2026 OSI Elections Update

Pausing the 2026 Board Election Cycle to Improve How OSI Selects Directors and Hears the Community

Over a decade ago, OSI introduced an experiment in non-profit governance: a public board election process. We wanted the board composition to be more representative of the broad community we serve, and this process seemed like a real, practical way to accomplish this. The intent was to create a structured feedback mechanism for the community to help inform board member selection and to broaden stakeholder participation around who leads this organization.

After observing fourteen years of experience and process iteration, and after closely reviewing community feedback and concerns about the most recent election cycle, I presented an unsolicited proposal to the OSI board on January 17 and asked them to consider two things: 1) to not hold the Spring 2026 elections when scheduled in order to 2) take time to revisit our current governance processes. After much discussion and thoughtful consideration, the board voted in favor of both actions.

This decision is also about being honest regarding outcomes: the experiment has not produced the results we hoped for. Too often, it has created confusion, operational strain, and diminished trust. Those outcomes are exactly the opposite of what we set out to achieve.

What’s true about OSI’s structure—and why clarity matters

It’s important to remember that OSI’s bylaw amendments to include elections were not to enable binding, member-run elections. OSI is not structured as a membership organization. Board seats have remained the responsibility of the sitting board to fill, informed with the recommendations of the election process.

The public election process was designed to gather community priorities and improve board member selection, while final appointments remained with the board.

Over time, that nuance has become a source of understandable confusion for community members. Many reasonably expected elections to function as elections normally do, and in fact, the board has generally adopted the electorate’s recommendations. When a process feels unclear, trust suffers. When trust suffers, engagement becomes harder. This is especially problematic for an organization whose mission depends on legitimacy and credibility.

Why the board is pausing the 2026 election cycle now

OSI is in a leadership transition. A permanent Executive Director is expected soon, and it is in the organization’s best interest to address this now, before a new ED is asked to inherit a process that has not been working in the ideal. Pausing creates space for the organization to do the work carefully and publicly.

What the board has decided

The board has made two decisions:

1. OSI will not run the 2026 spring board election cycle.

2. The board has established a Board Working Group to review and improve OSI’s board member selection process and stakeholder engagement mechanisms and to return with recommendations by September 2026.

The working group’s mandate is practical: identify what OSI was trying to accomplish when we introduced public elections, assess what has and hasn’t worked, and propose a selection approach that better meets those objectives while aligning cleanly with OSI’s bylaws. 

This includes evaluating models used by other nonprofits in which boards remain self-perpetuating, especially those where stakeholder input is gathered in ways that are more transparent, more continuous, and more meaningful than a once-a-year vote.

What stays the same

OSI’s mission remains unchanged. The board will continue its oversight responsibilities. OSI will continue its work in support of open source licensing and policy, community education, and protecting the Open Source Definition and advancing the Open Source AI Definition.

What changes is that we are not going to repeat a process and simply hope that trust will be restored. Trust requires listening, deliberation, transparency, and follow-through. 

I am grateful to the OSI board for their openness to change and for their commitment to the organization’s mission. 

What comes next

The working group will convene, then publish its charter and timeline and methods for public input in March. By September 2026, the group will return with recommendations.

We will share a clear plan for how stakeholders can provide input during this review, including when discussions will happen and how input will be incorporated into the working group’s recommendations.

OSI tried its experiment for the right reasons, but a variety of factors resulted in “elections” that are performatively democratic while being gameable and representative of only a small group, and we’ve learned from the results. Now we are making space to align our director selection process with our bylaws, to rebuild trust, and to develop better, more durable and truly representative participation in which the global stakeholder community can be heard.