Notes: #23 Voting

Voting is a big matter that all groups need to understand because as its how the organization expresses its will.  So let’s look at some basics.  First off, let’s handle some basic definitions of voting.

Definitions

• Majority- more than half
• 2/3rd majority- 2/3rd of the vote
• General consent- when everyone approves
• Quorum- minimum number of members needs to hold an official meeting
• Abstention- not voting

Let’s look a little further into these definitions.

Majority is “more than half”.  That’s its definition.  It’s NOT “50% plus one” or “half plus one” or 51% or the like.  If you go with definitions like that, you will have problems.  2/3rd majority (some call this a “supermajority”, but this is NOT a valid parliamentary term) is as it says, 2/3rds or 66% of the vote.  It’s needed in certain cases.

General consent (sometimes called unanimous consent) is used when it’s clear that everyone (or nearly everyone) is in agreement.  We cover this later in this Note.

Quorum is the number of people needed at a meeting to legally have a meeting.  This should be stated in the bylaws.  The default is half the membership.  But some groups may not be able to get even half their membership at a meeting, so a quorum needs to be set.  It should be set to the likely number of people who will be at the meeting.  It should be a specific number, NOT a percentage.  This is because if the membership number changes, you may not be able to meet this percentage.

Abstention is NOT voting.  It’s the third choose for people, the ‘I don’t care’ choice, as by NOT voting, the decision will rest with those who DO vote.  The mistake people make it thinking that abstaining is the equivalent of either a YES or NO vote.  It is neither, as it does not affect the outcome.  Outcome is based on votes cased (YES or NO).  Further, the chair should NEVER ask for abstentions.  They are ignored, again, because they have no affect on the voting results.

HOW then is voting done?  There are actually several methods, and depending on the situation will determine which one is used.

Methods of Voting

• Voice
• Raising Vote
• Counted Vote
• Roll Call
• Ballot
• General/Unanimous Consent

What are these methods?

 

Voice vote. Most of your voting in your meetings will be by voice vote. If the vote needs a majority vote, you can use this. If it requires a 2/3rds vote, you'll have to do a raising vote (see next). How does it work? The chair asks "all those in favor, please signify by saying AYE". After they have done so, the chair asks "all those opposed, please signify by saying NAY(or NO)". The chair then gauges which side had more votes and announces the results ("The ayes have it, the motion carries" or "The nays have, the motion fails"). IF THERE IS DOUBT (i.e., it’s too close), the chair will need to go to a raising vote. If the chair doesn't and others feel it’s too close, they can protest and force one themselves.

 

Raising vote. As noted, MUST be used for 2/3rds voting instead of voice votes, and CAN be used if the outcome of voice vote was too close to tell. In a raising vote people STAND (raise) to signify which side they vote. As an alternate, especially with a small group, raised hands is ok. How does it work? The chair asks "all those in favor, please (stand or raise your hand)." Chair should quickly count the votes. The chair should then say "Thank you. Please (sit down/lower your hand). All those in favor, please (stand or raise your hand)". Chair should quickly count those votes, compare the two, and announce results. DO NOT GIVE TOTALS. Just announce which side prevailed.

 

Counted vote. As the name implies, this is the raising vote, BUT the vote outcome IS given and recorded. This is usually ONLY used if someone demands it. This should be the ONLY time the outcome of a vote should be given in your meeting minutes.  And again note that only votes (YES & NO) are given, never abstentions.

 

Roll call. I doubt most crews will use a roll call vote. This is usually only done in government bodies. Here the secretary reads thru the roll of the members, asking each on for their vote (Yes, no or 'present'). Present is the equivalent to abstention (see above for what this is). Usually the results of the vote (i.e., who voted which way) is recorded.

 

Ballot. Most probably understand this. This is your secret ballot, in which you write down your vote on a piece of paper, so no one knows who voted which way. While this is usually only used in elections, it can ALSO be used for motions if membership wish to do so. The group will have to select tellers to collect the ballots, count them, and announce the results. You will also need to make a motion to instruct the tellers to destroy these ballots afterwards (usually a good idea, as if you don’t, the ballots are kept as part of the records of the meetings, and available for members to review.).

 

Unanimous consent/general consent. This can be used by a chair to move the meeting along when they feel that everyone is in agreement with the motion. Sadly, too many don't understand this and mess it up.  How does it work? Well, the chair says that the crew will use unanimous consent to decide, unless someone objects. If someone objects, it doesn't mean the motion failed, only they you'll have to use voice vote or the like. The chair would say "if there are no objections, we'll decide the matter by unanimous consent". Chair should pause to give people a chance to object. If not, they would say "As there are no objections, the motion passes".

Resources

As always, I like to include some resources.  I haven’t found too many resources devoted to just voting, other than the National Association of Parliamentarians work called “Various Optional Techniques Explored: A Guide to Voting” which is part of their Pathways to Proficiency series.

Notes #22 Elections

An important part of any organization is the selection of its leaders.  This is ideally done thru elections, in which the will of the organization as to its leadership is made clear.  Elections are important, but an area with lots of misconceptions.  Hopefully, some of those misconceptions can be dispelled in this Note.

First off, an organization needs to set down certain facts regarding their officers and elections.  This information should be held in the organization’s bylaws, hence why it’s so critical that organizations HAVE bylaws, and that ALL members have access to these bylaws.  (we covered bylaws in a prior Notes).  What information needs to be set down? 

• What are the organization’s elected officers? 
• What are the duties/responsibilities of these officers? 
• What is the term of office of these officers? 
• When are elections held and when do the officers take office? (in some organizations, elections may be held days, weeks or even months before the new term of office, allowing for a transition period, while other organizations have elections with the new officers taking office that day). 
• What is the method of elections? 
• Does the organization use a nominating committee or just have open nominations? 
• Are ballots mandated? 

There are other matters about elections that also should be noted.  We will cover several of them in this Note.  The important thing to keep in mind is that if your organization DOESN’T specify certain items about your election, your group should follow what is set down in works like “Robert’s Rules of Order, Newly Revised” (RONR).  And what I have found is that many don’t know what RONR says and assumes incorrectly as to what the default action should be.

Nominating Committees

Now, an important part of many election procedures for organizations, large or small, local or national, is the use of “nominating committees”.  These can be a very useful and powerful tool in elections, but I have found that it is something too often misunderstood and misused.  Note, that many organizations do NOT use a nominating committee, and that is fine.

The ‘default’ way to conduct elections is to have open nominations, in which people are asked to nominate themselves or others at a meeting either before the elections or on the day of elections.  The only problem is that too often not many people may step forward.  Using nominating committees can help.  It’s important to keep in mind that the purpose of nominating committees is simply to ensure that a full slate of candidates are put forth for consideration.  Nothing more.  Further nominations from the organization should be allowed and encouraged.  The nominating committee is not omniscient, and they are not putting forth the next group of leaders, but putting forth possible candidates (hopefully the best possible ones, but there are never guarantees).  The organization STILL must decide on who their leaders will be.

Nominating committees (nomcomm) are selected by the organization, or by the leadership (as set forth in the bylaws).  The selection and membership of the nomcomm should not be secret, nor their activities.  The nomcomm should then put out to the membership that they are soliciting nominations for candidates (as the positions to be held and their duties/responsibilities should be set forth in the bylaws, this information should also not be secret).  In addition, the nomcomm can ALSO seek out candidates, especially if they feel the nominations received aren’t the best.   Seeking out candidates should be in ADDITION to submitted nominations, not instead of.

The nomcomm should then met and interview all candidates, focusing on their understanding of these duties and their abilities to meet them.  Ideally, this should be done face to face, but could be done via a conference call.  Once completed, the nomcomm should make their selection known.  As noted, in most cases the nomcomm should just select the single candidate for each position whom they feel are the best for the organization.  A nomcomm CAN put forth more than one candidate, if allowed by the bylaws.  There is nothing wrong with this, and I know of at least one organization’s nomcomm that does this routinely, as they feel the nomcomm is intended to review all candidates, weed out the unworthy, and put forth ALL worthy candidates.

Once a nominating committee has put forth its slate of candidates (again, this should be made public knowledge to the organization), nomination from the floor (i.e. from the organization at large) should still be allowed.  Again, a nominating committee is NOT omniscient.  There may be candidates who should still be considered (and perhaps have been passed over by the nomcomm).  The organization is the one who is selecting the future leaders, NOT the nomcomm.  I have seen elections in which those who were nominated from the floor won the election, and did a great job.

Once nominations from the floor are obtained, you now have a set of candidates and may now move forward with elections.

I should also point out that in my opinion, it’s a sign of a healthy organization (in terms of membership numbers and enthusiastic members) when there are several people who want to run for each position.  If you have an organization in which you basically have to beg and plead with people (someone, anyone) to run for any office, something is not right.

Candidate Forms/Nominations Forms/Commitment Forms

At this point, I should point out something I see some organizations do that tie in with nominations.  These are not a parliamentary matter, but just good management practices.  Some organizations expect officer candidates to read and sign a “candidate form” that covers the positions' duties and responsibilities, usually with an agreement that they agree to met the expectations of the position or be removed from office.  This is usually used by organizations which don’t use a nominating committee or the like, as this is a main job of such a group (see above).  Similar forms are often used by some organizations with appointed officers/leaders or even committee members, to ensure they have committed to carrying out their duties or to achieve some goal, or be removed.

Conducting elections

Ok, so you have nominations.  How, then, do you conduct elections?  There are basically two ways.

The first is used when you have obtained all your nominations up front (either with a nominating committee and then open nominations, or with just open nominations), usually at a separate meeting from the elections.  The secretary should create a ballot with all nominations listed for each office, as well as space for write-in candidates (if the bylaws allow, and they should).   The ballots are distributed on the day of elections, and then gathered by the tellers and the results given (more on this below).  Apart from having candidates speak, this makes elections go fairly smoothly.

The second is usually done when nominations and elections are done on the same meeting.  Often, nominations and elections are handled for each office separately.  Usually the chair re-iterates the duties of the position, and then asks for nominations.  When it’s clear all possible nominations are obtained, nominations for that position is closed and the election is done, ideally with secret ballots (members can write the person they are voting for on it).  These are then collected by the tellers and the results given, and then you move on to the next officer election.  When you add in having candidates speak, this process can be very time consuming compared to the first and, depending on the number of positions to be held and possible candidates, can be very tiring.

Now, some other matters and questions about elections.

Tellers

You need to have 2-3 people appointed as tellers.  These are the people who will gather the ballots and announce the results.  With youth groups, I would recommend your adult advisors do this, as they should ideally be neutral.  They should report the results of elections by stating how many votes each person received (including write-ins!).  These should be recorded in the minutes, and the tellers’ report is actually kept in the organizations records.  A good practice is to have a motion to destroy the ballots, else you are forced to keep those as part of your records.

Run for more than one position?

Yup.  Nothing wrong with that.  Why loose the valuable work of someone because they only ran for one office and lost?  Even in the first case, you can have people running for several offices.  The highest position they win an election for is the position they win, which will automatically remove them from the other elections.

No clear winner?

What if you have 3 or more people running, and none get a majority vote (which is required to win an election)?  Well, the mistake here is that too many people assume the default action is the drop the person with the least votes and hold the election again.  NOT SO.  IF this is what your bylaws state, that is fine, but the default action is the hold the election again with ALL the same candidates.  And to keep doing so until you have a majority.  What will occur is that some people will shift their vote, and what can occur is the person who originally had the least votes wins the election (this is known as the “dark horse”), due it being the ‘second choice’ of most people.

Preferential voting

We stated above that people can run for multiple positions.  Now, if you handle elections for each office separately, that’s not a problem, but it can be a problem if you hold one election for all positions at once.  A person may actually obtain a majority vote for two positions.  They can only hold one, which eliminates them from having the second.  But with the second you now don’t have a clear majority.  What do you do?  You can have a run off, but what you could have also done is allowed for ‘preferential voting’, where people give their second (or even third) choice.  If their first choice is eliminated (say by winning another elections), then their vote for their second choice would go into effect.  I rarely see this method used when elections are held at a face to face meeting, due to the ease of doing a run-off vote, but usually done with ballots by mail where doing a runoff can be costly and time consuming.  But it is there.

Resources

As always, I like to include some resources.  I haven’t found too many resources devoted to just elections within organizations that I liked, other than the NationalAssociation of Parliamentarians work called Navigating Through Nominations: A Handbook for the Nominating Process, which costs $10.  There is also their Leadership Spotlights booklet on Nominations and Elections, which costs $3. 

[this Note was reviewed by Patricia McDougle, Professional Registered Parliamentarian.]

Notes #21 Bylaws

Bylaws (one word, no hyphen) are one of the most important documents for many organizations. Bylaws define the organization and how it functions. Without them, a lot of information about how the organization operates is unknown (in several prior Notes, I pointed out some of this information).  Sadly, I have found that among too many leaders there is a shocking (to me) ignorance and misunderstanding about bylaws.  This I find problematic, as they will often misinform the people they lead or advise.

One common one I get, especially with groups that are part of a larger national organization, is thinking they don't need bylaws because all that information in contained in some "national documents".  Actually, most such organizations usually expect the local groups to create their own bylaws and define how that particular group operates.  These national organization ideally will provide templates, and hopefully ask for (better yet require) the group to provide their bylaws to the parent organization.

Bylaws are actually but one of several documents an organization may have, but one of the most important for most members.  This Note is a very high-level overview on bylaws.

So let’s start off with some basics.  Formerly, it was common practice to separate the rules governing an organization into two separate documents--a "constitution" and "bylaws." Later on, it became the recommended practice to combine these two documents into ONE known formerly as a "constitution and bylaws" and now simply as the "bylaws." (been so since the 1960s or so) However, some organizations (and individuals) haven’t “gotten the message” and you still see groups that create separate constitutions and bylaws.  There is no advantage to do so, so please don’t.

Bylaws can vary in size from one to fifty pages. Like clothes, bylaws should be made to fit the organization they are meant to serve. No one set of bylaws is appropriate for all organizations.  As noted, many national organizations does provide a very basic template for their local level organization's bylaws, which is a decent starting point. 

Another document that many organizations have as well is their “Standing Rules” (these may be called “policies and procedures” or the like). This gives additional, procedural rules of the organization which don’t really belong in their bylaws. An important feature of standing rules is they are easier to adopt and change, so some information is really more appropriate for them. Such information can be dues amount, meeting time/location, and the like.   So, for instance, your bylaws may state that you have meetings at least twice a month.  But in your Standing Rules would be the details of your meeting, giving day (maybe the second and fourth Monday or perhaps every Monday), the time (7:30-9pm), and location (St Andrews Catholic Church, Room 101).  If something were to occur such that you would need to change your meeting location, it would be easy to change the Standing Rules, as it just takes a 2/3^rd majority vote at a meeting, whereas with bylaws, it typically requires prior notice to do so (say 10 days before a meeting with email sent out).  Hence, having this in your Standing Rules would be better.

The following tips are applicable to most bylaws:

• Language should be clear and concise. (if it’s not clear, it can lead to confusion and differing opinions as to what it says)
• Sentences should be structured so that it is impossible to quote provisions out of context.
• A standard format (as seen below) can help in avoiding repetition and in locating provisions.
• Do not include requirements from state law or higher governing authorities (this gives the appearance that these rules can be changed).   More appropriate is to cite that you must follow these higher governing authorities.
• If the bylaws state that elections are to be by ballot, this provision cannot be suspended (even if there is only one candidate for office). (We covered elections in a prior Notes, and noted that election rules are one of the most important purposes of your bylaws. When they occur and how they are run is very important, so be sure you have this covered.)
• Make provisions for calling special meetings. (including who can call them)
• Clearly define the duties and powers of any executive board or committee. (and who is on it)
• List a book as a parliamentary authority to be followed at meetings. (whether its “Roberts Rules of Order, Newly Revised” or what have you. These works will also tell you the appropriate text to include.)
• Describe the method (including any notice requirements) for amending the bylaws. (nothing is worse than having to change your bylaws and having no idea how to do it)
• Be careful not to set a quorum for meetings that is too high and may be difficult to obtain. (we also noted the important of setting quorum in a prior Notes)
• Do not place purely procedural rules, such as the order of business for meetings, in the bylaws. (these go in your “standing rules” and the like)

The standard set of Bylaw sections are as follows. You can add additional sections as your organization sees fit:

I. Name
II. Object
III. Members
IV. Officers
V. Meetings
VI. Executive Committee/Board
VII. Committees
VIII. Parliamentary Authority
IX. Amendment

A brief explanation:

Name. What is the name of your group? “The Happy Wanderers” would be fine.

Object. What is the purpose of your group? Here would be a good place to define what your group is all about.

Members. What kind/level of members do you have (active, associate, honorary, etc)? What are their rights? How does one become a member? How can one be dropped as a member? Etc.

Officers. Who are your officers, their duties, what happens if an officer steps down, how do you remove an officer, how are they elected (do you use a nominating committee, candidate forms, candidate forum and such), what is their term of office?

Meetings. What kind of meetings do you have (regular, special, annual), how often, who calls them? What is quorum?

Executive Committee/Board. Who is on it, what are its purposes/duties, etc.

Committees. What are the standing committees (permanent committees) within your organization, their duties, how are the chairs and members selected, etc.  How can special (ad hoc, as needed if your will) committees be formed and by whom.

Parliamentary Authority. What is it?

Amendment. How do you amend your bylaws?

You can have more, but these cover the basics.

Once you have a set of bylaws, what do you do with them?  Well, all members should be provided with a copy.  Any new members should be provided with a copy as well.    Your parent organization may require that you submit your bylaws to them.  Putting the most recent version of your bylaws on your website is a good idea, both for members who might need access to them, as well as new members considering joining.  At meetings, it’s a good idea that at least the president and secretary have copies of the current bylaws in their officer notebooks. There is nothing secret or sinister about bylaws.  In fact, some organizations I am part of provide a regular “Members Guidebook” which contains all the current operating documents, the current officers, members list, and other information on the organization.  This is provided to all new members, and the guide is revised and republished when a new group of officers are elected.  (the cost of producing this work is part of the membership fees).

So, any resources for Bylaws?  Yes, a few.  The late Joyce Stephens has a nice work “Bylaws: Writing, Amending, Revising” (2^nd edition, 2000) that you might come across.  The National Association of Parliamentarians has a great work called “What Does it Say in the Bylaws: Writing, Amending, and Interpreting Bylaws” which is part of their Pathways to Proficiency series.

(based on Jim Slaughter’s on-line document Bylaws Tips http://www.jimslaughter.com/bylaws.htm)

Notes #20 Officer Duties

“What are my duties?” “What should I be doing?”

These are frequent questions asked by people who take on a new responsibility in their organizations, either as an appointed chair or as an elected officer.

Ideally, your group should take the time to ensure these people are trained in their position as soon as possible.  And if not, these people should seek out help and learn what they should be doing.

Too often, they won't, doing a poor job and upsetting others (and frustrating themselves). You’re not learning anything by stumbling along blindly. At best you’ll do a poor job, at worse you can hurt your organization, either by reputation, financially, or cause it to lose members.

They made the mistake of not ASKING FOR HELP. Not asking for help is not a sign of strength, but of stupidity. Who can you ask? Your predecessor. Other officers. Your parent organization or leaders at other levels of the organization (if they exist). Even looking on-line for manuals and assistance.

What should (or could) have happened to avoid this issue?

Officer Transition Training/Office Training

Ideally, new officers should be shown what their job entails by their predecessors. This can be done informally, one on one, or more formally by group in what is usually known as "officer transition training". Too often, elections are held too late for this, as the previous officers leave at the end of the term, and no one has the time at the end of the term to properly do this.  This is one of the reason why many organizations will have elections done weeks if not months before the end of a term, to allow for this training and transitional period.

Also, attending training for your position is vital, if it exists.  Different organizations handle training differently.  Some focus on general leadership training, others focus on specific position training, some do a mix.  All have their good and bad points.

Organizational Documents

Your organization's bylaws (if they exist) will contain some basic description of your office position. This can be a good starting point.  These descriptions should have been used when elections came up, to ensure that everyone knows what is required of the positions before people ran for the positions, and those that did should understand they have committed to the job.  (this is also why some organizations make use of nominating committees and commitment agreements as part of their election process, as covered in a previous Note).

Officer Notebooks

Many organizations create officer notebooks. These binders contain all of the information gathered for a particular officer. Ideally, each officer will add to it during their term, and pass it to their successor. Sadly, sometimes these are lost, which means the information they had is gone. Each officer notebook should be unique, but typically it will contain the following:

• Bylaws and other operating documents (Standing rules, etc.)
• Relevant mailings and information from the parent organization and other levels
• Committee reports from last year (or more)
• Calendar & goals, roster & contact info.

Some information will be unique for certain officers. The Treasurer’s Notebook should have all the financial information, etc. The Secretary’s Notebook will contain the last year’s meeting minutes and committee reports (older minutes and reports should have been moved to the group’s permanent records).

Of course, these notebooks are useless unless they are USED. The officers should bring them with them to meetings, so they can be referred to as needed, new material added to them, and the like. More importantly, the officers should review what is in the notebooks. (you know, READ it).

Advisors (if applicable)

If your organization is a youth group, you should have adult advisors.  Your advisors are a resource of information. Many of them have been officers (and/or officers in other clubs/organizations), so they can help explain what your job entails. Approach them and ask for help. If they’ve offered to help new officers in learning their job, take them up on this offer!  Some youth groups that have adult advisors will assign specific advisors to specific officers.  This ensures the officer has a dedicated advisor who understands their role.  Does your group do this?  Should your group do this?

Parent Organizational Resources

If your group is a local chapter of a larger organization, there may be resources within that larger organization.  There may be national level people who have been officers and understand how things work in that organization.  Some organizations have levels in between the national and local level who can also help. 

On-line resources

There are usually several on-line resources for most organizations, both official and non-official.  This can include email discussion lists, on-line forums, Facebook groups, LinkedIn groups, and the like that you can use to speak with others, many of who are officers themselves.

As noted, there are a lot of help for the new officers.  Make use of them.

Notes #19 Toastmasters International

As part of the Leaders Notes series I plan to highlight several organizations that may be useful to know or even be involved in as leaders.

Many people have probably heard of Toastmasters, but few probably know what the organization is all about.  Toastmasters' focus is on communication: helping people be better communicators and speakers, in their personal and professional life.  People join (and stay) for a variety of reasons.  Most to become better speakers or communicators, others to improve their skills in English or other languages, some may want to become professional speakers.  Those who are good speakers become better speakers. They stay because the organization is all about continuous improvement of our communication and leadership skills.  You never stop learning.  And, yes, I am a member of Toastmasters.

The organization was formed more than 80 years ago, and since then has spread around the world.  Anyone can join Toastmasters, so long as they are 18 years of age.  That is the only requirement.  The heart of Toastmasters is the Toastmasters Club.  This is where things really work.  There are a variety of Toastmasters Clubs, so one should take a look at local clubs to find the one that works best.  There are morning clubs, noon-time clubs, afternoon clubs, and evening clubs.  Most meet for an hour, but some clubs may have meetings that run up to two hours.  Most clubs are weekly, but some are twice a month, a rare few are once a month.  Some clubs may be corporate clubs, chartered to a company, and may restrict their membership to employees of that company.  There are also specialty clubs of various sorts.  Some are “advanced” clubs that restrict membership to those who have completed the basic education awards (more on this shortly).  There are also clubs with a particular focus: bilingual, humor, leadership, a foreign language, or the like.  Some Toastmasters may be members of several clubs, as different clubs met different needs.

As noted, leadership is ALSO a big part of Toastmasters.  This is because Toastmasters is lead by its members.  Clubs are lead by the elected club officers.  Above the club are other elected and appointed members, all Toastmasters members themselves.

In Toastmasters one works on a variety of educational awards.  And members are encouraged to do so.  The education program has two branches: a communication track and a leadership track.  When one joins Toastmasters, you start work on the two basic awards: the Competent Communicator (CC) and the Competent Leader (CL) awards.  The CC award has you completing 10 speeches.  Each speech project builds on the other, as you learn and practice your skills.  You learn to organize your speech, use vocal variety, make use of gestures, and more.  With the CL award, you get engaged in your club doing 10 projects that involved taking on meeting roles such as a speech evaluator or the toastmaster of the day or the like.

Once these two awards are completed, one then moves in to the advanced awards.  On the communication side, Toastmasters has 15 advanced manuals, each with 5 speech projects.  The manuals are on subjects like storytelling, technical presentations, informational speeches, discussions, and the like.  There are 3 advanced communicator awards: bronze, silver, and gold.  Each requires completing 2 advanced manuals along with other work.  The leadership track has 2 advanced leadership awards.  The first has you being a club officer and do other work within your club, and the second has you doing work outside your club as a district officer, helping other club, and leading a project.  Completing the top communication and leadership awards gives you the top Toastmaster award of Distinguished Toastmaster (DTM).

There are other Toastmaster programs that members can make use of.  There are three series of short, prepared presentations that can be given.  These are the Better Speaker, Leadership Excellence, and Successful Club series.  Each has a dozen or so presentations.  The Better Speaker series includes items like organizing your speech, coming up with topics, impromptu speaking and the like.  The Leadership Excellence has leadership topics such as the vision, goal setting and planning, motivation and more.  And the Successful Club has topics on improving the clubs such as evaluations, mentoring, meeting roles and more.

Toastmasters has additional, longer seminars that can be presented to members and non-members alike.  These are under the Success/Communication and Success/Leadership series.  The completion of these other programs mentioned are required to met the above education awards.  The Success/Communication program has workshops on how to listen effectively, be a better evaluator, improving your thinking skills, and more.  The Success/Leadership program has workshops on how to have productive meetings, how to be an effective leader, develop leadership skills, and more.

I find it interesting that some groups, we deride the idea of adults earning awards, but in Toastmasters that is a big part of what we do.  When you join, you are encouraged to earn your CC and CL awards within the year, if possible.  And once you complete those, you are encouraged to take this further to earn your DTM.  And once you’ve earned your DTM, you can continue to earn the awards and get a second (or third) DTM.  Further, as in some other organizations, we have group quality awards at various levels, called the “distinguished” program.  Members earning educational awards is a BIG part of meeting distinguished goals, both for our clubs and for other levels.

As a leader, we need to be better communicators.  If you have a vision of what you want to accomplish, but you can't get that idea across, how effective can you be as a leader?  So joining Toastmasters to improve your leadership skills can help.  Also, one thing I've learned as a leader is that the knowledge and skills I learn in one organization can help me in others.  So being a leader in Toastmasters can help you be a better leader in other areas of your life.

If these things are important to you, please check out Toastmasters and consider joining a local club.

Notes #18 Max De Pree and the De Pree Center for Leadership

Max De Pree is an interesting character in the world of servant leadership and leadership development.  He is a son of D. J. De Pree, founder of the Herman-Miller office furniture company.  Now, you may not have heard of Herman-Miller, but it is a very successful company which is also known for their corporate culture which has been very employee focused.   They implemented the Scanlon Plan, as well as servant leadership.  Max and his brother Hugh De Pree assumed leadership of the company in the early 1960s. He succeeded his brother Hugh as CEO in the mid-1980s and served in that capacity to 1990.  After this he moved into his ‘second career’ as a writer and speaker on leadership, including servant leadership.  He has written several works on the topic.

In 1996, the De Pree Center was founded in connection with the Fuller Theological Seminary.  In 1999, Walter Wright came on board as the executive director, and in 2009 the Center’s name was changed to the Max De Pree Center for Leadership.  The focus of the center is on the “relational leadership” ideas of Max, which is Max’s take on servant leadership which focuses on the relationship between the leader and the follower, which takes on a mentoring element.

 

Max himself has written four books, and contributed to several shorter works.  His main two works are Leadership is an Art (1989) and Leadership Jazz (1992/2008).  These are the works he is most famous for, and deservedly so.  Leadership Jazz has recently been revised, but I am not familiar with what has been changed.  This two are very readable works on Max De Pree’s view on leadership, and ones I would recommend to anyone.   The theme of Leadership is an Art is that leadership is about liberating people to what is required in the most effective and humane way possible and Leadership Jazz continues that theme.

His next book is a little different, Leading without Power: Finding Hope in Serving Community (2001).   While the first two focused on business (but the ideas could be used anywhere), here his focus is on the non-profit world, again with the purpose of how to bring out the best in people. Called to Serve: Creating and Nurturing the Effective Volunteer Board (2003), is as its title suggested, is focused on those who serve as part of a trustee group for an organization, and would have a limited audience.  I actually have not read this one.

In addition to these works, he has also contributed to a few short monographs published by the De Pree Center, such as “Mentoring: Two Voices” (with Walter Wright, Jr) and “Does Leadership Have a Future?”  These are available as a digital download at the Center's website.

I should also point out the works done by Walter Wright, Jr, who is the executive director of the Center.  First off, there is Don’t Step on the Rope! Reflections on Leadership, Relationships and Teamwork (2005).  This work focuses on teamwork and how to develop and nurture teams.   There is also his work Mentoring: The Promise of Relational Leadership (2005), which I don’t yet have, so can’t comment on it.  Then there is Relational Leadership: A Biblical Model for Influence and Service, revised (2009), which is his take on servant leadership.  The term “relational leadership” is used, because the focus is on the relationship between the leader and the follower.  It’s not a different form of servant leadership, but one were we focus on that relationship. 

In addition to those, he has also contributed to some short monograph as well, such as the previously mentioned “Mentoring: Two Voices”, as well as “The Gift of Mentors”.  Again, these are available as a download from the Center.

The Center has put out several good works, so I recommend you check them out.

Notes #17 Debate

(part of the parliamentary procedure subseries)

Debate is the discussion on the merits of a pending question [motion] in a deliberative assembly [your organization]. "It is the essential element in the making of rational decisions of consequence by intelligent people." RONR (11th ed).

 

Debate is NOT a dirty word. Debate in itself is not something to be avoided. It’s our chance to voice our views, for or against, the pending matter at hand.

 

 

RULES OF DEBATE

• A motion must be proposed before a matter can be debated. [ie discussed]
• The maker of a motion has the right to speak first in debate. [this is their time to expand upon their motion and explain why others should vote for it]
• A member must be recognized by the chair before speaking in debate.
• Debate is closed and the vote taken when no member rises to claim the floor. [this can be clear if the chair asks for further discussion, and no one steps forward]. The chair may not cut off debate without the permission of the assembly.
• Debate may be closed by the adoption of the motion Previous Question which requires a two-third vote.
• A member may speak for 2 times for a maximum of ten minutes on each pending question.  [this is the default]
• The rules of debate may be modified by adopting a special rule of order [such a rule would apply only in the crew, for however long the rule exists], by changing the limits for a single session [ie this particular meeting], or by changing the limits on the pending question only.
• The requirement that the presiding officer [the officer serving as chair] remain impartial precludes their exercising their right to debate while presiding.

DECORUM in Debate

• Remarks must be confined to the merit of the pending question.
• When speaking in debate, a member must refrain from attacking a member's motives and avoid name calling. The motion, not the member, is the subject of debate.
• All remarks should be addressed thru the chair. Members do not address one another directly.
• Avoid the use of member's names. Instead say, "the member who made the motion" or the like.
• Do not speak adversely about some prior action of the organization which is not pending.
• The maker of a motion is not permitted to speak against their own motion.
• Permission of the assembly is required to read from any paper or book as part of a speech in debate.
• During debate, during remarks by the presiding officer, during voting, no member should be permitted to disturb the assembly by whispering or any other way.

Complied by the Plantation Unit of Parliamentarians, with minor edited by MRB.