Some folks think that one year is just about long enough to be in the position of board chair (the volunteer leadership position). One year is particularly appropriate if it comes at the end of 2, three-year terms of board service and, that individual has steadily moved up the rank of committee and officer positions. But others feel that the term should be at least two years to ensure that the individual in the position has the opportunity to "make a mark" assuming of course that no mark had been made prior to role as chair.
Of course there are the boards where no one really wants the position and the current chair, in the position for multiple years, is doing a fine job and should just continue until they drop or move away. So much for succession planning.
As for me, I have generally been a proponent of 1-year chair terms but am seeing the light towards 2 years. I tend to agree that a 2-year term does better accomodate getting an agenda done but: 1) this means that same person has less time to prepare themselves for the office (assuming folks do prepare themselves for the office); 2) someone will likely not have a shot at being chair; and, 3) succession planning becomes more important.
What's your thought?
I have generally been a proponent of 1-year chair terms but am seeing the light towards 2 years. I tend to agree that a 2-year term does better accomodate getting an agenda done but: 1) this means that same person has less time to prepare themselves for the office (assuming folks do prepare themselves for the office); 2) someone will likely not have a shot at being chair; and, 3) succession planning becomes more important.
Posted by: cheap jerseys | September 16, 2011 at 04:42 AM