Over the years I have worked with and served on governing boards, I have observed many director resignations, some sudden and unexpected, others more drawn-out and planned; some fiery and dramatic, and others typically routine. I myself resigned from a board I had served on for many years!

With all board resignations there are generally two aspects which should be handled well: an administrative, procedural task-oriented dimension which needs to occur in order to maintain the integrity of the group’s procedures and process; and a human or people-oriented dimension related to maintaining healthy group dynamics and board culture.*

Tasks and procedures

The task-oriented, procedural dimension is usually fairly straightforward. A resignation should be understood as the act of an individual board member, not of the full board. It is generally considered to be effective (“in effect”) at the time when notice is given either to the board leader or the whole of the board, ideally in writing, or when a later effective time is stated in the notice that was given. Depending on the nature of your group, the legal statutes governing your organization or your own bylaws may say something relevant about director resignations—so be sure to check those if you are unsure whether they apply to you.

Once notice of the resignation is received, this triggers any procedural steps which should take place. For example:

• Acknowledging receipt in some way (“thank you for your service”);

• Appropriately notifying the rest of the group, so that everyone is aware of the resignation;

• Changing permissions on a shared drive or removing someone from an email list or other access-related tasks that ensure integrity of the board’s archive and systems;

• Changing the board section of the website, co-op bulletin board, or other public-facing contexts where the person who resigned is identified as being a board member;

• Adding an agenda item to the next board meeting as needed; this could be to record the resignation in the minutes and to create space for the board to discuss whether they wish to appoint a new director to the person’s seat; it may also be necessary to review the former person’s duties and transfer those to another director.

• Including a copy of the resignation (if written) in the next meeting’s board packet;

• Deciding on a reasonable method for informing the co-op’s membership or community—for example, in a board article in the upcoming edition of the co-op’s newsletter. For many circumstances, this could be a routine, matter-of-fact message, though tailored for the individual situation (example: recognizing the service of a long-standing board member who decided to resign);

These specific tasks could vary, depending on your own systems and processes, but in general you would want to act efficiently and according to your established procedures, including any decision-making, group communication, etc. If you do not yet have an established process for handling the procedural aspects of a resignation, take a little time to create a simple one, using the above list for inspiration.

The human dimension

While the procedural element is usually fairly simple and straightforward, along with this could be a human, or people-oriented dimension that is much more context- and situation-dependent.

Here, the details matter: Was the resignation done in a routine manner for reasons that had nothing to do with the group dynamics? Or did it happen in the heat of an emotional moment? Was there a misunderstanding between directors that led to the resignation or an ongoing interpersonal conflict that needs to be resolved? Are there unresolved questions or concerns that would be helpful for someone to express? How are the other members of the board processing the situation? Is there a need to heal or rebuild trust among the group? The answers to these questions would probably not change the procedural tasks, but they might flavor or inspire other actions for the board leader to take following the event.

For example, after a contentious meeting that resulted in a board resignation, the board leader might feel the need for the group to do some healing and processing together. They could decide to include an item on the next board meeting agenda that is intentionally designed to create a safe, supportive environment for people to acknowledge and share their feelings, with the ultimate goal of strengthening their working relationships with one another.

However, after a less dramatic resignation due to external factors, such as a major life change, it may simply be sufficient to recognize and appreciate the person’s service, assign someone the task of sending that person a thank you card, and then move on to the business of deciding whether to appoint a new director.

Although different, in both of the examples above there is a recognition by the board leader that a change is occurring that will impact the group dynamic, and an intention to maintain a supportive group culture through that transition. In fact, whenever a person leaves the group, the board leader should be thoughtful about how to handle the impact of that change.

*To help frame this topic, I am using the classic N.T.L. (National Trainings Laboratories) model for understanding group dynamics in organizations.