Question: two year consecutive terms why?

One-year terms are certainly the most common, but I wouldn't say they're automatically more productive. For one thing, you get more continuity and a more experienced president (in the second year) with a two-year term. Why do most by-laws only allow two year terms... I need to explain this to our members.

Asked by Agent

Answers:

Advice from PTO Today

Craig writes:
I'm not 100 percent sure what you're asking. Most bylaws specify one-year terms. One-year terms probably make the most sense because it's easier to get people to commit for a year than for two years. But to a certain extent a new president learns the ropes in the first year. If she serves a second year, she's likely to be more confident in the job. A good system, if you can pull it off, is to have a president and, basically, an assistant president. The president is in charge and the assistant president (you might call her co-president) works along side her learning the job. In year two, the assistant president becomes president. She now has the experience and confidence to handle the job.

Community Advice

Agent writes:
I am just trying to explain to our members why it is a good idea to only allow the executive board to serve two consecutive terms.

Community Advice

law0923 writes:
So is there any problem with having the bylaws state the terms can be longer? Only reason I ask is because with our school it is super hard to fill positions and if there is someone willing to fill president for longer than 2 years, would there be a reason not to let them?

Advice from PTO Today

Craig writes:
I think most groups allow the president to keep serving, particularly if there is no other candidate for office. I do think that changing presidents is a best practice for the long-term health of the group, but as you point out, that's not always reality. One possible bylaws clause might be to limit the president to two consecutive terms unless there are no other candidates.