Anthony DiPierro wrote:
You've given your own suggestions above, but what is the board going to do, say "hey, Gavin Chait said this is how we should do it, so lets go with it"? I don't think it's going to happen.
Why not? I have 15 years experience in South Africa developing and running non-profit organisations in fields as diverse as HIV / AIDS, education and small business development. I've worked with student-run, university-based organisations, corporate funded ones, and institutional versions. I have fund-raised, written proposals, developed ideas and implemented them. Some of my ideas even work.
I'm probably not the only person with this sort of experience on this list but I do have some idea of what it takes to run a self-sustaining non-profit social benefit organisation.
So why not listen to my suggestions? They are my opinions, based on my experiences. They are freely and honestly given. I don't have all the answers but I may be able to save you some bother.
Well, I'm personally a big believer that there needs to be a competent central figure during this process. Maybe you agree with me, and maybe you don't. I'm also a big believer that Jimbo, the only current candidate, is *not* competent at such a task.
So hey, if you could convince the board that you have what it takes, I'd say hire *you* as interim CEO. Unlike some others I don't think the interim CEO has to have a tremendous resume as a top leader of huge organizations - someone with the experience you describe would probably be good enough, and probably a *lot* cheaper.
I'd say that right now, we need a CEO who understands plainly what our troubles are. It is not the case of Gavin right at the moment. I can't speak of the future :-)
Maybe you'd even be willing to take on such a role for free. If so, even better.
As an alternative it'd be nice to get someone with your type of experience on the board. Preferably as an additional member, but if Jimbo's control issues won't allow the board to expand then maybe Ant or Angela would be willing to step down (we could give her some sort of new title like "Volunteer advocate" and an advisory position).
It is nice to see how quickly you would like to get rid of the community representatives :-) Don't worry, there is a chance that happen.
Perhaps... I must clarify something here. I think that legally speaking, the decision to expand the board is not in the sole hands of Jimbo. It is a decision which should be made by the board. In short, if 4 members vote expanding the board and Jimbo votes against, expansion will occur.
Current problem is to define whether board members should be appointed and/or elected, as well as the proportionality of community members versus external members. External should be appointed, but the question was whether community members should be appointed only, elected only or a mix of the two. Note that in case of election only, Gavin probably has no chance to be on the board as a community representative. We could possibly imagine a solution such as 2 community members elected every year for 2 years. Plus 5 appointed.
Of course, all of this is dependent on you being 1) willing, and 2) able to demonstrate your ability to handle the task. And it goes equally well for anyone on this list who can convince Jimbo that ey can do it.
If Jimbo is the only one to decide who to appoint, yes.
Anthony
Ant