I regularly write that values are part and parcel of defining what is a nonprofit. Values are defined by a board, often through a periodic review of a Theory of Change, often in-turn, conducted as part of strategic planning conducted every 3-5 years.
This weekend there was a story about a nonprofit exec who is being accused of calling a parking attendant racial slurs, more than once. The exec denies the accusations. The board has publicly stated that it stands behind the exec. It's kind of a "he-said, she said" although there is documentation of the accusations.
Now, here's why this story merits mention. It appears that the CEO calling an individual racial slurs would not be inconsistent with the organization's core values. The organization in question states on its website that one of its programs is to invite conservative speakers to Yale and host "disinvitation dinners" where presenter whose speeches at other colleges have either been canceled or heckled by protesters. This is consistent with its mission to promote "intellectual diversity and freedom of speech at Yale University".
So...one might conclude that a CEO who calls an individual racial slurs would not indeed be inconsistent with the organization's core values and defensible by the board/board members. And no, I am not at all saying such behavior or values are acceptable nor saying that I know enough to know how much of the situation is fact (although I doubt an individual would go this far just to have a case).
So, good that a board lives its values and that the CEO follows. Not crazy about the values am I but the system that enables almost any group to create a nonprofit doesn't appear to impose limitations, like treating individuals with respect no matter....