How Transparency and Collaboration Works with Accountability to the Membership

[_Keith]

How Transparency and Collaboration Works with Accountability to the Membership

1. Board publishes issues under consideration with committee and committee chair to which it is assigned, and where to send comments.

2. Board allows a 14 day comment period

3. Committee chooses a solution, sends solution to BOD in the form of a motion. Committee publishes committee notes, non-accepted alternative and proposals, etc. Note - Committee motions generally do not need a second.

4. BOD publishes meeting agenda to the membership 30 days prior to meeting, with all included documentation, such as written proposals, and other documents relating to understanding the motion to be considered.

5. BOD publishes pass/fail record and vote tally within 72 hours of meeting

6. BOD publishes official minutes after approval, but no later than 7 days.

I have been on the board of non-profits that work like this. Sure, there are still arguments and not everyone is pleased, but there is trust.

[_Keith]

Wow, the quiet is deafening after this post.

[Cindy Adair]

I've only been on one IPS committee and only for less than 2 years. However we communicate via PMs often. I'm guessing none of us would want to collect and publish committee notes, etc. and honestly I doubt anyone would want to read them. I could certainly have made a suggestion that I later regretted after I learned all the facts. We throw out ideas and debate and come to a consensus pretty well without any formality. I don't think the Board or anyone outside of the committee should be consulted on very routine questions where Dean asks for opinions on something. On major issues like those under discussion now, of course it's correct for the committee to send a proposal to the Board and open it up for further discussion. So the latter two sentences in your number 3. below sounds overly cumbersome.

3. Committee chooses a solution, sends solution to BOD in the form of a motion. Committee publishes committee notes, non-accepted alternative and proposals, etc. Note - Committee motions generally do not need a second.

I do agree with the theme of your ideas, though some of the time frames seem short for a diverse international volunteer organization. Now if we had interns working for free to assist it would be different....

[_Keith]

The times frames were just examples. It would vary issue by issue and by the response requirements. In some cases, rare cases, there might not be time to do any of that. And it is always more cumbersome to involve the membership rather to just simple rule over them. I have been on boards where the members simply they thought they knew best and did not want to be interfered with.

It does take a lot of effort to collaborate. And transparency comes with a certain pain in the butt, too.

But how would you want your local government to operate, just go into the back room, come out, and tell you how it is. Or would you want them to publish agendas in advance, allow citizen input, listen, and then make the decisions out in the open. That is how they operate because you the citizens demand it. Why would you want different from an organization that is funded by your money and that depends on your membership to survive.

Committee decisions and BOD decisions don't just affect the few Directors, they affect the thousands of members. The members should be aware before hand of what might affect them, see what is on the table, have an opportunity for input, and know exactly who to hold accountable for what.

And I for one, would like to read all of that stuff. You might be surprised how many others would as well, and even provide valuable input.

[joe_OC]

I've only been on one IPS committee and only for less than 2 years. However we communicate via PMs often. I'm guessing none of us would want to collect and publish committee notes, etc. and honestly I doubt anyone would want to read them. I could certainly have made a suggestion that I later regretted after I learned all the facts. We throw out ideas and debate and come to a consensus pretty well without any formality. I don't think the Board or anyone outside of the committee should be consulted on very routine questions where Dean asks for opinions on something. On major issues like those under discussion now, of course it's correct for the committee to send a proposal to the Board and open it up for further discussion. So the latter two sentences in your number 3. below sounds overly cumbersome.

3. Committee chooses a solution, sends solution to BOD in the form of a motion. Committee publishes committee notes, non-accepted alternative and proposals, etc. Note - Committee motions generally do not need a second.

I do agree with the theme of your ideas, though some of the time frames seem short for a diverse international volunteer organization. Now if we had interns working for free to assist it would be different....

I do not see an issue for members to know what the BOD will be voting on in advance. As well as an opportunity to be heard. Of course this would be done at a local level for the BODs in our geographical regions. This would be for major policies that would impact the IPS, not just PalmTalk.

[palm student]

Dear Keith,

This is a small plant society. There has not been any obfuscation that I can see. There isn't time to do all the things you suggest. What is your beef?

The most important matters that come up in the IPS Board meetings is how we can afford to do all the things that would be nice to do. There isn't time to tell the members about the business workings. Most would not be interested anyway. The meetings are open for any member to attend the Board of Directors' meetings at the Biennials, or anywhere if they want to travel to the meetings.

You are the only member I have heard of that is talking about "Transparency".

I was not present at this past meeting but had been present for the last 16 years for all meetings except one.

When you have an honest to goodness complaint, write a letter to be read at the meeting. Please don't try to make it a public issue because there isn't a real issue.

Palm Student

[PALM MOD]

I just deleted a slew of comments which ranged from slightly disrespectful to off-topic. The guilty parties know who they are.

I will emphasize once again: There will be zero tolerance for anything other than a respectful and courteous dialogue.

I made that warning as forceful as I could (in bold red type) in the pinned topic at the beginning of this forum, and I intend to enforce it strictly. In this forum, where we are dealing with Directors and fellow IPS Members, respect will be expected.

[_Keith]

Dear Keith,

This is a small plant society. There has not been any obfuscation that I can see. There isn't time to do all the things you suggest. What is your beef?

The most important matters that come up in the IPS Board meetings is how we can afford to do all the things that would be nice to do. There isn't time to tell the members about the business workings. Most would not be interested anyway. The meetings are open for any member to attend the Board of Directors' meetings at the Biennials, or anywhere if they want to travel to the meetings.

You are the only member I have heard of that is talking about "Transparency".

I was not present at this past meeting but had been present for the last 16 years for all meetings except one.

When you have an honest to goodness complaint, write a letter to be read at the meeting. Please don't try to make it a public issue because there isn't a real issue.

Palm Student

Suzzanne,

Our past president Bo, has mentioned "transparency" on several occasions. I respect his judgement. And I would like to make clear, I have lodged no complaint.

The items in my post above are simply examples and techniques of how some organizations collaborate and hold themselves more accountable. Their use would also be situational. Flexibility in small organizations is always king. I have been on boards that use those very techniques. It is not nearly as cumbersome as it might appear, particularly when technology is appropriately applied. And again, even if an organization chose to use some or all of them, they still might not all warrant application on every issue.

On the "public issue" note, I respectfully suggest that you read back on the board a bit. There is an entire chain of conversations that originated over the PM issue, which I did not reference in this thread. I posted this as an "informational" post only on tools and techniques. I had hoped that this conversation would be limited to that.

[Kim]

Based on my limited experience as a Director, the process you describe above would be unbelieveably cumbersome. If you think progress is slow now, institute those processes and watch progress become imperceptible. This concept may be appropriate for those rare motions that have a direct and significant impact on the membership. The vast majority of board business and decisions are housekeeping issues, or issues where no possibility of a consensus could be expected among the global membership -- not just the PT membership. Some things have to be decided by leadership.

This whole situation arose due to a single, incompletely informed, oversimplified, and hasty motion that was presented in a way that made it feel high risk, time sensitive, and "easy to fix". That unique situation is not likely to be repeated. Should a comparable issue arise in the future, one hopes the Board has learned from this divisive and painful experience.

[_Keith]

Based on my limited experience as a Director, the process you describe above would be unbelieveably cumbersome. If you think progress is slow now, institute those processes and watch progress become imperceptible. This concept may be appropriate for those rare motions that have a direct and significant impact on the membership. The vast majority of board business and decisions are housekeeping issues, or issues where no possibility of a consensus could be expected among the global membership -- not just the PT membership. Some things have to be decided by leadership.

This whole situation arose due to a single, incompletely informed, oversimplified, and hasty motion that was presented in a way that made it feel high risk, time sensitive, and "easy to fix". That unique situation is not likely to be repeated. Should a comparable issue arise in the future, one hopes the Board has learned from this divisive and painful experience.

Kim, thank you for a honest, and applicable example. All I ever intended with this thread was to start a conversation. I appreciate that you did just that.

One thing that I might add from my own input is that I draw no distinction between the PT membership and the Global membership. To me they are one in the same, or at least I wish they were, but that is just me.

[Kim]

Mmm, well the global membership includes all the PT members, but the PT membership does not (yet) include all the global members.

[realarch]

Keith, with the caveat of having very limited board experience, and although there are some similarities between the IPS and your outline example of board to membership function, it would set an already slow and steady procedure into suspended animation.

The whole process, until recently, was pretty much a non-issue, but as Kim described above, the current situation was a body blow from which we are still trying to recover. On the positive side, the BOD has heard loud and clear that underdeveloped decisions can awaken a seemingly passive membership. That is a great thing.

Tim

[_Keith]

Mmm, well the global membership includes all the PT members, but the PT membership does not (yet) include all the global members.

You are of course correct, which is why I am promoting one website, one membership. Join IPS, you are automatically provisioned in IPS and on PT. Board member, forum member, chat member, all business conducted in one spot with one identity. Then there can be no more us and them talk.

And ok, I'll do it to myself

[Ken Johnson]

Bump...