Skip to main content

Meetings and Governance

I have had several meetings this week. Big volunteer led, policy setting type meetings. As I look back on them, I see two things that would have made the meetings much better.

First, is clearer governance. It would have been great if all parties at each meeting were familiar with the current policies and governance areas. I don't blame them for not being familiar though. We have done a poor job of organizing them in an easy to read and understand manner, as well as updating them as times have changed.

Do yourself and your volunteers a favor. Put everything in plain English in easy to find places on your website. And don't be late on updating documents and policies as they need it. Change is easier incrementally.

The second issue I had was the use of Robert's Rules. Being near the center of government, it seems as if I have too many people in meetings who know Robert's Rules. However, I think these ancient rules sometimes hinder actually getting things done. I wish I could just stand up, take over, spell out the issue and have people vote. It would save time, shrink confusion, and get it done.

Agree?

Comments

Lisa Junker said…
Great post, Matt!

I actually think Robert's Rules can work well, as long as a) everyone understands and is comfortable with them and b) nobody is using "rules lawyering" to control the discussion or keep themselves in the spotlight. When people feel awkward or uncomfortable using them, or someone is using his/her superior understanding of the rules to run circles around others in the discussion, then Robert can create problems.

At my last association, we actually used a simplified version that worked pretty well; every board member had a laminated "cheat sheet" that was basically just a glorified notecard with the simplified rules. Before their first board meeting was over, they were all pretty comfortable.

Coincidentally, I just came across a link to this post from Nick Senzee from last year; he has some good thoughts that relate to what you're talking about in this post.
The problem is when many people want to "stand up, take over, spell out the issues, and have people vote."

That's why everybody needs to understand and follow the rules.
Anonymous said…
I agree with Lisa: Roberts' Rules exist to promote democracy, not impede it. Simplify them so that they can accomplish more egalitarian meetings rather than be used as a blunt instrument of intimidation by the selp proclaimed experts.

Popular posts from this blog

10 Thoughts on #ASAE10

Ok, so I could have spelled out the title, but chose the hashtag - #asae10. Supposedly there were over 8,000 tweets with the hashtag, but probably countless more direct messages of messages that left out the hashtag but were conference related. Two years ago, we were using twitter as a backchannel to talk about speakers. Now, over 800 people sent conference related tweets. If you aren't on Twitter, you are already late to the party. Anyway, on with the post... In no particular order, my thoughts on this years ASAE Annual Conference: 1. LA was a good venue. Lots to do. Hotels close by. Only downside was the rooms were a bit of a hike. 2. I missed Sunday because of family obligations. That really put me behind the 8 ball. Since I led a session, that meant I only got to go to 3 true sessions. Sorry, I don't count Joy Behar and the closing session. Although Marshall Goldsmith was good, I probably wouldn't have gone to see that speech as a Learning Lab. 3. Based on #...

The Whole Cook Source Flap

I am going to give my 2 cents on this whole Cook Source thing. If you don't know what I am talking about, you can read more here and here . I am sure a few folks are going to take umbrage with my stance, but that is bound to happen. So a magazine found a blog post, liked it, printed it while giving credit to the author. The author hears about it, and gets pissed? She wants printed apologies and a donation made, because she got published? What am I missing here? Who wouldn't want their stuff to be published while being credited? Isn't that one of the main tenants of blogging, to be linked to? Sure, the response from the editor was one of the dumbest things ever written and she handled it tremendously bad. However, I am just floored that this person is pissed off. True, the internet is not public domain. However, every college paper in the world has citations. And all those students didn't contact the author to make sure they can use it. And every blog post ...

Where do you draw the line on social media?

I try to keep up. I have a feed reader . I blog . I comment on other people's blogs. I tweet . I have multiple websites . I have accounts on Facebook, MySpace, LinkedIn and others. But you have to draw the line somewhere. I wrote earlier about being app'd out . I still feel that way. But each day I feel farther behind. Maybe not behind, but not necessarily maximizing potential. I don't Digg. I don't StumbleUpon. OK, maybe I do like once a month if I have some spare time. But I know I am missing out on a lot of cool things. I usually check out other people's links to cool tools or the next new thing. But right now, I feel like I am in the Dip . Any suggestions on how to get out?