{"id":6106,"date":"2026-09-03T11:00:00","date_gmt":"2026-09-03T15:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/carleton.ca\/cicp-pcpob\/?p=6106"},"modified":"2026-09-02T13:07:40","modified_gmt":"2026-09-02T17:07:40","slug":"board-recruitment-renewal-and-resilience","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/carleton.ca\/cicp-pcpob\/2026\/board-recruitment-renewal-and-resilience\/","title":{"rendered":"Board Recruitment, Renewal, and Resilience"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n
\n\n
\n
\n
\n

\n Board Recruitment, Renewal, and Resilience\n <\/h1>\n \n \n <\/header>\n\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n<\/section>\n\n\n\n

Charitable boards of directors play a critical role in providing strategic direction, oversight, and community leadership. Yet many charities are finding it increasingly difficult to attract and retain volunteers willing to take on governance responsibilities. Survey comments reveal that vacancies are often driven by broader changes in volunteerism. In May of 2026, the CICP surveyed charitable sector leaders about board terms and recruitment<\/a> and found that 58% of participating charitable organizations currently have open board positions. In addition, 43% reported that recruiting qualified and interested board members is difficult or very difficult, while only 18% described recruitment as easy or very easy. The survey findings also highlight broader questions about board renewal, leadership succession, and how organizations are adapting to a changing volunteer landscape.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Unfilled Board Positions<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The challenge of filling board roles is not evenly distributed across the sector. There is a considerable range of open positions across subsectors. Notably, 76% of arts organizations reported an open board position, compared with 62% of Community Resource Organizations and about half of Organizations Relieving Poverty, Christian organizations, and Public Amenities organizations (Table 1).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Table 1. Number of Organizations Reporting Open Board Positions by Charitable Purpose<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Charitable Purpose<\/strong><\/th>Yes <\/strong> n (%)<\/strong><\/th>No <\/strong> n (%)<\/strong><\/th>Not Sure <\/strong> n (%)<\/strong><\/th>Total number<\/strong><\/th><\/tr><\/thead>
Arts<\/td>63 (76%)<\/td>20 (24%)<\/td>0 (0%)<\/td>83<\/td><\/tr>
Christianity<\/td>44 (52%)<\/td>41 (48%)<\/td>0 (0%)<\/td>85<\/td><\/tr>
Community Resource Organizations<\/td>70 (62%)<\/td>41 (36%)<\/td>2 (2%)<\/td>113<\/td><\/tr>
Organizations Relieving Poverty<\/td>127 (51%)<\/td>116 (47%)<\/td>6 (2%)<\/td>249<\/td><\/tr>
Public Amenities<\/td>63 (52%)<\/td>58 (48%)<\/td>0 (0%)<\/td>121<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>
(Rounded to the nearest percent)<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The discrepancy between different subsectors is noteworthy and deserves more study, especially by researchers focused on arts and culture.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ease of Board Recruitment<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Additionally, organization size also appears to matter for the ease of board recruitment. Nearly two-thirds of small charities (63%) reported difficulty recruiting board members, compared with 50% of medium-sized organizations and 40% of large charities (Table 2). Large organizations were almost twice as likely as small charities to describe recruitment as easy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Table 2. Ease of Board Recruitment by Charity Size<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ease of Recruitment<\/strong><\/th>Small <\/strong> n (%)<\/strong><\/th>Medium <\/strong> n (%)<\/strong><\/th>Large <\/strong> n (%)<\/strong><\/th>Total number<\/strong><\/th><\/tr><\/thead>
Easy to recruit<\/td>5 (10%)<\/td>21 (13%)<\/td>127 (19%)<\/td>153<\/td><\/tr>
Neither easy nor difficult <\/td>10 (21%)<\/td>53 (34%)<\/td>257 (40%)<\/td>320<\/td><\/tr>
Difficult to recruit<\/td>30 (63%)<\/td>79 (50%)<\/td>257 (40%)<\/td>366<\/td><\/tr>
Not sure<\/td>1 (2%)<\/td>2 (1%)<\/td>8 (1%)<\/td>11<\/td><\/tr>
N\/A<\/td>2 (4%)<\/td>2 (1%)<\/td>0 (0%)<\/td>4<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>
(Rounded to the nearest percent)<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Comments from survey panellists suggest that many organizations are competing for a shrinking pool of volunteers, particularly in rural and smaller communities. One respondent described the challenge this way:<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\n

“Living in a small community of 16,000 people with over 100 not-for-profit organizations spread across 80km, the demand for board members is considerable and recruitment for specialized needs and culturally diverse representation is challenging.”<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

But finding the volunteers is only part of the issue. Many organizations reported difficulty recruiting people with specific skills in fundraising, governance, finance, accounting, legal affairs, and human resources. At the same time, many organizations emphasized that commitment to mission and organizational values remains just as important as technical expertise.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Renewal of Board Members and Term Limits<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The survey also sheds light on board renewal practices. While 40% of participating organizations reported always following board term limits, 41% reported having no specified term limit for board members, and 42% no specified limit for board chairs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Many panellists acknowledged the importance of bringing in fresh perspectives, avoiding stagnation, and planning for leadership succession. At the same time, they emphasized the value of long-serving Board members who provide deep institutional knowledge, historical context, and stability during periods of transition. Several charities reported revisiting their bylaws and term-limit policies in an effort to strike the right balance between institutional knowledge and different perspectives.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\n

“The challenge of recruiting new members means that current members stay on for much longer than is healthy to keep board energetic and current.”<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Charities value fresh eyes at the Board level, but many are reluctant to lose experienced board members when recruitment is already difficult.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Conclusion: Intentional Governance<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

At the same time, panellist comments also point to the Canadian charitable sector becoming increasingly intentional about governance. Some respondents described using board skills matrices, conducting gap analyses, planning for succession, and recruiting to address strategic needs rather than simply filling vacancies. Others highlighted the need for governance training and a clearer distinction between governance and day to day operations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Perhaps the most encouraging finding is that many organizations remain optimistic about the future of board leadership. Despite recruitment challenges, this year\u2019s respondents frequently described engaged directors, strong board cultures, and dedicated volunteers.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\n

“We are lucky to have some very devoted board members”<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Taken together, these findings suggest that Canadian charities are navigating a difficult governance environment, but they are not standing still. Recruitment challenges are real, with greater challenges for smaller organizations and some specific subsectors. Yet many charities are responding with more intentional recruitment practices, stronger governance processes, and a continued commitment to volunteer leadership.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n
\n\n \n\n\n
\n

\n Author\n <\/h2>\n\n <\/header>\n \n
\n \n\n \n
\n \n
\n \"\"\n <\/figure>\n \n
\n

\n \n McWhinney, Tara\n <\/a>\n <\/h2>\n <\/header>\n\n
\n