Subject: Fiduciary Governance Concerns and Request for Board Action

Date: January 16, 2026

Association for Supply Chain Management Members of the Board,

We are writing in our capacity as long-standing ASCM chapter leaders, instructors, members, and Fellows who care deeply about the integrity, sustainability, and future of the Association. This letter is not intended as a critique of individuals, but as a good-faith request for governance action grounded in ASCM’s financial disclosures, bylaws, and nonprofit fiduciary standards.

Over the past several months, a number of us have raised concerns—publicly and privately—regarding ASCM’s financial trajectory, governance posture, and leadership oversight. These concerns have been supported by documented evidence, including ASCM’s IRS Forms 990 and the Association’s own bylaws. At this point, we believe the issues warrant formal Board engagement and response.

1. Financial trajectory and fiduciary duty

ASCM has now reported multiple consecutive years of operating losses, net asset erosion, and material liquidity drawdown. While short-term deficits can occur in any organization, sustained deterioration without visible corrective action constitutes a fiduciary issue, not an operational one.

Under ASCM’s bylaws, the Board retains full authority and responsibility for the affairs, business, and financial stewardship of the Association. Committees are advisory. Members have no statutory governance power. As such, accountability for financial sustainability rests solely with the Board.

2. Governance structure and accountability gaps

A review of the bylaws highlights several structural realities that are now material:

• Members lack formal voting rights or mechanisms to compel governance action.

• Finance and Audit Committees are advisory only and cannot enforce corrective measures.

• The Leadership Team structure embeds executive influence upstream, which may unintentionally buffer timely Board intervention.

• The bylaws explicitly permit CEO removal with or without cause by a two-thirds Board vote, indicating that leadership change is procedurally available if warranted.

These provisions place a heightened duty on the Board to act decisively when financial and organizational health deteriorate.

3. Constructive proposal for a path forward

In parallel with raising concerns, we have developed a high-level governance and recovery framework informed by best practices from peer professional associations (including PMI, ISM, ATD, and SHRM). This framework is not radical; it reflects common elements already in use elsewhere:

• Explicit Board accountability for solvency and executive oversight

• Clear trigger conditions for intervention during sustained losses

• Independent audit and compensation authority

• Transparent reporting to members

• Defined separation between Board governance and executive execution

We believe this framework represents a credible, constructive path forward and are prepared to share it formally for Board consideration.

4. Request for Board response

In the interest of transparency, good governance, and institutional integrity, we respectfully request the following:

1. Formal acknowledgment of this letter by the Board

1. Clarification of what actions, if any, the Board has taken or plans to take in response to the financial trajectory

1. Identification of a Board contact or process for reviewing the proposed governance framework

1. A response timeline so members understand how concerns are being addressed

Absent a response, it will be difficult for members to conclude that fiduciary obligations are being actively exercised.

5. Closing

We raise these issues reluctantly but responsibly. ASCM has a proud history, strong brand equity, and a global professional community that still wants it to succeed. The question now is not whether problems exist, but whether governance will rise to meet them.

We remain open to constructive dialogue and engagement and look forward to your response.

Respectfully,

Petition Signatories