-
Apply the same diligence in checking out the prospective employer as that organization will do in checking out their prospective employee;
-
Research the organization by talking with people who know it (volunteers or staff);
-
Ask the right questions in an interview (e.g., ‘tell me how your strategic plan was created and what will be accomplished by implementing it?’);
-
Ask for information you need to have (e.g., how the employee’s performance will be measured) before accepting an employment offer; be certain of your rights in the event the employer decides at some future date to terminate employment without legal cause.
Why Good Executives Get Fired
Jack Shand, CMC, CAE
© Leader Quest and Jack F. Shand
Leader Quest started to research the reasons why good association executives are fired a decade ago. This information has been augmented by new cases and additional information.
Men and women who held senior roles (fiduciaries) in business, professional, and philanthropic associations were identified and interviewed. Those selected for the study had been in the position from which they were terminated for an average of five years.
“Good” association executives were defined to be individuals not previously terminated from a job (i.e., it was a “one time” experience). All of the study participants were terminated without legal cause and were provided with payment in lieu of notice. In every case, the participants had also received favorable performance reviews in the role.
The information was augmented by many years of experience counselling executives and organizations on employment issues, including career and hiring strategies following termination. The views of legal professionals and outplacement experts were also included, as well as comparable research conducted in the United States.
This research identified the following reasons why association executives are fired:
1. Personality and conflicting style.
Groups that do not share power well (e.g., some entrepreneurs or individuals with no organization experience) will clash with a chief executive with a very directed leadership style. One participant said, “I don’t seek permission to do the job I’ve been hired to do. What I didn’t understand was the culture of the organization. They wanted me to ask permission.”
An other research participant had the following counsel for volunteers: “Be clear what the expectations really are. Determine a style that works and make sure that the staff person you hire fits with that style.” In other words, don’t hire the race horse to pull the plough!
2. A confused leadership “model”.
Decision making authority varies from event-to-event, decisions are frequently reversed, and power cliques or oligarchies make decisions. One CEO described this as “bathroom not boardroom decisions” because the Board would appear to come to consensus at a meeting, then take a rest break to have individuals or factions lobby and undermine decisions. Individuals are often hands-on to the point of meddling. People may assume elected office (chair or other key position) and believe it is a sanctioned dictatorship.
3. The Board is not strategic.
Directors and staff do not play a strategic role. The association has no pre-determined plan with specific deliverables or objectives to benchmark, and to measure progress.
4. Scattered accountability.
It is difficult to attribute responsibility for actions because either many are involved (volunteers and staff) or no accountability exists whatsoever because individual volunteers take actions which the Board has not authorized and will not challenge. “When I was out of town on business, the chief elected volunteer would call general staff meetings without consulting me. No one would want to correct inappropriate volunteer behaviour,” said one of our study participants.
5. Absence of volunteer training and orientation.
“The new volunteers didn’t understand the context of our progress because they had no history or understanding of our past, including what I had done for the association [for the past ten years]”, observed one research participant.
6. Distrust and/or political factions within the organization.
One research subject reported that his former association had camps on the Board, and the chief elected officer assumed that he had been the choice of the other camp. His words of welcome to the new hire: “You are plotting a coup d’etat against me.” Whenever the executive tried to play peacemaker between the factions, he was accused by one faction as being favorably biased toward an other.
7. Volunteers who covet the position of chief staff officer.
One research subject, once hired, discovered that a prominent director applied for the position but did not get it. That director, while still on the Board, later instigated a campaign to fire the executive. Volunteer orientation is a related issue (see #5 above). Members who do not understand how an association management role differs from other kinds of work may think anyone, especially themselves, can do it.
8. Lost confidence and respect.
The Board or a group of volunteers lose confidence in the chief executive’s ability to achieve the organization’s future goals. Sometimes, like politics in government, the people decide it’s time for new leadership and “fresh blood.” Conversely, the association executive who demonstrates disdain for a volunteer, no matter how much he or she is provoked by abusive, unfair, or unprofessional treatment, will lose the respect and trust of the Board and members. The “do as I say and not as I do” rule very much applies. Association executives must hold themselves to a high standard of professional conduct.
The best advice for job seekers is to be certain they do their homework: