The Board–Executive Director Relationship

When a nonprofit hires a new Executive Director, there is naturally a lot of attention on the transition.  Will the new ED be successful?  What do they need to learn?  What should the board expect?  How can the organization support them?

Those are all important questions, but a new Executive Director also provides an opportunity for the board to step back and examine something that is often overlooked: the board–Executive Director relationship itself.

A leadership transition is a good time to have that conversation, but the relationship between the board and ED should never be viewed as something that only needs attention when a new leader comes on board.  It is one of the board’s most important ongoing responsibilities.

The Board and ED Have Different Roles

At the heart of a strong board–ED relationship is an understanding that the two have different roles.  The board governs, while the Executive Director leads and manages.  Those roles are different, but they are highly dependent on one another.

The board is responsible for establishing the organization’s mission and strategic direction, providing financial and risk oversight, hiring and evaluating the Executive Director, asking thoughtful questions, and helping ensure the organization has the resources it needs to fulfill its mission.  The ED is responsible for leading the organization and staff, managing day-to-day operations, implementing the board’s strategic direction, managing resources, identifying risks and opportunities, and keeping the board informed.

Problems often arise when those lines become blurred.  A board that becomes too involved in day-to-day operations can make it difficult for the ED to lead.  On the other hand, a board that takes a hands-off approach and assumes everything is now the ED’s responsibility isn’t fulfilling its governance role.

The goal isn’t for the board to run the organization.  It is for the board to create the environment in which the Executive Director can lead effectively.

What Does a Strong Partnership Look Like?

A healthy board–ED relationship requires intentionality.  It doesn’t happen simply because the board and ED get along or because they have worked together for a long time.

Trust is an important starting point.  Once the board has hired an Executive Director, it needs to give that person appropriate authority to lead.  Trust doesn’t mean agreeing with every decision or giving up oversight.  It means having confidence in the person the board selected and allowing that person to do the job.

That trust also depends on clarity.  The board and ED should have a shared understanding of the organization’s priorities, what success looks like, and which decisions belong to the ED versus those that require board involvement.  An ED shouldn’t have to guess what the board expects, and the board shouldn’t have to guess what the ED is doing.

Communication is equally important.  The board should receive the information it needs to provide effective oversight, particularly when there are significant financial concerns, risks or opportunities.  At the same time, the board doesn’t need to be involved in every operational decision.  Good communication is about providing the right information at the right time, not about involving the board in everything.

And a strong relationship requires candor.  Board members should be willing to ask difficult questions and challenge assumptions when appropriate.  That doesn’t mean second-guessing every decision.  The purpose of a good question is to help the ED think through an issue, not to demonstrate that the board member would have handled it differently.

Support Means More Than Saying, “Let Us Know If You Need Anything”

One of the most valuable things a board can provide an Executive Director is support, but support is often misunderstood.

Telling an ED, “Let us know if you need anything,” sounds supportive, but it puts all of the responsibility on the ED to figure out what to ask for and who to ask.

Board members have resources that the ED may not have.  They have relationships, professional expertise, community knowledge, fundraising experience and networks that can help move the organization forward.  An engaged board uses those resources.

If a board member knows a potential funder, make the introduction.  If the ED needs to meet a community leader, open the door.  If a board member has expertise that could help with a difficult issue, offer it.  If the ED is working through a significant decision, be willing to serve as a sounding board.

This is sometimes described as an “all hands-on deck” approach.  It doesn’t mean board members begin running programs, directing staff or making operational decisions.  It means every board member considers what they can bring to the organization and its leader.

The important second step is knowing when to step back.  The board can make the introduction, provide the expertise or offer the perspective.  The ED needs the opportunity to build the relationship, make the decision and lead.

Helping the ED Build Relationships

This becomes especially important when a new ED takes over after a long-serving leader.

An Executive Director who has been with an organization for ten or fifteen years may have developed deep relationships with donors, funders, community leaders, government officials and other nonprofit organizations.  Those relationships are valuable organizational assets, but they may also be closely associated with the individual who built them.

The board can help make that transition easier.  If a board member has a relationship with someone the former ED worked with, make the introduction.  If there is a community leader the new ED should know, help create the connection.  If the board member has a longstanding relationship with a funder or donor, consider how the new ED can become part of that relationship.

The goal, however, isn’t to recreate the former ED.  It is to give the new ED a bridge into important relationships while allowing to develop relationships of their own.

That same principle applies long after the transition.  Board members should always be ambassadors for the organization and should continually be looking for ways their relationships and connections can advance its mission.

Strategy Requires the Board and ED to Work Together

Strategic planning is another area where the board–ED partnership matters.

The Executive Director should lead the organization and ultimately be responsible for implementing its strategy.  But determining the organization’s direction is not something the ED should have to do alone.  The board has a responsibility to help determine where the organization is going and what it should prioritize.

That means asking bigger questions.  Where should the organization be three to five years from now?  What does the community need?  What opportunities should be pursued?  Are there programs or activities that should change?  What risks need to be addressed?  What resources will be required?

A strategic plan shouldn’t simply be something the ED develops and brings to the board for approval.  It should reflect a meaningful conversation between the board and ED about the organization’s future.

A leadership transition makes that conversation particularly valuable.  A new ED may see opportunities that weren’t previously considered, while long-serving board members bring institutional knowledge and perspective.  The best strategy comes from putting those perspectives together rather than relying solely on either one.

Financial Oversight Is Part of the Relationship Too

The same principle applies to the budget.

Suppose an organization has a budget that includes a deficit.  The board shouldn’t simply tell the ED, “You need to balance the budget.”  That crosses into management and doesn’t help the board understand what is actually happening.

At the same time, the board can’t simply say, “It’s the ED’s budget; we’ll let them handle it.”  Financial oversight is one of the board’s fundamental responsibilities.

Instead, the board should seek to understand the situation.  Why is there a deficit?  Is it intentional?  Is it temporary or structural?  What assumptions are driving it?  What happens if projected revenue doesn’t occur?  How much financial flexibility does the organization have?  What options are available, and what should the board be monitoring?

The ED should lead the financial management of the organization, but the board should understand the financial picture, challenge assumptions, help identify resources and solutions, and make sure the organization remains financially sustainable.

A board shouldn’t be afraid of a deficit. But it should be uncomfortable with a deficit it doesn’t understand.

These Aren’t Just Responsibilities for a New ED

Perhaps the most important point is that none of these responsibilities exist only because an organization has a new Executive Director.

A leadership transition simply makes them more visible.

Whether an ED has been in the position for six months or fifteen years, the board should continue to provide direction, oversight, support and accountability.  It should maintain clear expectations, engage in strategic thinking, understand the financial picture, use its relationships and expertise to advance the mission, and give the ED appropriate room to lead.

In fact, long-standing board–ED relationships may require even more intentionality.  Familiarity can be helpful, but it can also lead to assumptions.  The board may become accustomed to how a particular ED operates, and the ED may become accustomed to how the board responds.  Over time, people can stop asking whether the relationship is still working as well as it could.

That is why board education and intentional conversations about roles are valuable even for experienced board members.  Experience matters, but experience alone doesn’t guarantee that a board is practicing effective governance.

The Goal Is a Partnership

A strong board–Executive Director relationship doesn’t mean the board and ED will always agree.  There will be difficult decisions, different perspectives and times when the board needs to challenge the ED.  There will also be times when the ED needs to challenge the board.

The goal isn’t to eliminate disagreement.  The goal is to create enough trust, clarity and communication that disagreement can be handled productively.

The board should not run the organization, and the ED should not govern the organization alone.  The board provides governance, direction, oversight and support.  The ED provides leadership, management and execution.

A strong board doesn’t make the ED’s job easier by doing it for them.  It makes the ED more effective by being the right board.

And that is why a new Executive Director is more than a personnel change.  It is an opportunity for the board to think intentionally about the partnership it wants to have with its leader, not just for the first year, but for the years ahead.