Managing Well: When you Leave leave.

When it is time to leave, leave. Too blunt? Perhaps for some it might come across as a little harsh. But the intent is simple: those leaving a role, especially a senior role, need to do all they can to not compromise the leadership to be offered by a successor. So we leave; we create distance; we get out of the way. We don’t muddy the waters with our presence. There is more to leaving well than simply leaving; but this is rather basic.

The Presbyterian Church USA has this as a guiding requirement. When a pastor retires, they need to stay away from the congregation they are leaving for one entire year. And even then they only have a contributing role or involvement with the blessing of the successor. Any involvement is at the invitation of the person who followed them into the role. That seems a good rule of thumb for those of us that are within organizations where there is no such requirement or expectation explicitly stated. For one year we stay away; we leave space – emotional, social and intellectual space – for our successor.

This is not only for the sake of our successor. This has implications for each person who is adapting to new leadership: in a church, members of the congregation; in a school members of the faculty or staff; and then those who serve on the board of trustees. They all need time and space to make the adjustments and re-alignments of working with a successor. Give them all space. One year; stay away.

I had to chuckle a little when I was leaving Ambrose University in Calgary. Dan Aleshire, the former executive director of the Association of Theological Schools, met with me and we discussed what it means to leave well. And a little gingerly he asked whether it would be difficult for me to keep distance or whether I would be tempted to visit the campus or connect over coffee on the campus. And I assured him that that would be no problem: we were selling our home in Calgary and we were moving to BC. I’ll not soon forget this response and affirmation of how that was good, so very good. So he added his counsel that I stay away for a full year. A little too enthusiastically, I thought at the time; but I got his point.

And the follow up advice, any involvement even after that year would only be at the request or invitation of the successor.

Three entities need to get this. First, obviously, those of us who leave and move on and do it well. Even if our successor assures us that our presence is not a problem, we still make it a point to just stay away. Perhaps you meet with the successor at their request to clarify this or that or the other. But as a rule, you create distance. this is not only about the relationship that the two of you have; it affects others as well.

Second, the successor. It may be very difficult to do, but if there is even a hint of a problem, you may need to do the very awkward thing of asking your predecessor to give you distance. They may be terribly offended given how much they have invested in the organization or the church. But the principle remains: you and the organization are moving on and you need to ask this person to honour this principle

And third, boards. Resist the temptation to honour the out-going pastor or leader or president in a way that is not helpful going forward. Resist the inclination to give them a kind of on-going honourary role – as chancellor or as president emeritus or global ambassador or pastor without portfolio. The longer the tenure of the out-going leader the greater the inclination to honour them in some way. Also this: if you are part of a judiciary body – bishop or district superintendent or regional director – you may need to step in and speak with the out-going person to be sure that nothing happens that complicates things for the incoming person.

Think Mount Nebo. God very graciously advises Moses that they have worked together for 40 years – good years, though with many ups and downs and challenges, but now, just as they are about to cross the Jordan, the word is that Moses will not be part of the program. God will move ahead with Caleb and Joshua. Was this cruel, or a severe mercy? Might it be a mercy and good not only for the out-going leader but also the organization?. Moses needed to let go and become a reminder to all of us that no one, no leader, is indispensable. No one. We are in a role or responsibility for a season and then we move on and others take up the role or responsibility. And we resolve that we will nothing to complicate that transition. Nothing – whether intentional or unintentional. God was not disrespecting Moses; rather, God was doing what was right and best for the people of Israel. Even Moses was not indispensable and the next chapter for the people of Israel required that Moses step back. And so the point is simply this: when it is time to leave, leave. Don’t cling; leave. Move on to a new challenge and opportunity so that your intellectual and emotional and social energy is focused elsewhere. Leave; move on.