Accuracy

After the termination, there was an immediate question about how the Association would communicate my departure.

I was shown proposed wording.

One version was not acceptable to me because it suggested a voluntary departure or personal reasons.

That was not what happened.

I had not resigned.

I had not decided to return to Melbourne because I missed my family.

The Board had ended my employment during probation.

I was prepared to keep the public statement professional and restrained.

I did not need the reasons argued publicly.

I did not need a public attack on the Board.

But I did need the basic fact to be accurate.

The final statement said that I was no longer in the CEO role and that my employment had concluded during the agreed probationary period.

It also acknowledged that I had brought significant energy and fresh thinking to the organisation and introduced initiatives and projects the Board and staff intended to continue progressing.

That sentence stayed with me.

The work was useful enough to continue.

The person doing it was not.

I do not say that sarcastically.

Organisations are entitled to continue good ideas after people leave.

In fact, I hope they do.

The point was simply that the public statement itself acknowledged something important.

The seventy-two days were not empty.

There had been substantial work.