Wearing the right hat: Managing condo owners’ expectations
Wearing the Right Hat: Managing Condo Owners’ Expectations
by Pat Crosscombe, Founder & CEO, BoardSpace
Originally published in 2016. Substantially updated in July 2026 to reflect changes in technology, communication and condo owner expectations.
Picture this: It’s a sunny Saturday morning, and a condo director has just stepped outside for a quiet walk. Before she reaches the sidewalk, a neighbour approaches and begins explaining everything that is wrong with the board’s latest decision.
The director may serve on the board, but at that moment, she is not attending a meeting, reviewing board business or acting on behalf of the condominium corporation.
She is simply an owner trying to take a walk.
Sound familiar?
This happened to me many times when I served on my condo board. Owners saw me as a director whether I was sitting at the board table, getting my mail, carrying groceries or taking out the garbage.
One of the biggest challenges of serving on a condo board is managing owners’ expectations of directors. Directors are also owners. They live in the community, pay condo fees, experience service interruptions and are personally affected by the board’s decisions.
However, being elected to the board does not mean that a director is on duty whenever they leave home. Nor does it mean that owners should approach directors privately to discuss board business.
Directors wear two hats. Understanding when each hat is being worn can prevent frustration, protect directors’ privacy and help ensure that owners’ questions and concerns are handled consistently.
The owner hat and the director hat
A director wears the director hat when attending a board meeting, reviewing board materials, completing an assigned task, communicating with the property manager about authorized board business or otherwise carrying out the responsibilities of the position.
At other times, the director is an owner and neighbour.
A director walking through the lobby, collecting a parcel or leaving for work is not available for an informal consultation about board business. Their presence in a hallway, elevator, parking garage or common area does not create an impromptu board meeting.
Owners should not expect an individual director to explain a board decision, receive a complaint, investigate a problem or promise a particular outcome during a private encounter.
An individual director may not have all the relevant information. They may not remember every detail of the matter. Most importantly, one director normally cannot speak or make decisions on behalf of the board.
Owners should not approach directors privately about board business
Owners should not approach individual directors privately to discuss board business.
This includes conversations in hallways, elevators, parking garages, social events or outside a director’s home. It also includes personal text messages, emails and social media messages.
A private conversation bypasses the corporation’s established communication processes. The other directors and the property manager may never know that the conversation took place. Important information may not be documented, and the owner and director may leave the conversation with very different understandings of what was said.
An individual director also does not normally have the authority to respond on behalf of the board, investigate the matter or promise that action will be taken.
For these reasons, a director should not say:
“I’ll take care of it.”
“I’ll look into it.”
“I’ll mention it to the board.”
Those responses place responsibility on the individual director and encourage owners to continue using private conversations instead of the corporation’s official communication process.
The appropriate response is:
“Please submit your question or concern through the corporation’s established communication channel so it can be documented and directed to the appropriate person.”
The director does not need to hear the full story first. The purpose of the response is to establish the boundary immediately and direct the owner to the proper process.
This is not rude or dismissive. It ensures that all owners are treated consistently, protects directors’ personal time and helps the corporation maintain a complete record of questions, complaints and requests.
Directors are owners too
When wearing the owner hat, a director is entitled to think about personal interests.
Like every other owner, a director may be concerned about a condo fee increase, unhappy with the timing of a major repair or frustrated by a service interruption. Directors have household budgets, personal responsibilities and opinions about what happens in their community.
The challenge arises when those personal interests affect decisions made while wearing the director hat.
When acting as a director, the person must consider what is in the best interests of the condominium corporation as a whole. That means looking beyond the effect of a decision on one unit, one group of owners or the director personally.
The difference sounds simple. In practice, it can be difficult.
When the wrong hat appears at the board table
Imagine that a condominium corporation needs to replace its windows. The work is necessary, but the reserve fund does not have enough money to cover the entire project. A special assessment of $10,000 per unit may be required.
One director thinks, “I can’t afford this right now.”
Another director is planning to sell and does not want to pay for work that may not begin until after the sale.
Those concerns are real. A special assessment can create serious financial pressure for owners, including directors.
However, the board cannot base its decision only on the personal financial circumstances of individual directors. It must review the available information, consider the condition of the windows, examine the risks of delaying the work, evaluate financing options and decide what is in the corporation’s best interests.
Reasonable directors may disagree about the timing, scope or financing of a project. Disagreement does not necessarily mean that someone has failed in their responsibility.
The problem arises when a director’s position is primarily based on avoiding a personal cost rather than considering the corporation’s long-term needs.
That is when the owner hat has appeared at the board table.
An individual director is not the board
Owners sometimes assume that every director has the authority to provide an answer or solve a problem.
They do not.
The board exercises its authority collectively. Depending on the issue, a decision may require discussion, professional advice and a formal vote.
An individual director normally cannot approve a repair, reverse a previous decision, interpret a rule on behalf of the corporation or instruct the property manager to take action.
The board president does not automatically have this authority either. The president may chair meetings and serve as the main contact with management, but the president is still one member of the board.
This distinction is especially important when an owner approaches a director privately.
Even a well-intentioned promise to “look into it” can create an expectation that cannot be met. The owner may believe that the director has accepted responsibility for the issue. The other directors and the property manager may know nothing about the conversation.
The better response is always to direct the owner to the corporation’s official communication process.
Every condo needs an official communication channel
Hallway conversations are unreliable corporate records.
A director may genuinely intend to remember the issue but become distracted. Important details may be missed. The concern may never reach the property manager or the full board.
The same problem occurs with personal text messages, private email accounts and social media posts.
Every condominium corporation should establish an official way for owners to report concerns and ask questions. Depending on the corporation, this may be a management email address, an online form, a resident portal or a dedicated board email account.
Owners should know where to send a routine maintenance concern, a complaint, a request for accommodation, a records request and an emergency report.
They should also understand that posting in a neighbourhood Facebook group or messaging one director personally is not the same as notifying the corporation.
A dependable communication process protects everyone.
The owner’s concern is documented. Responsibility can be assigned. Follow-up can be tracked, and the information remains with the corporation when directors or managers change.
Consistency matters
All directors should follow the same practice when owners try to discuss board business privately.
If one director regularly engages in lengthy hallway conversations while another refuses, owners may assume that the second director is unhelpful or unfriendly. They may also begin approaching whichever director is most likely to listen or offer assistance.
That can lead to conflicting information, undocumented promises and individual directors becoming unofficial representatives of the board.
The rule should be simple:
Owners submit questions, comments, complaints and requests through the corporation’s official communication channel.
Directors do not receive or handle board business privately.
When every director responds consistently, owners quickly learn how to communicate with the corporation.
Technology has changed owners’ expectations
Ten years ago, an owner might have raised a concern at an annual meeting, called the management office or sent a letter.
Today, an owner can send an email, text a director, post in a community Facebook group and leave a message through an online portal—all before breakfast.
Faster communication has created an expectation of faster answers.
But receiving a message instantly does not mean the board can make a decision instantly.
Some concerns can be handled by the property manager. Others require research, contractor input, legal advice or discussion at a board meeting. A director may not know whether other owners have reported the same problem or whether confidential information affects the response.
Technology has made it easier to send concerns. It has not eliminated the need for proper governance and decision-making.
It has also made clear communication boundaries more important than ever.
An acknowledgement is not the same as a solution
Owners should not have to wonder whether anyone received their message.
At the same time, boards should not promise that every issue will be resolved within a day or two. Some problems are complicated. Contractors may be unavailable. Insurance companies may need to be contacted. The board may need several quotes or professional advice.
A good communication policy distinguishes between acknowledging a message and resolving the issue.
An acknowledgement might simply confirm that the concern was received, identify who is reviewing it and explain when the owner can expect another update.
For example:
“We have asked the contractor to inspect the area and expect to hear back by Thursday. We will provide another update on Friday.”
Even if nothing has changed by Friday, the corporation should still communicate:
“The contractor has not yet confirmed the inspection date. We are following up and will provide the next update on Tuesday.”
Silence creates its own story. Owners may assume that no one cares, nothing is happening or information is being hidden.
A brief update can prevent weeks of frustration.
Get ahead of the story
Boards sometimes avoid communicating because they do not yet have all the answers.
Unfortunately, owners will often fill the information gap themselves. Rumours begin, assumptions spread and expectations grow.
When a major repair, fee increase or service disruption is coming, the board should communicate what it knows as early as reasonably possible.
Owners need to know what is happening, why it is happening, what has already been decided, what remains undecided and when they can expect the next update.
The board should also avoid presenting the most optimistic possible timeline as though it were guaranteed.
If a project could take three to six months, promising completion in three months creates an expectation that may quickly be disappointed. Providing a realistic range gives the corporation room to manage delays without owners feeling misled.
Clear expectations do not eliminate frustration, but they reduce surprises.
Transparency does not mean sharing everything
Owners increasingly expect corporate information to be available electronically. That is a reasonable expectation.
Approved minutes, notices, policies, forms and project updates should be organized and reasonably easy to find. Owners should not need to search through years of emails or repeatedly ask the property manager for the same document.
However, transparency does not mean that every owner is entitled to every piece of information.
Boards deal with confidential matters involving legal advice, employees, contractors, arrears, disputes, accommodations and personal information. Directors must know what can be shared, what must remain confidential and when professional advice is required.
Directors also need to be careful about how they use technology.
A screenshot from a confidential board discussion can be forwarded in seconds. A document stored in a personal email account may remain accessible after a director leaves the board. A casual comment in a private online group may be copied and distributed throughout the community.
Good governance requires both transparency and discretion.
Owners should expect the board to explain important decisions. They should not expect individual directors to disclose confidential discussions or information about their neighbours.
Transparency is not direct democracy
Owners sometimes believe that transparency means the board must consult them before making every important decision.
That is not how condominium governance normally works.
Owners elect directors to make decisions for the corporation. Depending on the applicable legislation and the corporation’s governing documents, some matters require an owner vote. Many operational, financial and maintenance decisions, however, are the responsibility of the board.
Owners should expect the board to communicate the reasons behind significant decisions, especially those affecting condo fees, major repairs or the use of common areas.
They should not expect to vote on every contract, invoice, repair or rule-enforcement matter.
Transparency means explaining what is happening and why.
It does not mean moving the board meeting into the hallway.
Directors are not on duty whenever they leave home
Directors are volunteers and neighbours. They are not a 24-hour customer service department.
Owners should not expect directors to respond through personal social media accounts, debate board decisions in elevators, receive complaints while walking through the property or provide immediate answers while trying to go about their day.
The fact that a director lives in the community does not make every encounter an opportunity to discuss board business.
A director who steps outside their home is an owner. They are not expected to engage in discussions or debates with owners about board matters.
That boundary should be communicated clearly and respected consistently.
However, directors cannot use their volunteer status to avoid their responsibilities.
Directors are expected to prepare for meetings, read reports, understand the issues before them, protect confidential information and complete work they have agreed to undertake. They must take the role seriously, even though they are unpaid.
The balance is important.
Directors are not always on duty, but they remain accountable for the work they undertake as directors.
Owners have responsibilities too
Managing expectations is not only about telling owners what they cannot expect.
Owners have an important role in a well-run condominium corporation. They should read notices, follow the corporation’s rules, attend owners’ meetings and raise concerns respectfully through the proper process.
They should also recognize that not every concern will produce the outcome they prefer.
Listening to an owner does not require the board to agree with that owner. Responding to a complaint does not mean the complaint is valid. Transparency does not guarantee that everyone will be happy with the decision.
Owners may advocate for their personal interests.
Directors, when acting as directors, must consider the corporation as a whole.
That is the fundamental difference between the two hats.
Technology should make expectations clearer
Technology can make condo governance much easier, but only when it supports clear processes.
A digital document library can make approved records easier to find. A board portal can keep decisions, minutes and action items together. An online form can ensure that owner concerns reach the correct person. Task tracking can show whether an issue has been assigned and followed up.
Technology cannot fix poor governance by itself.
If owners do not know which channel to use, directors respond from personal accounts and decisions are scattered across email threads, adding more technology may simply create more places for information to get lost.
The goal is not to use every available tool.
The goal is to create one dependable system that everyone understands.
Clear boundaries make better neighbours
The next time an owner approaches a director during a walk, in the parking garage or while carrying groceries, the director should not engage in a discussion about board business.
The response should be simple:
“Please submit your question or concern through the corporation’s established communication channel so it can be documented and directed to the appropriate person.”
That response establishes an important boundary.
It also makes it more likely that the concern will be documented, reviewed fairly and not forgotten.
Directors and owners will continue to wear more than one hat. That is part of living and governing in the same community.
The key is knowing which hat belongs where—and making sure everyone else understands the difference.
Originally published in 2016. Substantially updated in July 2026 to reflect changes in technology, communication and condo owner expectations.
If you re a landlord or just looking to make money with real estate, it s crucial to understand how to manage a property the right way. It s not just about knowing how to fix things when they break. As a property manager, especially as a first-time landlord, you ll be forced to wear many hats. How you manage that property is going to either make or break your chances for success.