A few months ago I asked the 2000 folks on my email list to tell me about the titles of their paid and volunteer leadership, seeking to answer the basic questions: do titles matter and if so, how? This question arises in recognition that nonprofits appear to be using a number of titles for these position and it's not clear to me how much the naming is related to power and authority. I believe that power and authority are the basis for how these two positions "get along", so it is not a flight of fancy that moves me to want to think about titles as providing one window to a better understanding about relationship and roles.
I received 191 response to the survey. I will share some of these insights gleaned from this survey as I review the responses.
Today's topic: what is the reason for the title of the paid leader?
President conveys the status and responsibility of the position; we have a structure with multiple directors so the head makes sense as Executive Director; to emulate the for-profit sector; not adopted CEO or President - maybe influenced by female dominated leadership; wanted to give staff more stature than title Executive Director does; President was chosen as title to ensure a say in the governance of the organization; several years ago we changed the title from Executive to CEO because this sounded more important; ED is the traditional title when the person doesn't have a vote on the board.