Challenges in charity leadership recruitment in divisive times

In my role as Head of Not for Profit Appointments at Peridot Partners, and as Co-Chair of NCVO’s Small Charities Advisory Panel, I spend a lot of time listening to charity leaders. Over recent months, the environment charities operate in has become markedly more hostile, polarised and uncertain.

The findings in NCVO’s Challenges Facing Charities in Divided Times report reflect what many leaders have been experiencing firsthand. Rising intimidation, misinformation and threats are no longer isolated incidents. They are shaping how organisations protect their staff, trustees and volunteers, and how visible they feel able to be.

At Peridot, we are seeing how safety-led, responsible decisions are affecting how charities are perceived by prospective leaders. Reduced visibility can create uncertainty for candidates, even where an organisation is well-governed, values-led and mission-focused.

The tension between safety and transparency and the unintended impact on trust are issues that charities and recruiters must navigate together to attract the leaders the sector needs most in challenging times.

Visibility challenges in charity leadership recruitment

Charities are operating in a climate of growing hostility, polarisation and fear. Across NCVO’s listening sessions, organisations described rising intimidation, online abuse and misinformation directed at their staff, trustees and the communities they support.

For many, this is no longer an abstract risk:

• Refugee charities spoke of physical threats.
• Trustees and CEOs have been targeted online.
• False narratives have fuelled harassment from both the public and the press.

The impact is felt most acutely by people from global majority backgrounds, for whom everyday activities like commuting to work, attending events and being visible online now carry added risk.

In response, charities are taking steps to protect their people and their work. Some have removed staff and trustee names from websites, reduced their social media presence or stopped promoting public events altogether.

This is a protective response to a hostile environment, which allows organisations to continue delivering their missions while keeping people safe.

How reduced visibility affects trust in recruitment

Charities’ “forced invisibility” comes with consequences they can’t always control. While internal stakeholders often understand the reasons, it can be hard to communicate externally.

For so long, charities have been expected to be transparent, so hiding certain information can lead to questions about an organisation’s governance, culture or stability.

Talking about and understanding this tension is critical. Without context, protective decisions can be misread, affecting confidence, credibility and, ultimately, a charity’s ability to attract the leadership it needs.

How missing information shapes candidate perceptions

When senior leadership candidates research an organisation, they look for clear signals about governance, culture, stability and values. Websites, leadership profiles and public communications all play a role in building that picture.

Without context, reduced visibility can raise red flags. Some question whether an organisation is in crisis, poorly governed or deliberately opaque. Others worry about internal conflict, reputational risk or a lack of openness at board or executive level.

We have seen this first-hand. In the final stages of a recent CEO appointment with a refugee charity, several strong candidates expressed concern about the organisation’s limited online presence, with some assuming there must be something suspicious behind it.

These reactions were not unreasonable. Candidates are making high-stakes career decisions, often in an already uncertain sector. They are rightly cautious, particularly when stepping into roles that carry personal, professional and reputational risk.

What this illustrates is not a failure of candidates to understand the context, but a lack of shared framing. Without explanation, safety-led decisions are interpreted through a traditional lens of transparency and accountability. The result is hesitation, doubt and, in some cases, withdrawal from the process, even where there is strong alignment with the mission.

The impact on leadership recruitment and diversity

Those new to the sector, stepping up into CEO roles or without strong informal networks, are more likely to rely on publicly available information. When that information is limited, the perceived risk of applying increases.

There is also a disproportionate impact on candidates from global majority backgrounds, the very people already facing higher levels of hostility and scrutiny. For some, the prospect of leading an organisation that appears exposed or unsupported raises serious concerns about personal safety and wellbeing.

Over time, this compounds existing challenges around diversity, succession planning and leadership resilience. At a point when charities need bold, values-driven leaders, recruiters need to ensure that all candidates feel encouraged to apply.