Terms of Board members and Chair

1. I think that the 'number of years' purely on the basis of the same for rotating the Chair is NOT the most optimal way to determine rotatiuon policy. I also think that in the first few years of growth, the organisation needs to have a chair that can spend a longer stint than otherwise. Upto 6 years is great BUT this has to be based on evaluation of the Chair's performance, whether the role will change at any point etc.

 
2. In terms of criteria it would really depend on what is expected AT THAT POINT IN TIME from the Chair. I assume it would include stuff from taking the lead in Board development, trustee engagement to more hands on stuff like ensuring that policies are in place for adequate and optimal functioning.

 
Aarti


On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 7:20 PM, Daniela Costa <admin [at] ngoboards [dot] org (admin [at] ngoboards [dot] org)> wrote:

Response to Question 1

I think when a board chair is appointed mid way trough the term then the on the date of the appointment should mark the begining of the the three year term. Again it may depend in what the constitution of the organisation says. If it is stated explicitly that thye term for memebership/chair is three years then the person should spend the three years.

Question 2

A good constitution will spell out some of these criteria. However if such criteria is not clear in the constitution of the organisation then I suggest there should be some amendments. the constitution of an NGO should be the supreme reference point when it comes to decision making.

COnsider these for now

 

--- On Wed, 9/7/08, Daniela Costa <admin [at] ngoboards [dot] org> wrote:

From: Daniela Costa <admin [at] ngoboards [dot] org>
Subject: [Global Forum - Ask] Terms of Board members and Chair
To: "Ask the Community" <ask [at] community [dot] ngoboards [dot] org>
Date: Wednesday, 9 July, 2008, 4:50 PM

Hi

I think that more important than defining terms or limits of time, is HOW do you work in order to let or allow new good leaders appear in the horizon.

That is a crucial item in some organizations I know, and would lead us to other subjects: empowerment of associate members, sharing and reporting information, working groups in governance issues, and so on...

Regards
Paula

 Daniela, I tend to believe that most of us cannot be so strict in following a term of chairs. We have noticed that in most of non profits, the main challenge is to identify a member who fits to the required responsibilities and motivation to be a board member. For not keeping things very unclear for the organizations, it is important to have such a document ["term of chairs"] although I observe that there will be always situations when some board members will simply be recognized as the ones who cannot leave.   Regards Jaqueline de Camargo Brazil

My experience is that there are no recipies and each organization should feel free to agree on the policies and rules which are more convinient for the organization, as long as they are discussed and have it written.  Sometimes the decisions should be integrated in a policy or maybe, bylaws or statutes should be changed.

In the case of board terms, if a new board member is appointed mid-way, the organization may decide whether ther term is for 3 years or, only for the remaining time but it should be agreed as a general policy or rule which has to be included in their bylaws.

In some countries like Mexico, the members or associates of the organization have to ratify this kind of decisions their Annual Meeting. In this meeting, members also appoint the new board. If the organization like CEMEFI have 500 members, it is more likely to have a new board appointed. However, I understand that in the case of a family foundation, it is more likely for the board to be renewed.