The Shortening Tenure of the CAO: The New Reality

It is becoming increasingly common to hear about Chief Administrative Officers changing positions after only a few years, and sometimes much sooner. While this is often a voluntary move, that’s not always the case.

Not long ago, many municipalities could point to CAOs who spent a decade, and sometimes an entire career serving a single municipality. While long tenures have not disappeared completely, they are becoming less common across the profession.

Today, a growing number of CAOs are serving shorter terms before moving to another municipality, pursuing a different opportunity, or leaving the role altogether.

This trend raises an important question: is this a problem to be solved, or simply a new reality to be managed?

The answer is undoubtably a bit of both.

Why Is It Happening?

There is rarely a single reason behind a CAO’s departure.

Some transitions are positive, like when a CAO accepts a position with a larger municipality, seeks a new professional challenge, moves closer to family, or decides it is simply time for a change. Career mobility is a normal part of most professions, and municipal administration should be no different.

At the same time, we would be naïve to ignore the challenges associated with the role.

The expectations placed on CAOs have grown significantly over the past decade. While this is not an exhaustive list, some of the common reasons include:

• Councils that face increasingly complex issues

• Residents who expect immediate responses

• Incivility from both of these groups has grown considerably

• Regulatory requirements continue to expand

• Social media has accelerated the pace of public scrutiny

Through it all, the CAO remains responsible for connecting governance, administration, community expectations, and organizational performance.

It is a demanding role, and in some cases the cumulative pressure contributes to shorter tenures.

The relationship between council and the CAO also remains one of the most significant factors influencing longevity. When expectations are unclear, trust breaks down, or roles become blurred, the position can quickly become difficult for everyone involved.

As with many challenges in local government, the human element often matters more than the technical one.

The Benefits of Shorter Tenures

It is easy to focus on the negatives, but there can be advantages to increased mobility.

New leaders bring new perspectives. They ask different questions and challenge long-standing assumptions. They often introduce ideas and practices gained from working in other organizations and communities.

A municipality that has become comfortable with "the way we have always done it " can benefit from fresh eyes and fresh energy.

For individual CAOs, moving between organizations can accelerate professional growth. Different communities provide exposure to different governance models, economic conditions, service delivery approaches, and political dynamics. These experiences can strengthen leadership capacity and broaden perspectives.

In some cases, a well-managed transition can create opportunities for both the departing CAO, the municipality they leave behind, and the new CAO who is soon to arrive.

The Costs of Constant Change

The benefits, however, should not blind us to the costs.

Every leadership transition creates disruption.

Relationships with council must be rebuilt. Organizational knowledge can be lost. Strategic initiatives may slow down while a new leader learns the community and establishes priorities. Senior staff often spend significant time supporting recruitment and onboarding efforts rather than focusing on organizational objectives.

Communities can also experience "change fatigue" when multiple leadership transitions occur in a relatively short period.

From a council perspective, frequent turnover can make it difficult to establish long-term direction. From an administrative perspective, uncertainty at the executive level can affect morale and organizational stability.

None of this means that every CAO should stay indefinitely. It simply means that turnover carries costs that should be acknowledged and managed.

Preparing for the Reality

Whether we like the trend or not, municipalities should prepare for the possibility that CAO tenures may continue to shorten.

The first step is succession planning.

Unfortunately, succession planning is often treated as something relevant only to retirement. In reality, every municipality should have a plan for leadership transitions, regardless of the reason they occur. Unexpected departures are significantly easier to manage when responsibilities, processes, and organizational knowledge are documented and shared.

I had the opportunity to work through a knowledge transfer process introduction to a group of north American professionals at a conference in Halifax this past month, and it was a very interesting experience to see that this issue of succession planning is certainly not isolated to those of us in local government.

The second step is building a strong leadership team. This is also related to that knowledge transfer process. Organizations that depend too heavily on a single individual become vulnerable when that person leaves. By investing in directors, managers, and emerging leaders, municipalities create resilience that extends beyond any one position.

The third step is intentional onboarding.

Both councils and CAOs benefit from a structured process that establishes expectations early. Discussions around governance, goals, communication protocols, priorities, and decision-making processes should happen immediately, not after problems emerge.

Most importantly, municipalities should focus on creating environments where talented leaders want to stay.

Addressing the Root Causes

If municipalities wish to improve CAO retention, they must be willing to examine the factors that influence departures.

Compensation matters. Workload matters. Organizational culture matters.

But perhaps most important is the quality of the council-administration relationship. Further distilled, the relationship between the CAO and the chief elected official is critical.

CAOs generally accept that the role involves long hours, difficult decisions, and public scrutiny. What becomes difficult to sustain is an environment where expectations are constantly shifting, roles are unclear, or trust is lacking.

Strong governance practices can significantly reduce these challenges. Clear role definition, effective council orientation, regular performance discussions, and open communication all contribute to healthier working relationships.

None of these practices guarantee a long tenure.

What they do is increase the probability that both council and administration can focus their energy on serving the community rather than managing avoidable conflict.

Looking Forward

Perhaps the goal should not be measuring success by the length of a CAO's tenure alone.

A ten-year tenure can be highly successful. So can a four-year tenure that leaves the organization stronger than it was found. Indeed, a change-oriented CAO has a very different skill set than the CAO who takes over through a period of stability.

If shorter tenures continue to become the new normal, resilience will matter more than permanence.

Communities that invest in governance, leadership development, succession planning, and strong relationships will be better positioned to navigate change whenever it occurs.

And ultimately, that may be the most important measure of organizational health.

Your Ideas

What are you seeing in your region?

Are CAO tenures becoming shorter? If so, what factors do you believe are driving the change? What strategies have been successful in improving retention and supporting leadership transitions?

I would welcome your thoughts and experiences. These conversations help us better understand the realities facing local government and strengthen the profession as a whole.

You can reach me at ian@strategicsteps.ca. I look forward to the conversation.