On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 1:21 PM, Lodewijk <lodewijk(a)effeietsanders.org> wrote:
[snip a bunch of good things]
but I also would
like to urge you to choose a structure that makes you feel
comfortable, that is common in your country. I suggest you approach
some organizations that are similar to yours (small associations) and
ask them how they organized themselves.
This is probably the most important point ever.
Listen to our European centric opinions, pick our brains, challenge
our experience, and don't hesitate to discard right away what doesn't
make sense to you in a cultural, legal, gut-feeling kind of way :)
I totally agree there should be a way for the membership to replace
the board members - but this does not have to be easy.
+1
I agree with Manuel to have terms of 1 year instead of three. However,
keep in mind it is common that board members are re-elected, so their
actual term will likely be longer than one year.
I have a more mitigated opinion on this.
I believe for example that having one year terms for Wikimedia
Deutschland is a liability at this stage of development of the
chapter. But let me try and make this a bit clearer by giving you my
thought behind the length of a board mandate.
*Boards are usually made up of volunteers. Volunteers motivation is
fluctuating, mostly due to outside things. Today, all of you people
have time and are motivated to do things, but you don't know where
you'll be in three years. Maybe starting a new job, maybe finishing a
demanding Phd, maybe travelling the world, maybe having moved on to
other non-profit involvements, whatever. So signing up for three years
for a very young chapter is, in my opinion, not a realistic thing. One
year sounds more like it. Lodewijk is also right, people tend to be
reelected for at least another year anyway. And let's be realistic,
your first year will be spent on doing stuff, not on strategizing much
:)
* I don't agree however, that in the mid term, reelecting the board
every year is a good thing. My personal opinion is that for a very
developped chapterr like Wikimedia Deutschland for example, the
illusion of democracy (elections happening more often give the
impression that it is all more "democratic") actually have a negative
side effect, which is basically that people are campaigning almost all
year long. In a developped chapter, it takes quite a long time to get
acquainted with how things work, and a year can be very short. My
observation is also that as a chapter grows, the age of its board
members tend to go up on average, with people who are less prone to
sudden changes in their life, and more ready to commit for a longer
amount of time.
* A longer term as one year also gives some stability to the chapter.
It allows for continuity in the governing body, which I find is good.
However, that only really works if you add a the two-tier renewal, ie.
half of the board being elected every other year, rather than the
board being elected as a block for two years. Wikimedia France has
introduced a longer mandate (2 years) three years ago (I think?), and
has had rotating elections ever since, which, in my opinion, really
have benefitted the growth of the chapter. This also addresses the
passing of the flame, as you constantly have at least half of the
board who "was here the year before" and can work the new people in.
In any case, my advice, which of course, you are free to reject, of
course, would be the following:
* Go for a one year term at the beginning, to allow more people to
feel they can participate at the higher level of the chapter. This
helps with member motivation and member retention. If you start with a
three year term, there is no room for new people to come at that level
in well... three years, and it's a looooong time.
*Do keep in mind the possibility, when the chapter is better
developed, to change the bylaws and introduce a two year term with 1/2
he board elected every other year.
That's all folks,
Have fun bylawering ;)
Cheers,
Delphine
--
@notafish
NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost.
Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive -
http://blog.notanendive.org
Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto -
http://photo.notafish.org