[Foundation-l] Re: Information flow

[Delphine Ménard]

On 8/18/05, W. Guy Finley <wgfinley at dynascope.com> wrote:
 
[snip]

> I made reference to this before Anthere but let me put it bluntly - you have
> some work to do on boardsmanship.  Chiding those you represent for not
> having complete enough complaints is not going to endear you to any hearts
> nor help anything.  The board's position is one of governance, it shouldn't
> be making day to day decisions on things that need to be run, that's what
> officers are for.  Those officers should have clearly defined job
> responsibilities set by the board and if they aren't living up to them then
> the board, as a board, should give them direction.  Individual board members
> have NO power outside of their vote in a duly convened board meeting.

Although I agree with you on the background of this all, I believe
that  we as a community are not cutting board members enough slack as
is, particularly to the ones who actually try and get some information
out as elected representatives, Angela and Florence.

This whole thread and the various ones going on on this list or on
other lists make me think that we have reached a point where we are
redifining, or rather *finally defining* what the board should do/not
do, what officers are for/are not for, what local chapter can/cannot
do, in short, what this organisation is all about.

I see us as an organisation still struggling to find the balance
between too much information and not enough information, struggling to
define whose role is what and what can be achieve, where we want to go
and how we get there. Some people are impatient, others are too
silent, others again too sporadic. Some criticize easily, others
constructively, others just don't care at all.

I personally strongly believe that the organisation *is not* a wiki,
that the learning process is longer and that unfortunately, when you
make a mistake, nobody can just revert what mistake you have made, you
have to assume the consequences. In that, I believe our actual board
has done a good job. I can understand that they feel a bit lonely
sometimes, as there is no "edit" button on whatever decision they
make, and they are indeed carrying the weight of it on their
shoulders. The only *wiki* thing I personally would allow in this case
is "assume good faith", and if Florence's way of trying to learn how
to do things well is not of your liking, please, do share with her
your experience as "member having served many years on many different
boards of various kinds", so that she, and all of us, can benefit from
 it. Escalating in ping-pong scheme: "you this" "but you that!" is, in
my opinion, not the best way to go about it.

Florence voiced it plainly enough, and I believe that the near future
will come to emphasize it, at some point it does take professional
advice and time (ie. a full-time job - or full time job*s*) to make
things go the way they should be going. If we (including board members
by pointing out as Florence did the problems they encounter) can help
finding ways on how we can solve the problems, and allow the board
members and officials to have enough time to do what they should be
doing (and for which I completely agree with you) then, I think that
we should try and do that.


Best,

Delphine

-- 
~notafish