|
|
|||||
|
|||||
| Path: Main Street : NewsWeek : Archive : Cover Stories : Article |
Please note: While we ensure that all links and e-mail addresses are accurate at their publishing date, the quick-changing nature of the web means that some links to other web sites and e-mail addresses may no longer be accurate.
The right people at the right time: Considering dual leadership in the nonprofit sector
By Louise Chatterton Luchuk
September 17, 2007With today’s hectic pace, how often have you wished there was two of you so you could be in two places at the same time? That’s just one of the benefits cited by Tanya Sather of the Burnaby Association for Community Inclusion (BACI) of her position as co-executive director with Richard Faucher.
Both were managers with BACI prior to teaming up as co-executive directors four years ago, after the previous executive director submitted his resignation. As the former ED transitioned out of his role, various staff members took on additional responsibilities but none felt ready to singularly take on the leadership role. The exiting executive director recommended BACI research alternative leadership models. Sather approached her colleague Faucher because she knew his values and work ethic and felt there was a good fit. Together they submitted a proposal to the board outlining what a co-executive director model could look like.
The board responded positively to the idea. Sather is now the executive director who takes care of HR and administration, while Faucher oversees direct services. Yet, if one person is not around, the other person can make a decision in that area. “The benefits are endless,” says Sather. “Literally, we can be in two places at once. There is always someone here - we have built in holiday coverage.”
Not a new concept in the nonprofit performing arts sector
While this concept is relatively new to BACI, dual leadership has existed in the nonprofit performing arts for a very long time. Wendy Reid recently wrote her Ph.D. dissertation on the topic of dual leadership and examined nine cases from the nonprofit performing arts sector. Symphony, theatre and dance companies have had dual leadership structures for at least 50 years, where one person leads the activities related to the mandate and the other person takes care of the administrative side of things. Sharing the leadership role makes sense, according to Reid, because leadership is so demanding, especially as the business aspect becomes increasingly important.Howard Jang has spent the entire 20+ years of his nonprofit performing arts career in dual leadership roles. Currently he is the general manager of the Arts Club Theatre Company in Vancouver. The Arts Club organizational chart has two streams: anything artistic falls under the artistic director, while the business side (e.g. financial management, fundraising, marketing, revenue development) falls under Jang’s general manager duties. “It looks like two distinct streams,” comments Jang, “but in reality, we can’t make a major decision without each other.”
Promoting debate, generating ideas
The Arts Club Theatre Company switched to a dual leadership model in 1997 because they grew exponentially that year and the board decided that the organization was too big for one person to head on their own. One of the important benefits, according to Jang, is that the dual leadership model provides in-depth checks and balances by promoting debate. Says Jang, “It’s a myth that the two [leaders] have to get along really well. That’s not absolutely true. The result of debate is a more strategic and comprehensive approach. You are able to get much deeper about how and when and why you do the things you do.”Sather agrees. She and Faucher are very different from each other. Sather finds that they accentuate each other’s skills, and because they approach things differently, they generate more ideas.
Supportive work environment
While not currently working for an organization with a co-executive model, Jim Campbell did so for six years after three organizations merged to form the Big Brothers Big Sisters of Calgary and Area. In his estimation, dual leadership is a model that more nonprofit organizations should consider. “It’s getting to the point where fully capable people do not want to take on the load of an ED position, so it makes more sense to co-direct. People can go away on vacation for two weeks and not have to be on their Blackberry or back into the office...that’s what is burning people out.”Another benefit that Sather, Jang and Campbell equally express is the sense of support a co-director provides. Leading an organization can be a very lonely position, but with a co-leader, there is someone who understands and whom you can be free to speak with on a bad day or when you don’t know what to do. For Jang, the support also means “we can say things that the other person may not be comfortable saying. Sometimes Bill (the artistic director) and I strategize about who is best to give the message in a certain situation.”
Reality Check: what does it cost and what does it take to make it work?
While dual leadership may sound well and good, it also means paying two executive level salaries. In Sather’s case, however, establishing co-executive directors meant combining three positions into two, which resulted in a cost savings for the organization. As Campbell sees it, “you can pay two people well or four people less well to cover the same functions. I suspect if you look closely at it, there are cost savings.”Absolutely, it has to be the right two people. Dual leaders must have the same goals, mutual respect, and an immense amount of trust. “You can’t have people who want to captain their own rowboat,” comments Campbell. “I’m as competitive as the next person, but my job is to advance the organization not my own little career path. You need to be able to transcend your own ego.”
An integral part of making the co-executive director model work at BACI is the written agreement that Sather and Faucher developed for the board. Sather is a firm believer that it only works well when you have a comprehensive process with clear expectations, and that each party signs off on the agreement.
The arrangement also has to work for others in the organization; they need to be supported through the transition from a single executive director. “You can’t just assume that they will all of a sudden adjust, so you need to give very clear guidelines and a clear understanding of the dual roles. It is a big change,” explains Sather. And both Sather and Jang caution about the “playing mom off dad” scenario - if staff do not get the answer they want from one ED, they’ll go ask the other.
Dual leadership is an interesting model to consider. As Campbell points out, “You need to adapt the leadership model to the circumstances your organizations finds itself in. [The co-director model] worked for us at that period of time.” Since then, they have reverted to a single ED model. At the right time, in the right place with the right players, dual leadership may be an important alternative model for more nonprofit organizations to consider in attracting and supporting effective leaders in today’s nonprofit environment.
Louise Chatterton Luchuk is a freelance writer and consultant who combines her love of writing with experience at the local, provincial and national levels of volunteer-involving organizations. For more information, visit www.luchuk.com.
|
|||
