I report to an executive director who has exhibited very poor judgment and unprofessional behaviour in his first month on the job. I’ve told the chair and she says, “Give him more time.” The other staff members feel as I do. Is it unethical to threaten to quit if the board doesn’t get rid of him? His probationary period is about to end, and the AGM is coming up so the chair may change.

It is not unethical to alert them of your intent to resign if the situation does not change, if that is what you truly intend to do. However, it might be unwise. Let’s explore some alternatives. No matter how bad the situation, there are always choices.

First, the chair and the board have invested considerable time and credibility in this recent hiring. If you make them choose between him and you, you should expect to be job-hunting. You might be better to hang on and see what happens, especially with the AGM coming up. They might be waiting until a new chair is in place to act. They may have scheduled an executive meeting to discuss ED evaluation, or even firing. It would be unethical to tell you about it before telling the ED, so remember that the chair’s silence is not necessarily a sign of being uncaring or ignoring the situation.

You may want a reasonable excuse to advise how the situation is getting worse. Consider telling a few board members who know you well that you will be looking for another position, and ask if they will act as references. Such a request is much more neutral than an ultimatum, and does not imply immediate departure. Remember that if a staff member is leaving on short notice, the ED needs to know that, to plan for work coverage and recruitment. Don’t put the chair or board member into a position where they have to choose between confidentiality about your plans and the best interests of the organization.

If the work environment has become truly toxic, you might want to talk to your provincial government and see if you should file a complaint about workplace harassment or bullying. Provincial laws vary in this area.

If you stay on, do what you can to support staff who cannot afford to leave. The fact that other staff agree with you strengthens your case.

However, you should also do some personal reflection, and perhaps ask others who you trust to help. Are you sure your motives are entirely focused on the best interests of the community and organization? Or are you perhaps hurt by being passed over for promotion? Are you perhaps disturbed that the ED is making different decisions than you would have made, without thinking through whether they are better decisions? Does the ED seem unprofessional because he comes from a different culture and has not yet been helped to understand the culture of this organization? For example, what kind of joking is acceptable varies greatly among organizations. Is the ED showing signs of improving as he gains experience in your organization? Are you helping him learn?

After that reflection, put yourself in the shoes of the chair. You’ve decided that your motives were indeed pure, but would they be perceived that way? Are your communications about the ED demonstrating concern for the community and mission, or could they easily be misinterpreted as sour grapes? Can you offer constructive suggestions to improve the situation, instead of saying that firing is the only solution? Are you the logical successor or interim ED, and how does that appear to the chair? Can you give the chair documentation she can verify independently rather than just relying on your observations? Are you restricting your comments to truly major issues that affect mission achievement?

The chair should rightly deem complaints about less serious matters as inappropriate end runs around the ED, and consider such behaviour quite unprofessional on your part. While your concerns sound serious, many issues that nonprofit staff try to bring to the attention of the board are operational ones that the board should not listen to, such as who got what assignment, who will be sent to a conference, or how job duties are being re-arranged. The board hired an ED to manage operations, and meddling will drive away good EDs.

Remember also that even if the ED is on probationary status, he probably gave up a good job to move to this one, and could sue if the new one is not as described. Your organization may not have the deep pockets to defend such a suit, even if there is no major payout required. The board cannot lightly remove the ED without their own documentation of performance and efforts to ameliorate the situation. They have to think about liability. What you described to me does not justify firing for cause.

A positive suggestion you could make to the chair is to update the succession plan now that it has recently been used. Even if the new ED turns out to be the best ED ever, he could still be hit by a bus. The board should be ready to make a new interim leadership decision, and will have learned more about ED recruitment from their recent experience. They should document those learnings for the next board as a revised succession plan.

You may of course by now be even more determined to get rid of the ED, as you observe further instances of incompetence or poor decisions. Perhaps the above comments will help you document them more appropriately to the chair, and make more positive suggestions about next steps.

Keep in mind that if the board wants to act on your allegations, they will have to share them with the ED so he can fairly respond to them. The ED can probably guess who has made the complaints. You may be job-hunting soon even if you haven’t chosen to leave, and even if the board fires the ED soon after.

Finally, this chair may well realize that she led the board in making a bad hiring decision, and feel that she is the absolute last person to lead the next ED hiring. With an AGM coming up, she may be discussing ED recruitment with an incoming chair, or she may be hiding the situation from the likeliest incoming chair so he or she does not refuse the position. The latter raises ethical concerns, but that would be a question for another column.

Regardless, work now on a new ED succession plan would be valuable. If the chair and board do not understand such planning, there are some excellent resources on the Internet regarding nonprofit executive transition. There are also consultants who specialize in that work, some of whom also do executive recruitment for nonprofits.

Remember that succession planning is simply a wise process for all governing bodies and like any planning needs updating from time to time. The terms executive transition and executive recruitment presumes departure of the current ED. You could do some research on all three topics and local resources, and have it available if a board member asks — as one well might when you ask him or her to serve as a reference!

Since 1992, Jane Garthson has dedicated her consulting and training business to creating better futures for our communities and organizations through values-based leadership. She is a respected international voice on governance, strategic thinking and ethics. Jane can be reached at jane@garthsonleadership.ca.

To submit a dilemma for a future column, or to comment on a previous one, please contact editor@charityvillage.com. For paid professional advice about an urgent or complex situation, contact Jane directly.

Disclaimer: This article is for information purposes only. It is not intended to be legal advice. You should not act or abstain from acting based upon such information without first consulting a legal professional.

Please note: While we ensure that all links and email addresses are accurate at their publishing date, the quick-changing nature of the web means that some links to other websites and email addresses may no longer be accurate.