Healthy Letting Go is Not for the Faint of Heart
I was sitting at a table waiting for my board chair to arrive for dinner, and I was nervous. Like sweaty palms, heart beating too fast, imagining the worst-case-scenario, anxious. I was about to tell him that I planned to leave the organization after 14 years. It was my choice, and one I came to thoughtfully and not under duress. I was giving a year’s notice, and yet, I was nervous.
Why?
Well, let’s get real, it meant things were about to get a whole lot more murky. I was about to give up some, and eventually all, control of the organization, and I was no longer firmly planted in the driver’s seat with my hands on the wheel, feet on the gas and brake. It was not a comfortable place for me as a leader to be, given I was all-in, one hundred percent committed up until this point, which is what the job required of me.
In the nonprofit sector, we talk a lot about what it takes to lead and be a good leader. But what we really mean when we say this is that we talk a lot about what it takes to be a good ONGOING leader. What gets much less attention is how to be a good OUTGOING leader. So, let’s dig in and talk about this, because I want to argue that it requires a significant shift, and if you don’t make it, you’re setting the organization and its future leader up for failure.
Here’s what I frequently see from OUTgoing nonprofit leaders.
Leaders Leaving At the End of Their Ropes; Letting It All Go
These are leaders who have been so overextended for so long that they are utterly burnt out and done. Maybe they have waited too long to leave, and so now they are letting go of everything, as soon as possible, and not in a healthy, intentional way, but in more of a “I don’t care, I’m outta here” kinda way. There is little thought to succession, what the new leader needs to know, and how to pass the metaphorical torch successfully.
And then there is the other extreme…
Leaders Who Are “Leaving,” But Are NOT Letting Go Of the Rope AT ALL
These leaders are more often founders, or longtime leaders, or both. They have announced they are going. There is a date of their choosing, and yet…they are still doing almost everything themselves. They are not transferring information directly to their team or at least writing it down for a future leader, should there be a gap. In fact, perhaps secretly, they know there will be no gap because if a leader is not selected by their current end date, they will just stay on.
Hmmm…so is this leader even leaving?
Granted, I am offering the two extremes that I have seen time and time again, and as with most things, there is a lot of space in between. Many leaders – myself included, when I faced this situation – are in between the two extremes and truly want to get it right.
The big question is, HOW do you do that?
Finding the Magical Middle in a Transition.
I truly believe it is possible to leave a nonprofit ED/CEO role and do it well. I have seen it and attempted to do it myself. I do also believe it’s harder than you might think. Why? Good leaders are invested. They care so deeply about the organization they are running. They take every opportunity to strengthen it, build relationships, and plan/prepare for the future. They see gaps, and they fill them. They see opportunities, and they take them.
Being an outgoing leader requires that you shift your mindset and approach the job differently, and it is not a given that the things that made you a great ongoing leader can shift and make you a great outgoing leader. The first thing to do is to acknowledge and name the reality that you are leaving and won’t be there in the future, the way you have been in the past.
Here are two questions to ask yourself as a leader when you are transitioning from ONgoing to OUTgoing:
First, what’s your current leadership mindset, and how does it need to change as an outgoing leader?
Any good leader has core values or principles that guide them. Here’s an example of three common leadership values: integrity, reliability, and respect for others. Whatever your core values are as an ongoing leader, they actually have to shift as an outgoing leader. You don’t let them go, but you perform them differently.
Here’s what I mean. As an ongoing leader, integrity might mean that you make decisions with a clear moral compass and do so consistently. As an outgoing leader, integrity requires that you figure out what the moral compass is, i.e., what are the interests you are weighing, the stakeholders you are consulting, and how you actually make those decisions. You need to write it down if you have not already and share it with others-the leadership team, the board.
I remember that during my transition period, we were having to make some very tough, nuanced decisions about the political environment and what we would publicly align with and what we would publicly denounce. We had made these decisions, up until this point, ad hoc. We realized we needed a decision matrix to help the incoming leader and us understand why we landed where we did on different issues.
As an ongoing leader, reliability is likely something that guides you, especially if you have been at the organization for a long time. This probably means you show up when you say you will, you are available as needed, and you can be counted on for productive engagement, feedback, and input. As an outgoing leader, the items on the list might not change, but they should be approached differently. You were the person everyone could count on, but now you’ll have to start deliberately and visibly stepping back from that role. You’ll need to make conscious choices about when you show up and how you show up, ideally allowing others to step up, while you start to step back over time. This should be thoughtfully communicated, and you should seek to share or give power to others who will carry the leadership of the organization forward.
I was the main communicator between the board and my senior leadership team, especially if there was a difference of opinion. Yet, when I announced I was leaving and was in the transition period, before the new leader arrived, we realized I needed to let go of that and allow the team to speak directly to the board and vice versa. They were actually negotiating directly with each other on critical areas concerning the future of the organization.
As an ongoing leader, respect for others might mean that you play the role you need to in the organization, and you allow, expect, and support others to do the same. An outgoing leader can show respect for others by assessing the staff team they have and making tough calls if there are people not performing, and who might even need to leave – by making those changes, instead of waiting for the new leader to handle it. It can also mean not doing things you would do as an ongoing leader, like adding more board members or hiring for a key position on the leadership team, thereby allowing the new leader to fill those spots with their choices.
In hindsight, I did not get this right. Turns out there was someone who needed to go, and did go shortly AFTER the new leader arrived. I wish I could have made that call and saved her the trouble, even though it’s not something I am ever eager to do.
Second, how should these mindset shifts impact behavioral shifts in your leadership while you’re still there?
When you are an ongoing leader, there is an “I got it” energy that you probably bring to situations. If you are a collaborative leader, as many are in the nonprofit realm, it’s a “WE got it” energy – you and your team. When you are an outgoing leader, this needs to shift to, “THEY got it,” meaning the existing board, staff, and the organizational infrastructure you built.
This means thinking carefully about when you should be present, when you should NOT be there, and how you show up. Do you listen or talk more? WHO is running the meeting? Who is the person you’re preparing to take your place during the transition, and after?
The new leader might not be there yet, but you can write down what you do and how you do it. Not so they can read it and do the exact same thing, but so that they know the rationale behind the past, and they have a good grasp on the present as they come in.
If you are an ongoing leader in the magical middle, trying to get it right, and you are able to do so, you will offer to be there for the new leader to answer questions, make introductions, and transition specific items in person. At that time, though, it is the new leader and the board’s decision about whether and when those things will be needed. It’s a true letting go of your leadership authority to the new leader, and it can be hard for many of us.
Even if you do this, you need to do it in such a way that it sets the new person up for success WITHOUT your presence.
I find Abby Wambach’s “leading from the bench” concept, from her book Wolfpack, helpful here. She argues that true leadership is not tied to a title or playing time, but is a choice to support and empower the team regardless of one’s role. This is what we’re talking about.
I don’t claim to know all the answers about what mindset and behavioral shifts are needed in nonprofit leadership transition, but I do know that asking yourself these two sets of questions is a great way to start off on the right foot.
