How chairs and chief executives navigate challenge together

The relationship between a chair and chief executive sits at the centre of effective governance, creating the conditions for strong leadership and trust across the organisation.

At our recent Cross-Sector Chairs Forum, Kate Heaps and Satish Mathur reflected on what makes this relationship work and how it holds up when organisations face difficult decisions.

Kate Heaps has worked on both sides of the Chair–CEO relationship, having served as Chief Executive of a hospice and previously as chair of a learning disability charity. She shared her views on the roles that trust and accountability play in shaping the relationship between a chair and a chief executive, and on the importance of a shared sense of purpose.

Satish Mathur has worked in both private and public sectors at senior level. He has Chaired organisations and committees of Boards and was a Chair in the private sector before moving into the charity sector. Over the past five years, his focus has been on organisations where change is needed, and boards are working through difficult decisions.

A recurring idea in the discussion was how much the relationship between the chair and chief executive is shaped by how they work together over time.

Partnership, not hierarchy

The relationship between a chair and chief executive is formally hierarchical: The chair appoints the chief executive and holds them to account on behalf of the board.

But the relationship rarely works well if it stays only at that level. Both parties need to approach it more like a partnership, with their roles aligned around the understanding that they are working toward the same goal.

The dynamic goes beyond a simple “hire and fire” relationship. The chair and chief executive depend on one another to help the board make sound decisions and keep the organisation moving in the right direction.

Kate described the relationship as inherently co-dependent. While the chair leads the board, responsibility for the organisation’s success or failure sits with all trustees. That means trustees share a stake in how the chief executive performs rather than leaving that responsibility solely with the chair.

Trust and honest feedback

When the relationship between the chair and chief executive becomes too closed, other trustees can find themselves unsure what conversations are happening or how decisions are being made.

So, accountability applies to both the chair and the chief executive, and performance conversations shouldn’t focus only on trustees or the executive team.

Kate highlighted the value of 360-degree feedback during her time as chair. Inviting input from fellow trustees and the senior leadership team helped ensure that her own performance was open to reflection and challenge.

The chief executive must also be trusted to lead. While the board sets direction, the chief executive runs the organisation day-to-day and needs the board’s trust to lead within the governance framework it has established.

Who decides what

Clear delegation shapes how the chair, board and chief executive work together. In many organisations, this sits within a scheme of delegation that defines where authority lies.

Kate described how a documented scheme of delegation clarified which decisions the board expected to see and which would sit with the chief executive. It helped both sides understand when the board needed to be involved and when operational judgement should sit with the executive.

It also created the confidence to challenge assumptions when necessary. Kate reflected:

“That has helped the board recognise where they can say, ‘what about this or what about that?’ But it has also allowed me, at times, to push back and say, ‘actually, I think this sits within my responsibility.”

A scheme of delegation doesn’t remove judgement, but it does make it clearer where authority sits and helps avoid confusion about who should decide what.

Working through uncertainty

Challenge and support between chairs and CEOs

There will always be situations where the answer is unclear, and the next step is not obvious. Challenge and support are therefore closely linked in the relationship between a chair and chief executive.

A chief executive is often expected to project certainty in most settings, so having a place where they can say “I’m not sure” and talk through those uncertainties openly can be extremely valuable.

These conversations depend on trust, which will grow through regular time together that is protected rather than squeezed around other business. Shared values and mutual respect, along with honesty, make it easier to work through difficult questions rather than avoid them.

There is also a responsibility on both sides to notice when the other person is under strain, so you can agree on what’s needed to prevent problems from escalating.

The practical side of the relationship

The relationship between a chair and chief executive also depends on the practical ways they work together.

How often do they meet? What is that time used for? Do both people prefer a structured agenda or a more open conversation? These details may seem small, but they influence how the relationship develops over time.

It also helps to agree on how escalation will work. If something urgent arises outside the usual meeting rhythm, both sides need to understand how and when to raise it.

Visibility matters, too, and a chair’s presence should not be limited to formal board meetings. Spending time face-to-face, where possible, can open up conversations that might not surface in more formal or prescribed settings.

Finally, it helps when both people are open about their own strengths and weaknesses. Naming blind spots allows the other person to notice patterns, compensate where necessary and raise issues that might otherwise be missed.

Setting the tone and standing behind decisions

The way a chair and chief executive support one another often sets the tone for the wider organisation.

Support and challenge can include simple acts of recognition. Trustees and chairs often give their time and judgement as volunteers. Even when roles are remunerated, they still contribute experience and energy to a cause they care about. Acknowledging their contribution matters.

Chief executives do not always receive the same recognition, particularly during difficult periods. Taking time to recognise sustained effort or a difficult piece of work helps maintain trust in the relationship.

Support also becomes visible in how decisions are handled. Once a decision has been reached, leaders need to stand behind it rather than distance themselves from it or attribute it to someone else. Behaviour tends to follow what leaders model, and the relationship between the chair and chief executive often sets that example.

It can also help to have somewhere else to reflect on the relationship itself. A deputy chair, mentor or coach can provide space to talk things through and offer perspective when difficult issues arise.

All of these ideas become clearer when organisations face pressure.

Chairing together through crisis

Satish offered a different perspective, reflecting on chairing during periods of organisational pressure.

For him, the chair’s role operates in the short term and the long term at the same time. It goes beyond governance structures and depends on understanding the relationships around the board and how people work together during difficult times.

Satish emphasised that the responsibilities of a chair are significant and become more visible as circumstances become more difficult. A chair needs to build a strong board and give it direction, whilst encouraging trustees to work together.

When the pandemic hit

When the pandemic hit, Satish had only recently joined the board of one organisation when revenue disappeared almost overnight.

The charity began the period in relatively good financial health, but there was no shared view across the board, including management, on how to respond to the sudden loss of income.

Disagreement followed, and several trustees stepped down during that period, leaving those remaining to work through the decisions ahead.

Working as one team under pressure

During this time, the management team needed steady support and encouragement. The trustees who remained became more involved than usual, working closely with the executive.

The first step was to develop an action plan. Senior managers and executive directors worked with the board to agree on how the organisation would move forward. They developed a new business model and set out the actions needed to stabilise the charity.

The response relied on a collaborative approach built around planning and organisation to deliver. Board and management worked as one team, and that cooperation helped the organisation survive and expand in the years that followed.

What this means for chairs and chief executives

It should now be clear that a board’s effectiveness is closely tied to the strength of the relationship between the chair and the chief executive.

Leaders must balance governance with a relationship that’s based on trust, transparency, clear lines of authority and a willingness to work through uncertainty together. When the relationship works well, it helps the board remain focused on purpose while allowing the chief executive the space to lead.

Marie McQuade has a long history of working with charities to create impact. Since 2023, she has been recruiting board members for charities nationwide. You can reach Marie via email or connect with her on LinkedIn.