Should Staff Get a Say in Hiring the New ED? Why Collaboration Leads to Better Transitions

Here’s the story:

I am a nonprofit staffer in a small team of less than five employees. Our ED is leaving and I've felt quite disenfranchised by how little the board has involved the staff in the transition. I often feel like the board is completely disconnected from the staff, and that they don't truly understand our work. It’s hard watching others make major decisions about the organization’s (and ultimately my) future, without any input. I've talked about this with my ED but I don’t know if my thoughts have been shared with the board. Is this just the way things are? Am I wrong to feel like I should be involved? I feel lost and don’t know what power I have in this situation. 

Here’s my take:

I have been in your shoes, and I empathize with your concern and frustration. Are you wrong to want to be involved in the leadership transition? Not at all. Especially because, spoiler alert: in an organization with a small team, you will certainly be involved in some way. Ideally, staff involvement in leadership transitions is handled in an intentional and constructive manner. But sometimes, that’s not the case. But having supported boards through ED transitions, what I can tell you is that in most cases, the board is doing its best in a challenging situation, and the fallout that staff can experience is unintentional - but nevertheless, completely avoidable!

Why Leadership Transitions Hit Small Teams Hard

Leadership transitions are a very challenging time for any nonprofit, but especially in small organizations. Small organizations often have less formalized structures around roles, workflows, and institutional memory. This can leave the team reliant on informal ways of organizing work that have evolved organically in alignment with the particular skills and personalities of individuals on the team. 

 When you have a team of five, turnover in one position is a major upheaval; that’s 20% of your team leaving! And it’s going to have a cascade effect on the whole team that can seriously disrupt the organization’s productivity, culture and long-term impact. On top of that, where a small team has a strong, cohesive relationship, there is often a sense of ‘grief’ over losing a valued coworker, and fear that what you enjoy about your workplace will be lost. 

 When the person leaving the organization is the ED, all of these challenges are amplified, with the added anxieties that come along with getting a new boss. If there are existing tensions in the organization, this is the time they’re going to boil over. In your case, you mention a longstanding feeling that the board doesn’t ‘get’ or value the work you do in the organization, so it makes sense that you feel apprehension about the transition, and some distrust of the board’s process. It would be a lot to ask you to simply ‘trust the process’, so instead I’ll try to shed some light on what might be happening on the board side of things, and then explore how you can leverage your agency to influence a positive outcome for the leadership transition.

Why Is The Board Ignoring You? They’re Probably Overwhelmed

Boards are often unprepared to manage an ED transition, without a succession plan or HR expertise. This leaves them scrambling to build the plane while they’re flying it. Board chairs who have managed an ED transition refer to the task as an extremely stressful ‘full time job’, which they are often managing on top of paid work and busy personal lives. 

 From the staff perspective, a lack of transparency, communication and engagement from the board can signal disrespect (they don’t care about our opinion) or incompetence (they don’t know what they’re doing). In reality, it’s more likely a reflection of the board’s scramble. What appears to be a communications blackout to staff, is likely viewed as a communications delay to the board while they figure things out. 

But even when boards do have a plan for a leadership transition, they may choose not to engage staff in the process. Some boards worry that staff input could compromise the integrity or fairness of the process - especially if internal candidates are applying. In some cases, the board may be trying to respect the governance norm of not directly engaging with staff; or because it’s outside of the scope of their regular role, they simply don’t consider a staff role in the process. That’s a missed opportunity.

Yes, Boards Should Involve Staff in ED transitions - Here’s How

Boards absolutely should be thinking about how to engage and communicate with staff during an ED transition, especially in a small organization. This will avoid unnecessary tension and make for a better process overall. Boards should definitely consider the staff’s experience during a leadership transition, with an awareness of how the board’s positional power amplifies their actions (or inactions). And ideally, boards should develop an appropriately collaborative approach to managing the transition with staff. 

The easiest and most effective path here is to have an established ED succession plan in place before it’s needed! This will allow the organization to be thoughtful and intentional about building a process that fits the organization’s needs, values and culture, without the time pressure of an imminent transition. But for boards facing an ED transition without any existing policy or process to guide them, here are some tips to build trust and steward staff relationships: 

• Communicate early and often. A lack of communication invites assumptions, which can derail the process. When it comes to staff, don’t hesitate to be upfront. Share the board’s plan as soon as possible, and if you don’t have one yet, say so (and let the team know when to expect it). Send regular updates throughout the process; a simple email from the board chair that says ‘hey, we’re releasing the job posting tomorrow’ or ‘we have shortlisted candidates and expect to make a hiring decision next week’ will be appreciated more than you know.
• Open a dialogue with staff. Updates are essential, but you can go further to create opportunities for staff to ask questions, share concerns or make suggestions through one or more team meetings with board representatives. Everyone will be better off when the team has a chance to be heard, and real-time communication can do a lot to de-escalate any tensions that are simmering.
• Build a collaborative process: Engage staff in the process in an appropriate way. This could include: consulting the staff on leadership priorities, inviting input on the role description or screening criteria, or even inviting staff into the screening or interview process. The reality is that the board has a limited understanding of the organization’s context, and engaging staff expertise in a strategic way can strengthen the overall process. 
• Compensate for additional work. In leadership transitions, it’s common for staff to take on additional roles or responsibilities. Additional compensation can demonstrate the board’s awareness and appreciation of staff’s essential role in stabilizing and stewarding the organization during a challenging time - but make sure this is handled equitably. 
• Be thoughtful about internal succession. In small organizations, there can be sensitivities that come with considering internal candidates. Be clear and upfront about the board’s approach to internal candidates. Ensure that the criteria for internal hiring is transparent and that the process is equitable. Don’t pit staff against one another, and don’t interview internal staff if you know you’re not going to hire them.

The internal context surrounding leadership transitions can vary significantly. What is appropriate and effective in one organization could be dysfunctional in the next, and there is no ‘perfect’ process. But generally, boards should seek to build trust with staff during this critical time, make decisions that align with organizational values, and err on the side of transparency. But what happens if your board doesn’t take this approach?

How to exercise your agency as a nonprofit staffer

Nonprofit staff generally don’t have any formal authority when it comes to a leadership transition, but you do have agency to influence the process and outcome. But before you decide how to use that agency, it’s important to clarify your goals. What is it that you want or need during this process? Do you want to be kept informed of the process? Do you want to ensure that staff input is included throughout the process? Do you want to be considered for the ED role? Do you want to leverage this transition to advance internal change or growth?

Once you are clear on what it is that you want or need, it’s okay to try communicating that in a clear, constructive way. If the outgoing ED is still in their role, it’s best to go through them, otherwise you can reach out to the board directly. In any case, the best you can do is articulate your questions, concerns or offer, and be as specific as possible. 

Aside from that, I recommend you focus on the areas of your work where you do have direct influence. Decide how you want to engage with or support the transition as a member of the team. For example, if you are a program manager, you might want to think about how to orient the incoming ED to your program. If you’re interested in professional growth, you can find ways to take on more responsibility during or after the transition. If you’re concerned about shifts in your workplace culture, you can start being intentional about strengthening relationships with your peers. 

How to stay grounded during an unsettling time

Leadership transitions are always difficult to go through, and all the more so when we feel shut out of the process. You can share your perspective and offer your support to the board, but ultimately, it’s up to them to decide how to manage the process. If their approach falls short of your expectations, know that it’s probably the result of structural capacity issues, and not in any way personal. Ride out the transition period with a focus on what matters most to you, and what’s within your scope of influence. Afterward, you can decide whether or not to address any lingering issues with the new ED, and if you’re really unhappy with the board’s selection, you can begin your own search for a new organization. 

 Big Takeaways:

• Leadership transitions are challenging for all organizations, but small teams are especially vulnerable to disruptions and tensions during this time.

• Take the time to develop a robust ED succession plan before it’s needed, and ensure that it considers how to manage staff engagement and communications throughout the process.

• Boards can benefit from a transparent and collaborative relationship with staff during ED transitions.