When a nonprofit (or any board for that matter) loses trust in its executive, that executive must be replaced and the Board does well to air the laundry so that that non-profit's constituents don't lose trust in it. 

Yup, that's the lesson borne out in this week's firing of the Red Cross exec of six months.  The nonprofit ED had an affair or some type of relationship with a staffer.  

And you know, a relationship in the office can maybe be OK between peers but an in-office relationship with the CEO establishes way too many unequal power dynamics that just cannot work for an office.  The Red Cross ED failed to recognize or act like he understood this reality.  This failure begins to introduce the question of how well and much the board should trust the ED's ability to make important decisions.  That trust is, in the end, what must be weighed by the whole board in understanding next steps.

The Red Cross board must fully and deeply trust its Exec to ensure that mission is accomplished.  When that ED exhibits that he/she is not 100% trustworthy, that board must act in its and the organization's best interest.  The Red Cross board has acted responsibly and the public should be grateful and appreciative and most importantly, can begin to put their trust back in an institution which certainly has not proven its own trustworthiness over the last few years.

Good going Red Cross Board of Directors!

Interesting article in yesterday's Washington Post about the National Youth Rights organization that is focused on getting age restrictions exchanged for competency restrictions of the under 21 folks.

Overal the concept is great and sound.  However, what most caught my eye was a little detail noting that the national organization has high school students seated as members of the organization's board. 

Perhaps this is a lesson and perhaps a warning of caution.  Many nonprofits, especially those serving youth, have always been uneasy seating youth on the board.  They often find alternative methods for seating them so they have a programming voice but not a fiduciary voice.  And here lies the rub.

Can a youth, with few legal recognitions, really serve as a fully fiduciarily responsible board member?  Can they live up to the duties (I believe they can) and be held fully responsibly particularly if the organization does bad things when the "system" doesn't acknowledge them as "owners".

Questions to ponder....