By Mark Oppenheim
In the latter stages of any CEO search or other major transition, a nonprofit will sometimes experience leading indicators of doubt among board, staff and even candidates. At this point the Search Committee Chair can play a decisive role in helping the parties to successfully navigate the search endgame.
Endgame Anxiety
Anxiety on the part of staff or board members is generally driven by concerns over things a future leader might change or a direction that might be taken that could cause discomfort among important constituents. For candidates, there are anxieties about moving to a new city, anxieties related to whatever they don’t know about the organization they are joining, concerns for their partner or children who are joining in a relocation.
This kind of response is understandable, and there are certain indicators that function as a kind of “canary in the coal mine” signal for problems – anxieties and behaviors that might affect chances of closing a search and that might also have an impact on a candidate’s later success. Such signs in the midst of a CEO search can include:
- slowing of decision processes (which can take the form of delayed feedback, difficulty in scheduling meetings, etc.);
- otherwise legitimate concerns, but distinguished by the practice of holding different candidates to different standards; or by candidates asking for more and more and more detailed information as employment negotiations unfold;
- a focus on candidate style that is not balanced by a focus on candidate substance;
- advancing management initiatives, job descriptions, org charts, governance models, and other structural elements that could later complicate efforts to enact any change; and
- a retreat into critique and dialogue that makes “the perfect” the enemy of “the good” in ways that add “…just one more point to resolve…” and then another… and another.
In a CEO/ED executive search, a sharp definition of what constitutes success for the organization over the next years can help bring needed focus to evaluation of candidates; however, it is not always possible to reach consensus on such definitions. Under these circumstances, a practical way forward for Search Committees and candidates is to simply agree that: a) all real-world decisions are imperfect and there are always trade-offs, and b) adhering to a tight schedule of purposeful activity will help to drive to the best possible, albeit imperfect, decision.
Search Committees and candidates must also keep in mind that the parties all have a choice right through to just before they close an agreement. The board might not offer a candidate the role; if offered, the candidate might not accept it. A candidate might negotiate a higher salary where they are… or take another offered job. When a candidate slows negotiations and can’t get to the close, it can be a sign that they are buying time for other negotiations.
Driving to Close
When CEO searches are ready to close, the order of the next steps is less important than that they happen with reasonable speed.
Once a favored candidate is identified, the parties will need to work through different views on compensation, title, a relocation package, insurance & benefits, notice and severance arrangements, etc. There might be concerns about governance, scope of management responsibilities… any one of a thousand different matters might arise.
Once one finalist is favored, we often will urge Search Committees to tighten timeframes – final negotiations should be intense, build momentum and conclude in days. On the other hand, when momentum comes and goes, when we seem to make progress and then stall, it is not a good sign. Serious consideration should be given to taking a stance and then moving on unless momentum can be regained for a close.
The Search Committee Chair has a very powerful role at this point. The role is to set the terms of compromise, leverage the search consultant to advance negotiations, and jump in to make last adjustments that conclude negotiations… or move on to other candidates if momentum lags or a conclusion with a particular finalist can’t be reached. This requires clarity and decisiveness on the part of the Search Committee Chair. It requires an ability to have the Search Committee retain options, remain realistic and move on without regret.
Other Important Considerations for the CEO/ED Search Endgame
During the interview process we encourage Search Committees to discuss success metrics among themselves, with staff and with CEO candidates. Solid definitions of success that are embraced and actively supported by all bring clarity to the search process and attract no-nonsense, outcome-oriented leaders as candidates. Development of performance metrics can be incorporated into the final offer letter for the selected candidate.
As part of the CEO selection process, it is also important that the board: surfaces possible impediments to the future CEO’s success, openly discusses actions that the board can take to help the new CEO acclimate to the organization, and develop board roles (including board committees) that help the CEO to achieve the organization’s long range objectives.
Search Committee Chairs can shape a CEO/ED search endgame that is purpose-built to deal with uncertainty, that engages finalists suited to driving effective outcomes, and that positions the selected leader for success in their new role.
____
To receive a call to discuss these and other nonprofit leadership matters with the author, email Mark Oppenheim at marko@moppenheim.com.