Recently, some presidents of colleges and universities have run into serious trouble because of conflicts with their faculty. When such conflicts arise, faculty senates frequently precipitate an institutional crisis by voting (or threatening to vote) no confidence in the president. But whether one agrees or disagrees that a particular president should stay or go, such a decision ultimately resides with the institution. In this article, the author discusses how to avoid the use of this "nuclear option." Most institutions that face no confidence votes have suffered communication failures. Communication occurs not only through words but also through actions. Thus, the author states that the problem is the failure to consider how different constituencies will interpret an action. Furthermore, he emphasizes that a vote of no confidence is also a vote about trust. So, the president, the board, and the faculty need to come together and agree on specific actions they will take to rebuild a lasting and mutual trust.