ULAANBAATAR – The Board of Directors of the American Chamber of Commerce (AmCham) in Mongolia announces that Ms. Jackson Cox, Chairman of the AmCham Mongolia Board of Directors also commented, “our decision to select Tricia as Executive Director is a clear indication of our strong commitment to develop AmCham into the leading business organization in Mongolia.
AmCham Mongolia is an independent membership-driven organization that seeks to build, strengthen, and protect business between the United States and Mongolia and to actively promote Mongolia as a destination for American investment. Slideshare uses cookies to improve functionality and performance, and to provide you with relevant advertising. Resume of Experience - Seeking Director or Manager of Training and Development for Leadership or Operations Management. Clipping is a handy way to collect and organize the most important slides from a presentation. In the last issue of Blue Avocado, we discussed how board evaluations of executive directors (CEOs) are different from all other performance evaluations in the organization.
Input from others in and outside the organization is more appropriately focused on organizational assessment, not as narrowly as on ED evaluation. Most importantly: despite the fact that board members may have little to go on and not much experience with ED evaluation, it's still important to have the evaluation.
Perhaps the most important thing we learned from executive directors about the value that did emerge from evaluations is that the discussions -- if held in good faith -- result in better-aligned expectations and goals for the organization and for the executive. Every few years it's very helful for a board to get a sense of how its executive -- and the organization as a whole -- is experienced by volunteers, visitors, patrons, clients, members, funders, collaborative partners, and others.
Many organizations also have established goals and objectives for the year, such as number of enrollments, visitors to the art gallery, decrease in euthanized animals, and so forth. Measuring organizational performance against such benchmarks is tremendously helpful, as is measuring performance against an updated job description.
There may be external reasons why performance did not meet benchmarks, and those gaps may be more productively addressed in a broader context than the annual review of the CEO. A great many organizations do not have such organizational performance benchmarks, nor does the executive have a recently-updated job description. No one every has enough information to do a perfectly informed, "objective" evaluation of anyone. Our thanks to the many anonymous Blue Avocado readers who contributed to this article, as well as to Nancy Aleck, Kathy Booth, Steven Bowman, Marsha Caplan, Douglas Ford.
Jan Masaoka is editor of Blue Avocado, and author of the Best of the Board Cafe, available here from Amazon.
Not a bad form, but one of the overall limitations of any nonprofit ED review is that the board generally only sees the ED in action during an hour-long board or committee meeting, following a well-crafted agenda. You're right that the limitations of the process can't be overcome by a form, no matter what it's like.
But that is a key weakness in the review process -- the board's (indivual and collective) ability to separate the wheat from the chaff, to understand fully the ED's role.
I'm quite surprised that your check box ratings are so unbalanced--the ratio of positive to negative is 3:1 which skews the results. As part of my regular review a small group of Board members meet with my direct management reports.
I think that EDs should be evaluated based on the turnover in the development role or roles in their organization. 360-reviews can be helfpul if the organization is sophisticated enough and knowledgeable enough to know how best to execute and use this kind of review. This board also does a self-evaluation but really doesn't do very much with it except identify potential leaders, etc. How about a Board Evaluation Committee, who works directly with the ED, and together, Bd & Ed, develop standards by which an evaluation can be completed.
What do you do if the staff is so small that a 360 review of the ED would not be anonymous?

CAPTCHAThis question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions. AmCham’s members are among the very best companies working in Mongolia today and my focus will be ensuring that they get the most out of their membership in AmCham,” said Tricia following today’s announcement. AmCham is deeply committed to serving its members by delivering excellent services led by its wonderful staff. Trained and educatedinternal and external stakeholders on benefits and process to obtain buy-in. These differences -- including the limited ability of board members to observe the executive -- are also among the reasons why 45% of executives have not had a review in the last year (CompassPoint's Daring to Lead 2011 study).
The ED should go over the process and instrument(s) with that committee prior to the start. An executive session of the board (perhaps 1 hour without any staff present) to discuss the survey results and comments in general. Relaying the information to the executive: by the board chair or another assigned member or two. The review and the response (if there is one) are placed in the executive's personnel file. Most supervisors would not complete reviews of their staff if there were not someone from HR reminding and nagging them. A 360 degree evaluation takes a good deal of time (not only from the board but from everyone who is asked to give input), and it makes the most sense to use the opportunity not only to learn about the CEO, but about the organization. There may also be data available such as average rating score for workshops conducted by the organization, ticket sales, attendees at annual fundraising lunch, etc. Krista Glaser, Amy Heydlauff, Lyn Hopper, Trudy Hughes, Jeanette Issa, Shalom Black Lane, Kristen Larsen, Peggy Liuzzi, Dan Lozer, Diane May, Pat Moore. She has been an executive director and board member and experienced both bad and good evaluations from both ends. The day-to-day activity, the rapidly changing landscape of organizational management, and the one-on-one and group dynamics not involving the board (client meetings, staff meetings, training workshops, etc.) is often unknown to the board. If there are people on the board would would give serious attention to a bookkeeper's criticism that the ED is "always on the phone," that's a board without sound judgment.
Some board members are hyper-sensitive to any criticism so see any "negative" comment as a potential issue.
This is NOT an annual performance appraisal issue and should be addressed as the situation arises! Few board members have the requisite skill to conduct any personnel review, let alone the CEO, who they see maybe once a month in a fairly well controlled environment -- the board or committee meeting. Interesting to see where these 2 assessments match up -- and where the results are different! It would be great if we could do that in our organization but it's intimidating to think about retribution if staff were to be honest about issues with the ED that the board should know about. We publish approximately seven times per year through an HTML newsletter delivered to more than 64,000 subscribers.
Tricia, who served as AmCham’s Director of Communications and Membership for the past year, has been residing in Mongolia for nearly three years. In this article we draw on that discussion and on the submissions of dozens of Blue Avocado readers to propose a process and an evaluation instrument.
This can be as simple as an email or as deep as a group discussion about goals of the evaluation. Rather than compile an "average," it's imporant to report how many board members marked "outstanding," how many marked "needs improvement," and so forth. An HR or finance staffperson can keep reminding the board officers that a review must be completed for the executive's personnel file and that salary documentation must be provided. And unlike for-profit boards which may include a number of peers, many nonprofit board members don't actually manage organizations themselves (although they may be part of an organization) and so don't bring that knowledge with them as they review the nonprofit ED.

Good board leaders would dismiss such a comment, but would also value a comment from the bookkeeper that perhaps the ED was frequently insisting that his or her reimbursements be paid without backup documentation. Few board members -- despited an ED's best attempts to make it otherwise -- ever see the ED "in the field," interacting on a daily basis with staff and clients, working until 10 at night putting the final touches on the budget, etc. One I had (in a 9-person organization, including myself) had only 3 out of 8 people included in the 360, and the review didn't include any direct reports! I also develop a report on my accomplishments over the year because I notice that board's tend to forget the stellar work (big donation, new program launch, community recognition) of six months ago and focus on the recent call from irked client.
The board then eggs them on by promising it will be kept in confidence, so they often feel pressured to come up with something whether or not it is a major issue.
Prior to moving to Mongolia Tricia worked as an Operations Manager at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, a world-class healthcare facility, in New York, NY. I am not enamored with involving the people the ED manages in the review priocess unless there is significant hierarchy to involve staff who play a critical role in organizational success -- CFO, COO, PR director, etc. The form and the process -- no matter how good or bad -- is useful because it gives a platform for matters to be raised. Since the average tenure of a development professional is 18-24 months with an organization, as we all know, often the friction from the ED can be the cause of that. The board either should have selected the 3 direct reports or have included the entire staff.
A gentle reminder of all the work of the past 12 months (successes and duds) helps the board to put the evaluation in context. There should be a grievance procedure in place for staff to follow if in fact they find their ED is doing something truly egregious and it should be left at that. Tricia studied at Radford University in the United States and holds a Masters of Science degree in Corporate and Professional Communication.
Chamber of Commerce is the largest business federation in the world with over 3 million member companies. Directed the activities of 14 operations and training professionals (including external vendors) in the design, implementation, and evaluation of training programs to increase leadership and work skills. Whether the individuals involved are wise enough to make the right judgments is, unfortunately, something that forms aren't very good at. And instead of looking at the root of the dynamic between the two positions, people just assume that it was the DD's fault. Special thanks, too, to reviewers of this article: Trish Tchume (Young Nonprofit Professionals Network), Liz Heath (Sound Nonprofits), Rick Moyers (Meyer Foundation) and Tim Wolfred (CompassPoint Nonprofit Services). Asking the bookkeeper of a large and complex nonprofit about the performance of the ED is less useful. Since it takes a DD 12-18 months to start making real money for a nonprofit and building up the relationships to get big grants, major gifts, sponsorships, etc, every time the nonprofit has to hire and train a new DD, that's 12 months of potential revenue they are losing.
Yet the process I have gotten in the past was often less than effective.) I hope Blue Avocado continues to research ED evaluation models.
The board was flummoxed that they didn't get meaningful results -- but decided to use them because that was the process they had implemented. I think the board was trying to get a fresh perspective and to be inclusive -- except they weren't. Management to teach classes on leadership and to create a culture of feedback and recognition. Led cross-organization project to create a process for Sustainable Leadership Development ? Linked hiring, on-boarding, key competencies, performance reviews, and gap tracking.
Participated in a 9 month training project for high potential managers reporting to CEO on how to increase employee engagement across the organization.

Online business management xlri
Sales management training 101


  1. 31.05.2014 at 15:41:11

    Emphasis need to be placed on healing the internal condition, not obtaining a hot.

    Author: mp4
  2. 31.05.2014 at 23:35:52

    Buy / purchase Kerala Lottery tickets.

    Author: 3770077
  3. 31.05.2014 at 23:49:32

    Law of Attraction to win lottery prizes, this book offers the metaphysical.

    Author: Aynur1204
  4. 31.05.2014 at 22:44:32

    Nеxt ?е?t?оn?, but I give adore life,one thing terrible happened to my family, I lost my job and.