http://www.principledinnovation.com/blog/2006/07/31/suffering-in-silence/ Moving from imagination to impact... Thu, 17 May 2012 06:27:38 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.1 http://www.principledinnovation.com/blog/2006/07/31/suffering-in-silence/#comment-515 Wed, 02 Aug 2006 02:44:26 +0000 http://www.principledinnovation.com/blog/2006/07/31/suffering-in-silence/#comment-515 Oh dear! Not an good situation. It seems to me that there are 3 options: Wait, Leave or Action. Wait: presumes that the elected member will end their term at some time and be replaced. But the pain and damage may be too much. Leave: At some stage the CEO has to consider their personal well-being. It's a tough decision. Action: Action to make a change may be a "last ditch" option but there may be friends in the association - the disgruntled members, and possibly past-chairmen (presumably there was a time when things were better). But there is always a big concern with the CEO actively lobbying to change the elected leadership. I really think it shouldn't be done, although the CEO should express their concern to members who are friendly and influential. One other thought - are there major external organisations which could express their concern: for example sponsors, government, major clients? At least they are worth a scan to check that the CEO is judging things correctly. This is a very hard subject and really falls to the CEO to make some difficult decisions. A disclaimer: I resigned from a CEO position earlier this year as I and the Board disagreed on decisions. So maybe I'm not a good person to listen to! Oh dear! Not an good situation. It seems to me that there are 3 options: Wait, Leave or Action.
Wait: presumes that the elected member will end their term at some time and be replaced. But the pain and damage may be too much.
Leave: At some stage the CEO has to consider their personal well-being. It’s a tough decision.
Action: Action to make a change may be a “last ditch” option but there may be friends in the association - the disgruntled members, and possibly past-chairmen (presumably there was a time when things were better). But there is always a big concern with the CEO actively lobbying to change the elected leadership. I really think it shouldn’t be done, although the CEO should express their concern to members who are friendly and influential.
One other thought - are there major external organisations which could express their concern: for example sponsors, government, major clients? At least they are worth a scan to check that the CEO is judging things correctly.
This is a very hard subject and really falls to the CEO to make some difficult decisions.
A disclaimer: I resigned from a CEO position earlier this year as I and the Board disagreed on decisions. So maybe I’m not a good person to listen to!

]]>