up.”

Board Champions

To repair or get ahead of such dysfunction, association executives need to identify board members who are best positioned to serve as engaged and trustworthy leaders. Every board, Gellman says, should have a handful of board champions who encourage their colleagues to focus on mission. He stresses that they don’t have to be the longest-tenured board members or even those in executive committee roles. “You don’t have to be an officer to be a board champion,” he said.

Board orientation—where new board members often get introduced to the finer details of board service—is an excellent opportunity for establishing trust. “That’s when the team as a whole is affirming or refining what the board’s values are,” Aplebaum said. “That’s the conversation you should be having: How are we as a board going to demonstrate through action that we are living the values that we’re stating as our priority?”

Board orientations should turn on what Gellman calls a “purpose-building relationship”—establishing a culture in which a board collectively knows its values, aims, and strategy. Within and between meetings, he adds, board members and staff leaders should feel comfortable raising questions on those big-picture issues.

“You need to be proactive and inventory your board to understand their interests and needs, to figure out how to give purpose to their board term,” Gellman said.

Aplebaum agrees that the environment a board works in requires regular, deliberate maintenance—whether the board’s trust level is high or low and whether it is aligned with its stated values or not.

“The CEO is building relationships of trust with every board member—not just the chair, but every board member,” he said. “It’s a proactive and intentional effort that needs to be taken throughout the year. So when difficult moments arise, the CEO is going to be in a better position to customize that role to be the right fit, because they built those individual relationships of trust.”

A Faster Path to Better Boards

Becoming a board member is relatively straightforward at most associations. You demonstrate expertise in a profession, volunteer with the association that serves it, then make your way through the association’s particular governance pipeline to get a board seat.

Engle’s process distills governance down to three pillars—strategy, structure, and culture.

Becoming a good, strategy-minded board member is often another matter, though. Boards don’t always come in with a solid grounding of the work they’re being asked to do, or how to do it. That can lead to divisiveness, inaction, and even outright toxicity. Last month I participated in an Association Forum of Chicagoland webinar on the topic, and much of the conversation turned on the importance of solid onboarding processes.

But as long as I’ve been covering associations, leaders have struggled to get their boards to fully grasp their responsibilities. Mark Engle, DM, FASAE, CAE, principal of Association Management Center (and who helps run ASAE’s Exceptional Boards program), has recently been trying to address that on two fronts. First, he’s been working on something close to a one-size-fits-all introductory video that walks board members through the basics of their duties. It’s not a video AMC shares publicly, but it does a fine job of clarifying the duties specific to boards—in under ten minutes.

That brevity is a response to our ever-shortening attention spans, of course. But it also reflects an effort to boil board work down to governance essentials. “What’s the centerpiece that you alone as a board member are responsible for?” Engle says. “We need to be careful, or various things can really undo what a board is trying to achieve. That means having a mindset of asking what we’re doing with strategy, what you’re doing with structure, and what you’re doing with culture. That helps shape where the conversation goes.”

The emphasis on those three pillars of governance—strategy, structure, and culture—helps streamline the conversation during orientation. And when it comes to avoiding some of the toxicity that can infect boards, Engle stresses that culture can’t be talked about too much. Culture, he points out, simply means how a board gets its work done. But it also speaks to the roadblocks that keep a board from doing its best strategic work—interpersonal disagreements, lack of trust, influence poorly or unethically wielded.

To that end, the lion’s share of the questions that AMC uses in its board member self-assessment [PDF] deal with cultural matters. Among the traits board members are asked to rate themselves on: “I attend all board meetings—physically, mentally, and emotionally”; “I challenge issues and assumptions, not individuals”; “I am respectful of the opinions of other board members”; “I actively recruit new members and leaders.” Those matters can seem straightforward, like a board is setting a low bar for itself. But when those things don’t happen is when boards tend to go awry.

“Building a healthy governance culture is an ongoing process [PDF], not an intermittent task to rescue you if you inherit the ‘board from hell,’ Nancy R. Axelrod wrote years back in an Association Management article that foregrounds the importance of culture. How association boards handle the culture piece will be as distinct as the pipelines they use to fill board seats. But however they handle culture will have a direct influence on how the association will handle strategy and leadership of the association as a whole.

Association CEOs: What I Wish I’d Known

There’s nothing like hindsight, coupled with experience, to show you where your blind spots were long ago. An extended career tends to bring perspective and appreciation for what you may have undervalued in the past. We asked five association CEOs what they wish they had known as young professionals. Although their answers may be especially valuable for today’s YPs, these lessons are worth heeding at every stage of an association career.

The Power of Teams
Michele Ware, Building Owners and Managers Association of Greater Los Angeles

H3: Stag Sans Book / 36px
Lorem Ipsum Dolor Sit

H4: Helvetica Neue Medium / 24px Lorem Ipsum Dolor Sit

H5: Helvetica Neue Medium / 20px
2024 Fall Meeting & Exhibit

I started my career in associations in a temporary position. Four years later, I was running the entire organization. Having worked in every position before becoming CEO, I thought I knew all there was to know about running associations. I knew a lot about finance, events, marketing, and customer service, but I didn’t fully understand that my role wasn’t to know or do everything. I had a hand in every program, every booth sale, every committee—nothing happened in the association that didn’t involve me.

I was burning out early. Something had to change.

I started attending ASAE programs to learn more about being an association CEO. One of the most memorable programs I attended focused on Jim Collins’ book Good to Great. This book, along with many other ASAE programs and resources, helped me develop a deep understanding of how important people are to an organization’s success. Once I put the right people in place (staff, board, volunteers, committees) who were the best in their respective areas, the knowing and doing increased exponentially. While CEOs must be adept in many areas, I wish I had known early on the importance of having the right people on the bus.

The Magic of Community

Peter O’Neil, FASAE, CAE, ASIS International, Arlington, Virginia

Like so many others, I became an association management professional completely by accident. If you had told me 23 years ago that I would remain in this profession for so long, I would likely have thought you were crazy. I would like to have known when I was younger how enormously rewarding this profession would be and what an honor and privilege it would be to work with outstanding people to advance a mission. If I had known that a professional network of peers could be so helpful, supportive, and encouraging, I would not have found you crazy for asking me if this would be my chosen profession all those years ago.

There is no “secret sauce” to becoming a CEO or to being successful in whatever position you hold. My advice is so simple, you may not believe it: Work hard, play fair, be the best you can be in whatever you are asked to do, be honest, be polite, be consistent, and develop meaningful relationships. Be aware of your strengths and your weaknesses, get certified, support the ASAE Foundation, and constantly develop your network and your own abilities.

The Pursuit of Learning

Greta Ziemetz, CAE, NALA-The Paralegal Association, Tulsa, Oklahoma

I wish I had known years ago the importance of learning about all areas of the association, including areas that I might not be excited about. This can be challenging if your association does not provide for job rotations or if you do not have a mentor in the organization who can guide you into specific projects.

So, speak up and volunteer for new projects at your association or in your local community and learn, learn, learn all you can. Attend conferences and local association events, and sit in on sessions and conversations about topics that are outside your comfort zone. Be sure to look outside the association world for education too; there are many other nonprofit and corporate events that can give you a new perspective or insight.

If you focus only on your area of expertise, you will become the expert, but to move into the C-suite you need much more well-rounded experience. Building experience in all areas of an association helped me land my first CEO position, and while I felt confident that I would be successful, having additional knowledge makes my job that much easier.

The Value of Listening

Gregg Balko, FASAE, CAE, Society for the Advancement of Material and Process Engineers, Covina, California 

When I was an aspiring association leader, it was important to me to make sure that people knew that I knew my stuff. Way too often, I demonstrated that by being the first to speak, rather than sitting back and listening. When you rush in to speak first, you’re missing the opportunity to filter or evaluate what you’re hearing and what you’re not hearing. People often share information that’s biased—we all do it—and sometimes what they’re not saying is where the real heart of the issue is.

Process what is being said. Give yourself time to think about what you have heard so you can determine if it gives you a complete picture. If you’re busy talking, you can’t be filtering. Watching how other people react and listening to what other people say gives you so much more information that can help you shape the best response. There’s a lot to be gained when you resist the impulse to be the first voice.

The Importance of Belonging

Teresa Huizar, National Children’s Alliance, Washington, DC

In the association world, we often speak about membership and member benefits in an individualistic way: what an individual member needs and will receive in tangible benefits for their participation. And that certainly has value. However, in my experience—and I wish I had understood this better when I was younger—what members most want their association to deliver is a meaningful sense of belonging.

One of the most important roles an association plays is as a convener. Bringing together leaders to solve complex problems fully engages members in a way that no communications strategy or basket of benefits can replace.

I’ve found significant value in reframing membership as a venture in co-creating the future of our movement, which advocates for victims of child abuse. At the National Children’s Alliance, we’ve invested heavily in systems supporting collaborative work groups and other co-creation models. That has paid off in hundreds of leaders from every corner of our field partnering to create resources for their colleagues, as well as in advocacy and funding wins.

Being successful in an association career requires contributing to a meaningful sense of belonging within your membership. And that requires a shift in thinking from what we do for members as passive recipients to how we exercise every opportunity to grow what we can do together.

Legal Elements of Executive Succession Planning

With more and more baby boomers retiring, more changes are coming to association C-suites. Wise association executives already have a succession plan in place, but it is never too late to develop one if your association lacks a plan. Like insurance, a good succession plan is there when you need it. From a legal perspective, succession planning involves several elements: employment law, contracts, and governance.

You can begin to develop a succession plan by thinking about possible scenarios: How would your association react in the event of a vacancy in particular executive positions? Succession planning is often thought of as applying only to the chief executive, but for business continuity purposes, an organization should have a succession plan in place for each key staff member. If there is an employee whose departure due to retirement or a more lucrative job offer would create problems for your association, then you should have a plan in place to carry on that employee’s work. Every executive’s annual performance review should include not only updating his or her position description but also having a succession plan in place.

In large organizations, it’s more likely that current staff can assume the duties of a departing colleague, even if only on a temporary basis. Smaller organizations face the challenge of identifying someone to backfill the position. Sometimes staff can be cross-trained, but for more-senior positions or those requiring technical knowledge or skills, the solution might be to enlist an interim executive until a replacement can be hired.

Interim Executive Contracts

If an interim executive is hired, the association will likely enter into a contract with an individual or a company that provides interim placement services. In either case, the contract should clearly specify the expected duration of the engagement, payment of fees and expenses, and the interim employee’s duties and limits of authority. He or she is not usually involved in the recruitment of the permanent employee but may be asked to assist with onboarding.

The contract should state that the interim executive will not be considered for permanent placement. This has a number of advantages. It keeps the interim leader focused on the job at hand and not on trying to win the position. It also allows him or her to make necessary but perhaps unpopular decisions as the association transitions to new leadership. And it opens the board to considering others who might be identified through an open search process.

An arrangement with a search firm should be in writing and clearly set forth both parties’ expectations about services to be provided by the firm, the association’s responsibilities, the fee, and the timing for the search.

In some situations, the best choice for an interim CEO may be a current staff member. In such a case, the contract should specify:

  • the CEO duties he or she will carry out during the interim period
  • the duties of the employee’s regular position that he or she will continue to cover
  • changes in compensation, including any benchmarks to be met to earn a bonus
  • whether the employee may apply for the vacant position

In some situations, the interim contract will include a severance payment if the new CEO terminates the employment of the interim CEO. An enhanced severance payment might be necessary to persuade a current senior staffer to take on the interim position.

In times of change, an organization’s continued success—or even its basic functioning—may depend on retaining a few key employees. A retention or stay agreement can be used to entice those employees to stay with the association. This type of agreement, which typically covers a short time period, provides for either a single payment at the end of the stated term or a series of payments on specified dates if the employee is still employed. A stay agreement does not guarantee employment through a specified date. Instead, it is a promise of additional compensation if the employee chooses to stay. The employer may still terminate the employee at any time.

Beginning the Search

Part of an association’s succession plan might be to establish a relationship with a firm that can provide interim executive services and perform the search for the next CEO. An arrangement with a search firm should be in writing and clearly set forth both parties’ expectations about services to be provided by the firm, the association’s responsibilities, the fee, and the timing for the search. Many search firms provide some sort of guarantee that the association will be happy with its new executive, often in the form of a free or low-fee search for a replacement if the executive leaves within the first 12 months of employment. 

The association should be an informed participant in the search and recruitment process. Before providing a job description, the organization’s leadership should take a fresh look at the position, identify the required skills and experience, and think about the work that the new executive will do. Rather than looking at what was needed in the past, the board should ask what the association needs in a CEO today and in the future.

While approval of the full board is likely required to hire a new CEO, you will have a better working relationship with your recruiter if you limit active participation and communication to a small search committee. The committee can brief the full board on the progress of the search and involve them at appropriate points along the way.

The Board’s Role

A vacancy in the CEO position causes disruption not only to the staff but also to the board of directors. The burden of working with the interim CEO and the search firm often falls on the executive committee or the board chair. This burden can be reduced if the association already has a relationship with a firm that can provide both interim executive and search services. 

It is tempting for board members to seize control of the association’s operations during a CEO vacancy, leading to an unhealthy shift from governance to management that will likely present difficulties for the new hire. The board, executive committee, or board chair might be hesitant to back away from some management tasks they had assumed, at least until the new CEO has demonstrated the ability to handle the job. This is particularly true if the previous CEO’s departure was involuntary. An experienced recruiter can help to allay the board’s fears and restore balance to the board-CEO relationship.

The succession plan should include a plan for onboarding the new CEO. A successful onboarding process will increase the chances that the new executive will succeed in the position. The executive committee or board chair should establish achievable goals for the first year and check in with the new CEO periodically. The search firm might provide assistance with onboarding.

Like any business plan, the succession plan should be reviewed periodically and updated as necessary so that it is ready to be implemented when the need arises.

  • Tags:
  • CEO SUCCESSION

Eileen Morgan Johnson, CAE

Eileen Morgan Johnson, CAE, is a partner with Whiteford, Taylor & Preston LLP, in Washington, DC. She is cochair of the firm’s Associations, Nonprofits, and Political Organizations Section.

Why CEOs Need to Plan Their Exits

Don’t you think it’s time you quit?

For many CEOs reading this, the answer is probably “not yet.” Though the average CEO tenure in the corporate world has stayed relatively steady in recent years, there is also a growing phenomenon of “forever CEOs,” those who’ve stayed in the job for a decade, or decades.

There are upsides to a long-tenured exec—stability, institutional knowledge, experience with common crises, and more. But there are also challenges, as a recent article in the New York Times Magazine points out: A steady hand at the helm also means a risk-averse leader who misses opportunities to innovate. The chief example of this in the article is Microsoft’s Steve Ballmer, who managed the company through a “lost decade” where it let the competition pull ahead on search, smartphones, and social media. The company stayed afloat, but it didn’t—forgive me—excel.

Apple is facing this challenge now as its current CEO, Tim Cook, nears retirement age, and every stakeholder has an idea of what a successor needs to be. “An Apple CEO needs to either be the visionary to bring new products to market, or needs to be able to find who the visionary is and partner with that visionary to bring those new products to market,” Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman recently told the Economic Times.

Even if you’re not heading out the door anytime soon, it’s crucial to be thinking about what succession planning will look like.

You don’t need to be running a company with a trillion-dollar market capitalization to be dealing with this stress. The challenge for a small-staff association executive is no different—even if you’re not heading out the door anytime soon, it’s crucial to be thinking about what succession planning will look like in your organization. That means training up your board on the issues that your organization will face in the coming years, and developing a pipeline internally that ensures there are staffers who are ultimately equipped to manage those issues.

Some organizations are taking this process to extremes: One governance expert recently told the Financial Times that some boards are so anxious around risk management and continuity that “they need a plan B and a plan C.” 

But for many organizations, the question is likely more straightforward: What will you need in the coming years that you don’t currently have? Here, the Times story has an example as well: Former Levi’s CEO Chip Bergh, who led the company for 13 years and dedicated most of his efforts around upping the brand’s cool quotient. When he planned to leave, though, he wanted “someone with new talents” and selected Michelle Gass, a retail pro.

Bergh represents what business professor Jeffrey Sonnefeld calls the “ambassador” CEO, neither the long-tenured royal nor the job-hopper. It’s the sweet spot of servant leadership—long enough to dedicate the best of your talents to making an organization better, short enough to know that the job is never up to you alone. The exact amount of time for that will different from executive to executive. But whatever that answer is, the responsible leader has the task of ensuring that they’re preparing somebody else to lead as well as they have. Even if they’re not leading the same way.

Help Your Board Be the Best Version of Itself

Whether your association meets its strategic goals depends greatly on how well the board defines direction, invests leadership, and supports execution. Central to the board’s success in playing those roles is the board-CEO partnership, the nurturing of which arguably falls disproportionately to the executive. To a large degree, the groundwork you lay to sustain engagement and trust enables your board’s best. Those CEOs who most successfully tap into their boards’ vision and leadership capacity are sensitive to the importance of three practices that transcend association management fundamentals.

Enabling Ongoing Learning

Foundational association governance research reported in What Makes High-Performing Boards (2013, ASAE) documented that the highest-performing boards embrace a culture of learning and they benefit from staffs that prepare them well for meetings by providing relevant, complete information. Board orientation is important, but enhancing and tapping into collective knowledge of leaders demands a continual approach.

The CEO, collaborating with the chief elected officer, must be a catalyst for strategic board discussions that stimulate learning—for example, about impactful subjects such as diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility—while appreciating nuances that might steer subject matter choices and direction. Further, it is essential that cyclical board onboarding surfaces and clarifies philosophical considerations. For example, brokering conversations about the board’s risk tolerance and compensation philosophies builds healthy discourse and trust, making difficult board discussions that may come later more comfortable to have.

Ensuring Alignment

As any CEO knows, nothing will derail progress (or tenure) faster than misalignment of culture, values, or expectations. During an executive search, we use a painstaking process to make a complementary match. However, savvy CEOs make it their business to continually facilitate conversations with their boards that function as reality checks: “Is this direction still on target?” “Are we going too slowly, or too fast?”

Not only do conversations like those elicit useful information, but they also convey empathy, which enhances trust. There is a big relationship component here, too. A well-cultivated board-exec relationship will help weather inevitable bumps in the road, but when the relationship is shaky, even small issues can become big ones in the eyes of the board, so investing in the development of authentic relationships is paramount. Bear in mind the changing faces of the board as well—especially taking care to put in the effort necessary one year to the next to understanding the chair-elect. Often, visiting the chair-elect at work a year before that individual’s term as chair is time well-spent in setting the stage for leadership continuity.

Modeling Accountability

Accountability works both ways. The CEO must accept accountability for execution and the board for its fiduciary and strategic responsibilities. If either fails, the prospects for complementary leadership are slim. A big key to building or sustaining a culture of accountability is to model it. Commit to responsibilities. Expect the same of staff. Report results, completely and clearly. Tell the truth. Back up the staff.

I am reminded of a colleague who accepted an interim CEO role at an organization whose board and staff had lost a degree of trust in one another. Noticing this, the interim executive began visibly committing to roles and specific responsibilities—and then regularly reporting on progress. The board noticed. The simple approach demonstrated progress, opened communication, and set the stage for what the board could expect from its CEO. Importantly, it also helped build a positive feeling about the relationship, in a relatively short time establishing greater trust—the bedrock of collaborative progress.

Tactics for Effective Board Member Onboarding

board members

Each year, the National Foundation for Infectious Diseases holds an onboarding session for new and returning board members.

“I think everyone can learn from these discussions, regardless of whether you’ve already served on the board,” said NFID Executive Director and CEO Marla Dalton, PE, CAE. “Since the pandemic, some of our members haven’t met in person, so it’s important to include the full board.”

When done well, onboarding sessions help new members better understand the association’s goals and their role in moving those objectives forward.

“Boards need to be agile,” said David Falchek, CAE, principal at DF Solutions. “You can’t wait a year until new members are fully contributing. Each individual needs to understand what’s going on.”

Creating onboarding experiences that are not only informative and insightful but also fun and engaging can help new volunteer leaders better understand their duties so they can quickly start supporting the association’s vision.

Create a Comfortable Atmosphere

A high-functioning board requires strong personal relationships. This can be difficult to achieve for remote boards, so organizations need to ensure that members get to know one another.

“This builds a trust relationship that empowers them to tackle pressing and sometimes contentious issues,” Falchek said. “Volunteer leaders want to grow and be transformed by their experiences. By creating those opportunities for directors, we get the best of what they have to offer.”

NFID begins its onboarding meeting with fun ice breakers that allow members to get to know one another. That’s especially important since several members started their terms during the pandemic and because NFID holds virtual meetings.

“At the last meeting, we asked members about their first concert experience,” Dalton said. “These fun questions lighten the mood and help the board build comradery.”

NFID’s onboarding session features presentations from the chair and returning members about board roles and responsibilities.

“Our current president discusses her work to give new board members a better sense of what to expect,” Dalton said. “She’s shared the importance of media training, ways to engage with staff, and how to tell which tasks are best-suited for volunteer leaders or for staff.”

Dalton encourages returning members to give presentations as well, which helps them feel more engaged in the activity. In this way, the onboarding session becomes a valuable experience for new and returning directors.

“Have a clear, concise strategic plan that can serve as a North Star against which the board can consider new ideas and projects.”—Marla Dalton, PE, CAE, National Foundation for Infectious Diseases

Set Clear Expectations

If board members don’t understand the association’s culture and strategic plan, they may derail progress or add additional work that isn’t authorized.

“Have a clear, concise strategic plan that can serve as a North Star against which the board can consider new ideas and projects,” Dalton said. “One that offers a balance between inspiring innovation and creativity without taking the organization off course or detracting from the mission.”

According to Falchek, a lot of what associations do for incoming board members is built around the prudent-person rule, a legal principle that says a prudent person with this responsibility should be aware and knowledgeable about certain things.

“For associations, that would include recent work of the board, the current financial status, and the organization’s role,” he said. “Elements such as a year of minutes, financials, the most recent audit, board policies, programs and services, and legal matters help directors meet that standard.”

Falcheck also recommends securing a signed commitment from incoming directors. He uses a “Consent to Serve” document, which is a three-way agreement among the chair, executive, and new director summarizing the rights, responsibilities, and expectations each party has to the other.

“People are more likely to comply with something they sign their name to,” he said. “It can be a screening tool as well. Some prospective directors may read it and turn down the post.”

Allow Room for Growth

In addition to offering opportunities for volunteer leaders to get to know each other and setting clear expectations, Dalton recommends asking board members for feedback on how to improve the experience.

NFID provides a survey to board members after the onboarding session. The questions touch on what directors like and didn’t like about the process, suggestions for alternate approaches, whether the meeting helped them understand their role in the organization, and whether they understand how they can contribute to fulfilling its mission.

Through these surveys, NFID ensures its onboarding process meets expectations. For example, one board member told Dalton last year that the association should return to in-person onboarding sessions. When she included that question in the survey, most of the board preferred virtual meetings because they fit better into their schedules.

“Getting feedback is crucial,” she said. “If members feel that something isn’t working, then we need to be open to making changes. An engaged board member who sees the big picture and understands where they fit in is a great asset, so you need to do [onboarding] right.”

When Do You Take a Stand? 

In June 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned constitutional protections of abortion rights in its ruling on Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. That same week, Rick Harris, CEO of the Association of Proposal Management Professionals, convened a webinar for members to gather and “give people an opportunity to breathe and talk,” as he put it. (More than 600 attended.) To his mind, creating a space for discussion about the ruling was more important than the fact that APMP’s industry wasn’t directly related to women’s health. What Harris noted was that women are 70 percent of APMP’s membership.

“You have to look at what’s important to your membership as a whole, even though the issue may not directly impact the association,” he said. “We could not affect anything on the Dobbs decision, but we looked at it as an opportunity to lift up people who felt like they didn’t have a voice, and it worked wonderfully.”

CEOs are under increased pressure to speak out publicly on hot-button topics, from racism to immigration to war in the Middle East. The pressure can be particularly acute when organizations condemn CEOs who stay silent, and studies show that younger employees are more inclined than other generations to ask leaders to take public stands. But doing so is a challenging business. How do you determine when, and how, to speak—especially with risk-averse boards?

An overall strategy around public statements is important, says Patrick Glaser, MA, MPA, chief practice officer at McKinley Advisors, which has been collaborating with ASAE through its Association Insights Center on research about managing divergent beliefs within associations. (See sidebar.)

“If you go down the road of jumping into every issue that comes along, you’re going to get in a lot of trouble, because you’re going to find yourself making decisions that are inconsistent,” he said. “Your membership will recognize that and say, ‘Well, you spoke out about the turmoil in the Middle East but not this other issue that’s important to me.’ And you can’t really explain why.”

McKinley and ASAE’s research found that CEOs can play three key roles in such situations. First, to be an objective, nonpartisan facilitator of conversations as they arise with boards, members, staff, and stakeholders. Second, to listen “to get beyond stakeholders’ initial reaction to an issue and really unpack things,” Glaser said. Third, to be a “protector” of an association—weighing the pros and cons of making a statement and determining how the issue relates to the association’s best interests and strategy. Close engagement with the board is key before making any formal statement, according to the research, with a reminder to board leaders that their actions should reflect its duty to the organizations, not their emotions.

“If you go down the road of jumping into every issue that comes along, you’re going to get in a lot of trouble, because you’re going to find yourself making decisions that are inconsistent.”

Patrick Glaser, MA, MPA, McKinley Advisors

Holding Back

Peter J. O’Neil, FASAE, CAE, CEO of ASIS International, said he sees the value of such internal assessments, and has put its own protocols to use in response to the recent Israel-Gaza conflict. For instance, it published a list of recommended humanitarian support groups. But he said his inclination is to avoid public stands unless a clear case can be made for making one.

“My experience in the last 30 years has been that it is dangerous for an organization to make a public statement about something that does not directly impact the profession or trade that they serve,” he said.

Determining impact can be particularly complicated for a global association like ASIS International. “If we’re going to be prepared to make a comment about race-related matters in one country or one region, we’d better be prepared to make them about race-related matters in other regions,” he said.

And though the association has a process for triaging conversations with the staff and board about public statements, it doesn’t treat it as a one-size-fits-all plan. After all, the kinds of challenges that spark demands for public statements are inherently complex.

“Yes, we have a policy, practice, and system in place, and people identified who will make the decision about what we might say or not say and how we might say it,” he said. “I’m glad to have something as opposed to nothing, because it guides us. But it doesn’t always lead to the same answer or same action.”

APMP has continued the conversations sparked by the Dobbs ruling, including a second well-attended webinar. But, like ASIS, it doesn’t feel compelled to speak out on every; for instance, it declined to change plans to hold a conference in California, despite members who disapproved of its “sanctuary” status regarding undocumented persons. The guide, Harris said, is what serves members overall, and developing a board and volunteer corps that is open to conversation.

“When we’re looking for board members, we’re not looking for radicals on either side,” he said. “We’re not looking for people who feel like they have to come in and change the association. What we’re looking for are people who have open minds and good ideas.”

THIS IS THE SIDEBAR BELOW

When to Step In 

ASAE’s Association Insights Center, in collaboration with McKinley Advisors, is conducting ongoing research on divergent beliefs within associations. As part of that research, a thought leadership panel of association executives has discussed how divergent beliefs affect their organization and its decision-making. According to an October 2023 survey of the panel, here’s how they decide when to wade into divisive issues most often:

When there’s a risk to the association or field: 77 percent

When stakeholders are impacted: 73 percent

When the issue has been debated and the association recognizes the need to take a position: 61 percent

By contrast, associations are less likely to act on an issue simply because an associate or leader is passionate about or affected by it (30 percent) or because staff members are affected (23 percent).

Additional content goes here.