Notes #30- 10 More Useful Motions to Know

Last Notes, we covered 10 basic motions everyone should know.  Now we have 10 “More Useful Motions to Know”, which are of several classes of motions, some are subsidiary and relate to the main motion, some are incidental and relate to the pending business in different ways, and some are motions which bring a question "again" before the assembly. Initially it is more important to focus on what is accomplished by the use of the motions listed.

1. CHANGE RULES OF DEBATE. Move to LIMIT or EXTEND LIMITS OF DEBATE. You can move to reduce (or increase) the number of speeches or the length of each speech or you can specify a time limit for debate on a pending main motion.  Be aware this will require a 2/3^rd vote!  Standard is speaking twice on the same motion for 10 minutes each.  You group can change that across the board, setting it as a Standing Rule.  This motion allows you to temporarily change this.

2. FORCE CONFORMITY TO AGENDA. Use the device, CALL FOR THE ORDERS OF THE DAY to require the return to the adopted program or order of business.  This can be used if your meeting is getting off track.

3. URGENT PRIVILEGE. Use the device, RAISE A QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE, to interrupt pending business to make a request affecting the rights or privileges of the assembly (i.e to point out that the speaker cannot be heard, it’s too hot or too cold, or the like.)

4. SET UP AN ADJOURNED MEETING. Move to FIX THE TIME TO WHICH TO ADJOURN. The adoption of this motion does NOT adjourn the meeting, it really says that when we “adjourn”, we are really “adjourning to meet again at a specified place or time/day”.   This is a very confusing motion!  Think of it as a really really long recess of the meeting (to the next day), so that the meeting continues and you can conclude business.  Usually only seen with organizations that have a multi-day legislative session at a convention. 

5. DISAGREE WITH CHAIR'S RULING. Move to APPEAL from the decision of the chair (must be made immediately after the chair's ruling on a POINT OF ORDER).

6. IN DOUBT ABOUT A VOTE? Call for a DIVISION OF THE ASSEMBLY (you can just call out "DIVISION!") when a voice vote seems inconclusive (and the chair doesn't do this); it is a demand for a rising vote (no vote is required on this call) .

7. TEMPORARILY CHANGE RULES. Move to SUSPEND THE RULES if something needs to be done and it’s not in accordance with the regular rules of procedure. (NOTE: Bylaws cannot be suspended!!!)

8. FIRE A COMMITTEE. Move to DISCHARGE A COMMITTEE when a committee has failed to carry out its duties or when it is desired to return a matter back to the assembly.   Typically only done with Special/Ad Hoc committees.

9. CANCEL OR REPEAL A PRIOR ACTION. Move to RESCIND if you want to strike out, change, cancel, or countermand a previous action or order adopted any time in the past.

10. REVERSE A VOTE OR CHANGE ADOPTED MOTION. Move to RECONSIDER the vote on the previously adopted motion. The purpose is to permit correction of an erroneous action or to take into account new information.

Again, see the prior Notes on motions for more info on resources.

[this note is based on work by the Plantation Unit of Parliamentarians]

Notes #29- 10 Basic Motions

As noted, the workhorse for introducing and handling business in your group (or a committee within it) is the MOTION.  In the first in this sub-series, we covered how to handle the basic “main motion”.  Each member has the right to participate according to their own judgment- to make motions, debate, and vote. The following summary will not tell you everything you need to know, but if you know how to accomplish what you want in meetings, you have made great strides in contributing to effective meetings.   So here we give 10 basic motions that most people will need to know.

1. BRING UP BUSINESS. If you want to propose that your group take an action (ie, make a purchase, plan a service event or social event or a camping trip) you must make a MAIN MOTION. You can only do this when no other business is pending.  (see the first in this sub-series on how to do this).

2. KILL A MAIN MOTION. Move to POSTPONE INDEFINITELY. This avoids a direct vote on the main motion and thereby "kills" it.

3. MAKE A MAIN MOTION BETTER. Move to AMEND the main motion. You may add or delete or change, even substitute one motion for another.  Don’t withhold a second because the motion isn't quite what you want, instead AMEND it.

4. GET MORE INFORMATION. Move to REFER the motion to a committee. You may even specify which committee or you may define the committee. (that is, assign it to an already existing Standing Committee or establish a short-lived Special Committee or Ad Hoc Committee with specific members just to look at this matter)  Very useful if you think the idea has merit, but needs more work by a small group of people.

5. PUT OFF THE VOTE ON A MAIN MOTION. Move to POSTPONE the main motion to a later time or another meeting. The time must be DEFINITELY specified.  If postponing it to another meeting, ideally it should be the next one.

6. PUT ASIDE TEMPORARILY. Move to LAY the pending motion ON THE TABLE. Can only be used if an urgent reason to do so. Consideration of the motion continues after adoption of the motion to TAKE FROM THE TABLE.

7. CLOSE DEBATE/STOP AMENDMENTS. Move the PREVIOUS QUESTION. (some groups allow for this to be called "STOP DEBATE"). This requires a 2/3 vote and if adopted the vote is taken immediately on the pending motion.   DON’T confuse the vote on the previous question with a vote on the motion itself!!  They are separate!   If you voted to stop the debate, you STILL have to vote on the motion itself.

8. TAKE A BREAK. Move to RECESS. A recess is short intermission (say, 15 minutes or so); the interrupted business is resumed after the recess.

9. CLOSE THE MEETING. Move to ADJOURN. Adjourn is in order even when business is pending and if adopted closes the meeting immediately.   (any pending business is lost, by the way).

10. NEED TO KNOW SOMETHING more about the pending motion? Use the device REQUEST FOR INFORMATION. For example, "Mr. President, Request for Information. How much did we give last year?"

For more resources on motions, see the previous Note.

[this note is based on work by the Plantation Unit of Parliamentarians]

Notes #28 Organization Focus: Project Adventure & Karl Rohnke

[As part of the Leadership Notes series I will highlight several organizations that may be useful to know or even be involved in as leaders.]

Back in Notes #14, I mentioned a “spin-off” group from Outward Bound (OB) called “Project Adventure” (PA).  Project Adventure was established in the early 70s to bring the teachings of OB to everyone.  This would be done not with the intense long-term outdoor experience of OB, but with the creation of “challenge courses” (aka “ropes courses”) and initiative games and activities.   The purpose of this was to bring groups together, build trust, and break down some of the artificial barriers people build between themselves, and maybe gain a better understanding of themselves as well. While originally focused on high school students, they quickly branched out to other youth, including “at risk” youth, as well as adults.   Some of their programs and concepts include Adventure Based Counseling, Challenge by Choice, and the Full Value Contract.  

A major figure in much of this is Karl Rohnke.  A former OB instructor, he was one of the founders of PA and wrote many works there.  He left in 1996 after being director and president, and later co-founded High 5 Adventure Learning Center.

So let’s take a look at some of the terms used.  First off, some may dismiss this as just fun activities.  Well, they are that, but they do serve a purpose.  Some can be used with groups, to bring them together (with the use of “icebreaker” events), to break down barriers within groups (usually with “cooperative games”), and to bring them together in a team (with “teambuilding games”).  And teambuilding games can be used to help a group become a team, as well as to help a team leader become a better leader.  Some activities are referred to as “initiative problems”, where the team is given a challenge they must overcome (and not just physically, but something they must work out as a group).

As noted, many of these activities have a purpose.  A mistake that many of us make is thinking we should explain the purpose before the activity.  A sort of “in this activity, you will learn X”.  Too often, this is a bad idea, as it can set wrong expectations.  In such learning, it’s better to have the activity occur, then afterwards hold a debrief with the group, and using facilitation, asking open ended questions to draw from the participants their experiences and what they got out of it.  This often difficult to do for many people, because we are often taught how to present, but not how to facilitate.  And facilitation is critical for these activities to work well.

Project Adventure uses some other concepts as well.  Adventure Based Counseling (ABC) is a group counseling model that uses a carefully sequenced and processed series of experiential activities to elicit behavior change.   This is usually done with people in need of such counseling, including at-risk youth and others.  So the aim is not just in a learning experience, but a change in behavior.  Challenge by Choice is a cornerstone concept of PA.  It’s about encouraging the participant to challenge themselves and participate fully in the experience at-hand, and not force them into the experience.   The Full Value Contract is also an integral part of PA’s programs.  It aims to create an emotionally and physically safe environment supported by all group members.  It asks of the members to: 1) to create safe and respectful behavior that the group will operate under, 2) commitment to that behavior by everyone in the group, and 3) to accept the responsibility to maintain that behavior by all.

Some of the major works by Project Adventure & Karl Rohnke include:

“Cowstails and Cobras”, first published in 1977, and replaced by “Cowstails and Cobras II” in 1991, is their first book (written by Rohnke) on their approach to adventure games and challenge courses, and gives full info on how to implement the program.   It’s a good book, but doesn't have the large number of games & activities as others do, BUT does give information on how to use such activities.

For several years, Rohnke published a newsletter called “Bag of Tricks” that gave more games.  Out of these several books were published.   “Silver Bullets” was the first of these, first published in 1984 and recently updated/revamped with a new 25^th Anniversary edition in 2009, and is one of their classic works on initiative games, adventure games and trust activities.

Rohnke would put out further collections from “Bag of Tricks” (“Bottomless Bag”, “Bottomless Baggie”, and “Bottomless Bag Again”). All of these are out of print, but a revised edition of the last book has been released as “Bottomless Bag Revival” (2004).  However, if you have that book, “Revival” is essentially the same work.

“Quicksilver” (1995) by Rohnke and Steve Butler, was created as a sort of sequel to “Silver Bullets”.  More games and initiatives, but also included is a leadership/facilitation section that emphasized how they work, and how to apply them.  Check out the “Foes & Questors” game in this book. 

“Youth Leadership in Action”, ‘written by and for youth leaders’ is a book of cooperative and group games intended for use by youth groups.  A great resource for crew or VOA youth leaders to take a look at.

“Islands of Healing” is PA’s main work on “Adventure Based Counseling”, which is their combination of adventure education and group counseling.  This is not something I’ve looked into, but if you are dealing with at-risk youth, this may be of use.  They have a follow-on work, “Exploring Islands of Healing” as well.

Since leaving PA, Karl has continued to publish works.

“Backpocket Adventure” (1998) by Rohnke & Jim Grout is a small book of games and activities that DON’T need props (or props that would fit in your back pocket, hence the name).  That is the thing with many of these games: you need to build up a collection of ‘stuff’ to use in them.  Several adventure games sites will sell you the items (you sometimes need things beyond what you will find in your local toy or sports good store), and game leaders wind up with a large bag of such props.  But what if you don’t have them?  A few books like this one focus on “no props” games.

More recently, Rohnke started a new series of books called “Funn Stuff” to replace “Bag of Tricks”, but only 4 came out.  The content of these has been compiled as “Funn ‘n Games” (2004), giving yet another big book of adventure games, initiatives, trust activities, and miscellaneous fun.  “Funn”, by the way, stands for “Functional Understanding’s Not Needed.”

Per Karl, he recommends getting “Funn n Games” or “Quicksilver” as the first books to get, as they have lots of games.

As noted, after leaving Project Adventure, Karl helped founded High 5 Adventure Learning Center.  Like PA, High 5 provides program and services in the field of adventure games, including training and certification.  They have a store with books and equipment for sale.

I recommend that people check out the sites at both PA and High 5, as well as Rohnke’s site.   Both groups offers seminars and training, as well as on-line stores with resources (books, equipment, etc). I touched on only some of the works they have available at these 2 sites, the ones I’ve used and am aware of, and didn’t really get into out of print works (check out amazon or alibris).  But there are many other works out there from other groups and individuals.  Some of the major ones (in my opinion) will be covered in future Notes very soon.

To finish things out, here are some videos.  Here is an interesting, if brief, interview with Karl: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LeQ4P9A_8cc .  A video of a group that went to a No Prop workshop at PA: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vx5erzi2TLk .

Notes #27 Team Assessments

We are all part of groups of people working together, whether at work, in our units, in other levels of this and other organizations.  But is that group a team?  And how good of a team is it?  How can you assess that team?  Here are a couple of different, but similar models.

Blanchard et al (authors of the various situational leadership concepts we've touched on in past Notes) uses the PERFORM model.  PERFORM is:

• Purpose and Values
• Empowerment
• Relationships and Communication
• Flexibility
• Optimal Productivity
• Recognition and Appreciation
• Morale

PERFORM is covered in several of their works.  It was first put forth in “High Five: The Magic of Working Together” and is also covered in Blanchard’s “Leading at a Higher Level”.  The idea of PERFORM is that these 7 characteristics are key for a successful team, what Blanchard calls a ‘high performing team’, which he sees as a result of using situational team leadership (see the Note on that topic).  Basically, the characteristics are:

• Purpose and Value- what is keeping the team together and moving forward?  Members need to have a goal in mind (purpose) and shared values.
• Empowerment- members need to be empowered to be able to achieve that common goal.  Basically, the authority to act and make decisions.
• Relationships & Communications- the members of the team need to communicate together, not just with or only with, the leader.  Only then does the team come together as a team.
• Flexibility- members of the team need to be able to adapt to changes.  This is necessary as each member brings something different to the task at hand.
• Optimal productivity- this is what happens when you have a ‘high performing team’.  When you have a team dedicated to the goal and committed to high standards, they will use problem solving and decision making to achieve that goal.
• Recognition & Appreciation- members are responsible for and deserve recognition and appreciation for achieving both individual and team accomplishments.
• Morale- is about a sense of pride and satisfaction in a job well done as a team.  We all understand that high morale helps achieve success.

While most of these concepts seem obvious, too often we have to be reminded of them.

Another, different but similar, concept I found is enunciated in the recent book Extraordinary Groups: How Ordinary Team Achieve Amazing Results (www.extraordinarygroups.com).  I first read about it in an article in “Toastmasters Magazine” (March 2011) in the article “What Makes an Exceptional Team?” (you can read that article here: http://magazines.toastmasters.org/publication/?i=72188)

The authors of that book have set down 8 traits of “Extraordinary Work Groups”:

• Compelling purpose: we are inspired and stretched in making this group's work our top priority.
• Shared Leadership: we readily step forward to lead by demonstrating our mutual responsibility for moving our group toward success.
• Just enough structure: we create the minimal structure (systems, plans, roles, tasks) necessary to move our work forward.
• Full engagement: we dive into our work with focus, enthusiasm and passion.
• Embracing differences: we value the creative alternatives that result from engaging differing points of view.
• Unexpected learning: we are excited by what we learn here and how it applies to other work, other groups and our lives outside of work/organization.
• Strengthened relationships: our work leads us to greater trust, interdependence and friendship
• Great results: we work toward and highly value the tangible and intangible outcomes of our work together.

The article touched on some of those traits. I though this list was interesting. Several of them match up with the PERFORM model.  Others are additions.

So, let’s get to the heart of the matter, assessing teams.  Are the teams you are a part of achieve these points, whether it’s the PERFORM or the Extraordinary Group?  As I read thru both of them, and thought about the many groups, large & small, that I've been on at work, in various orgs, etc, I find that those groups that have most or all those traits were more successful, and those that lacked many of them not so much. A lot of this is due to the leadership and vision of the leader (or lack thereof). But also the others in the group and how they are involved also have an effect.  When most people in the group took on those traits, the more successful the group was, even in spite of the leader. 

I have seen groups that existed because the leader had a vision.  He either recruited others who shared that vision, recruited others who had necessary skills and got them to buy in to the vision, and others who agreed with the vision who sought out and joined that leader.  These groups were almost always successful.  A variant of this is the group in which all the members have a shared vision, and due to this vision they came together to achieve it.  Usually one among them became the leader, tho sometimes the vision was so strong within the group, that this “leader” was more of a spokesperson for the group then a true leader.  These groups also are almost always successful.

Less successful are the groups where, tho the leader had a vision, didn’t feel that the other characteristics listed above were important.  They might have succeeded, more due to the fact that the members wanted things to succeed, but they weren’t as successful as they could have been, and it’s certainly wasn’t as much fun (indicated low morale) as it could have been.

Purpose & Values/Compelling Purpose & Full Engagement is difficult when you have leaders (and members) who aren't committed to what the group is about, and are only there as a reward for past work.  (I always say a job is a job, not an award.  There should be an expectation of doing the work.)  It’s like they are there as a ego boast and not to accomplish things.

Empowerment/Shared Leadership is difficult, when the leader refuses to recruit additional members of the team (or have any team at all), or share leadership (power to a degree, responsibility would be a better idea, which is really what empowerment is) with others on the team.  Empowerment is all about the members having the power to act and make decisions.  But many leaders, fearing a loss of power, refuse to allow this.

Just Enough Structure is difficult when the leader refuses to recruit others to the team and tries to run it a one-person operation, or the group refuses to setup the structure.  You need some structure to get things done, and in absence of any structure, nothing gets done (except by individuals on their own).  Of course, too much structure can also be a problem, when you have leaders who build a huge organization of people (with titles), all of whom do nothing and get in the way.

Flexibility/Embracing Differences is difficult when the leader refuses to recruit people who may have a contrarian view of things and may challenge the leader with different views/ideas.  Too often the desire to have people of like mind means that those with differing views/ideas are shutout.  People should be recruited for their skills and knowledge, not for being “yes” men.  Obviously, you don’t want people who are totally against the vision of the group, but someone with a different take on it, or see a different path to that vision is good.

Relationships & Communications/Strengthened Relationships doesn't happen if the leader doesn't allow the team to really come together as a team.  Again, it could be that fear of losing power.  If the team comes together, they may feel they don’t need the leader (or perhaps feel a different leader would be better).

All this then short circuits any chance of getting Great Results/Optimal Productivity.  The goal will get done, because there will be members of the group who will want to ensure that stuff is done, but think of how more successful the group could be with better leadership in place?  And how much more fun?  The work may be hard, but it could be enjoyable hard work.

And when it comes to Recognition & Appreciation, do the members of the team get any, or does it all go to the leader for their own glory?  This is especially true, again, when you have “leaders” who often times took on a role mainly for the recognition they would receive.  How many people have we seen who took on a role mainly because it would get them an award?

So take a look at some of the groups and teams you are involved in.  See how many of these characteristics they exhibit.  How might you do something to change it?

Notes #26- More on Motions

When speaking of motions, there are some other things to be aware of.   There are, in fact, 23 different motions.  Do you need to memorize them all?  No.  In fact for most people and most situations, you need to be familiar with only a handful or so.  We will cover the most useful of these in the next 2 Notes. 

First off, every motion has certain characteristics. It’s important to be familiar with these characteristics. It can be difficult to memorize the characteristics of every motion, but thankfully there are various charts and cheat sheets you can get and use during your meetings.

The characteristics are:

1. Precedence
2. Application
3. If in order when another has the floor
4. Seconded
5. Debatable
6. Amendable
7. Vote needed
8. Reconsidered

What do these mean?

1. Precedence. For some motions (a dozen of them), there is an order of precedence. Thus, if a motion is being considered, you can put forth a motion of a higher precedence, without waiting for that motion to be finished. Main motions (those motions that bring forth new business to be considered, which was the main focus of the previous Note) have the lowest precedence. Some motions have no precedence, btw.

2. Application. What is the purpose of this motion? This is important, because some motions have somewhat confusing names and some motions seem to have identical purposes. You need to be sure you are using the right motion for the right reasons.

3. As noted, when someone has the floor, you have to wait your turn to make a motion. HOWEVER, there are some motions that you can use even if another member has the floor.

4. Does the motion require a second? Some don't.

5. Can the motion be debated (discussed)? Some don't allow it.

6. Can the motion be amended (changed)? Some can't.

7. What kind of vote is needed to pass the motion? Most motions need only a majority vote. Certain motions require a 2/3 vote (these are motions that affects member's “parliamentary rights” of debate). Some motions don't need a vote.  (refer to the Note on voting for more on this)

8. Can you reconsider the vote on a motion? Some allow it, some don't


In addition, motions are put into one of several groups: Main Motions, Subsidiary motions, Privileged Motions, Incidental Motions, "Bring Back" Motions.

What are these groups?

Main motions bring new business before the group as motions or resolutions.

Subsidiary motions are motions that apply to the main motion, by changing them, setting them aside, and the like.

Privileged motions are important because they have precedence over other motions and are not debatable. All deal with the business of running the meeting.

Incidental motions are related to the main motion, but in such a way that they need to be dealt with NOW.

"Bring Back" motions are a motions that bring back issues for consideration to the group. These can be motions that were set aside and the like.

As noted, one need not memorize motions, but you need to be familiar with them, and using various charts during your meeting can help.  Here are some resources for these charts. 

You can download several free charts at Jim Slaughter’s website (http://www.jimslaughter.com/articles.htm).  He has a great chart of the parliamentary motions, and two others that are useful are “Preside Like a Pro” and “Presiding Phrases”, which can help the person chairing a meeting to move things along.

The National Association of Parliamentarians has several items for sale in their store that are useful.   They have several plastic cards with basic information on them, such as handling a motion, chair’s guide, vote calculator, ranking motions, and subsidiary motions.  Their basic information leaflet is one I get by the 100 and pass out at seminars I do.  This one has it all in one place.

Notes #25- Motions: How they work

In previous works in this series, we have eluded to the concept of "motions" in meetings to get things done. But what are they all about, and how do you deal with them?

In most cases, all the decisions an organization will make will be due to 'motions' being made by the members, discussed, and then decided upon. (in cases where you have MEMBERS making decisions vs just your officers) How this is done is really very easy, but can be confusing to those not familiar with them.

Motions are handled in this seven step process:

1. Obtain the floor
2. Make the motion
3. Have it seconded
4. Chair repeats it
5. Motion is discussed/debated
6. Vote is taken
7. Result is given

How is each step handled?

1. OBTAIN THE FLOOR. Before you can state your motion, you must 'obtain the floor'. And you can't do this unless there is nothing else pending. In other words, if the group is currently working on another matter, your motion will have to wait. Hopefully, your chair will say "Is there any other new business?" once other matters are finished, indicating it’s ok to put forth something new. This is your chance to make your motion. Obtain the chairs attention, by either raising your hand or standing (depending on the size of the group and its customs). Hopefully, the chair will recognize you and you can make your motion (The chair may say "the Chair recognizes...")

2. MAKE THE MOTION. Now that you have the floor, make your motion. Start it off by saying "I move that", and clearly state your motion. Do NOT say "I'd like to make a motion...", or "I make a motion that..." or "I so move..." or the like. Do NOT spend time explaining or justifying the motion (you'll get your chance later). Make it short and sweet, and sit down. IF the motion is a little complex, have it written down and give copies to the chair and secretary.

3. THE MOTION IS SECONDED. Now that you have stated the motion, it needs to be seconded. Seconding ONLY means that at least one person feels the group should consider the motion. The seconder is NOT obligated to vote for the motion or be in favor of it. (they may in fact be against it, and may be seconded it so that it can be considered and defeated!). All that is needed is someone to say "Second!" If no one does, the chair can prompt for a second ("Is there a second"). IF THERE IS NO SECOND, the motion is lost and that's it (Chair "Motion is lost due to lack of a second. Is there any new business?"). If there is a second, we move to the next step.

NOTE: in small committees (12 or less), you may dispense with the need for a second.

4. CHAIR REPEATS IT. The chair then says "It has been moved and seconded that..." This make sure everyone is clear on what we will be discussing.

5. MOTION IS DISCUSSED/DEBATED. At this point, members can now discuss the motion. As noted in previous points, we are discussing ONLY the motion. The old style is for the chair to say "Are you ready for the question?", but it is simpler to say "Is there any discussion?" THE MAKER OF THE MOTION gets to speak first, by the way. This is now their chance to expound on the motion, and convince people to vote for it. Afterwards, everyone else gets to speak. It is a good idea for people to make it clear where they stand by saying "I speak for the motion/I speak in favor of the motion" or "I speak against the motion/I speak in opposition to the motion" and then explain why. Should there be a lull in those obtaining the floor to speak about the motion; the chair may prompt for further debate by saying "Is there any further discussion?"

There ARE limits to how long you can speak and how often.  The standard rule is twice on the same motion for 10 minutes each.  The organization is free to change this for the organization all the time (thru a “Standing Rule” of the organization) or for that meeting or for just that motion.

6. VOTE IS TAKEN. Once it is clear everyone has had their say, OR someone has forced the matter by 'calling the question' and ending debate, the chair will put the motion to a vote. Before doing so, the chair should again repeat the motion so that everyone is clear as to what they are voting on (helpful if the motion was changed thru amendments). The chair should say "The question is on the adoption of the motion to...". And then put the matter to a vote (see the Note on Voting).

7. RESULT IS GIVEN. After the vote is taken, the chair needs to announce the results: "the ayes have it and the motion is adopted" or "The noes have it, and the motion is lost", or the like.  As noted on Voting, you do not give a count of the vote, just who prevailed.

FREQUENT QUESTIONS

SECOND- as noted, and which bears repeating: Seconding just means that at least one person feels the group should consider the motion. The seconder is NOT obligated to vote for the motion or be in favor of it. (they may in fact be against it, and may be seconded it so that it can be considered and defeated!). Seconding is not needed in small committees or groups less than 12. Also, once seconded, you can't withdraw your second. And, if debate begins before a second is formally given (which it shouldn’t), then the second is assumed.

MINUTES- what goes into the minutes? The motion as it was voted on, who made it (don't need who seconded it), and the outcome (adopted or lost). "It was moved by John Smith and seconded that we increase our dues to $100 a year. The motion passed."

AMENDMENTS- during discussions on the motions, the members CAN make changes to the motion (add, remove, reword, change). These are call amendments. This will be covered in a future Note.

Notes #24 Tribal Leadership

Tribal leadership is an interesting concept about large groups that exist within organizations (both companies and non-profit groups).  Tribe is the term the authors chose, and has nothing to do with native Americans or African tribes or the like.  “Tribes” are groups of 20-150.  Below 20 is where you have teams.  And when a group goes over 150, will split into 2 tribes.  So smaller organizations may comprise one tribe, whereas larger organizations may have 2 or 3 or more tribes.

So what is your “tribe”?  It’s more than just your circle of friends.  It’s the group of people you work with at your company or in the organizations you are in.  It’s the people you probably have in your contact list (phone or email).  Your ‘circle of acquaintances’, which is more than just your friends.  As the authors put it, if you met them on the street, you’d at least say “hi” to them.

This is all covered in the book Tribal Leadership by Dave Logan, John King, and Halee Fischer-Wright (2008, paperback edition in 2011 with new intro and afterward).  They have a website: www.triballeadership.net .

There are some good videos on YouTube that explain this concept, but these should be used as an introduction, not as a replacement for reading the book.  The TED video is a good intro, and for a longer overview take a look at the Google talk or the Rypple video:

TED video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTkKSJSqU-I

Plug on the book: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2h954Hz2Rk

Google talk on book (long): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jirePLc0U1A

Rypple video series (long): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKM4Nf1HI7M

The authors speak of 5 stages of tribes and the people in them.  Each stage has certain characteristics.  They speak of a theme of each stage, which is illustrated by a certain phrase.  There is a mood of people at each stage and how they work together (or not).  People can move up the different stages, so it’s both a function of the attitude of the individuals, and their leader(s) as to what kind of tribe it is, sometimes it’s the ‘system’ (corporate culture) the people are a part of that defines the stage you’re in (leave that system and you can level that stage).  And, yes, people can move down in stages as well.  Someone with a Stage 1 attitude who comes into a higher stage tribe will either be changed or removed.  The efforts of a leader can transform a lower stage tribe to a higher one, but the members of the tribe also need to be willing to change. 

What then are these 5 stages?

Stage 1 is marked by the attitude “life sucks”.  Only about 2% of groups operate here.  This is the stage of criminals and gangs, a group of hostile people.  In a company, this would be a group that is stealing from the company or the like.

Stage 2 is a big step up from Stage 1.  Its theme is “MY life sucks”, a little different.  About 25% of groups are here.  This is the type of group you see on The Office or when you visit the department of motor vehicles.  People don’t care, and it shows.  In many cases, this has been caused by the culture of the group.  People have been beat down.  No among of touchy-feely stuff like team building exercises, motivational posters, or the like will change things.

Stage 3 is the dominant culture of groups, with 49% of groups being here.  Its theme is “I’m great”, with the unspoken completion of “and you’re not”.  This is where you have a group of experts, who do not work together (and why should they?  Each one feels that “I’m great, and you’re not”), and so it’s a culture of the ‘lone warrior’ (“oh, I had to do all this work, because no one else can do it.  After all, I’m great, and you’re not”).  Everyone is in it to win it for themselves.   Again, the system these people are in is what causes this attitude.  It’s not necessarily that people are selfish or the like, but the system they are in causes them to be this way.

One big characteristic of this stage is the relationship between people.  It’s always between two people.  The authors use the term “dyadic” for this.  But the relationship is a negative one.  This is not a mentor/mentee relationship or a partnership.  Here the two-way relationship is more of a leader and a follower, where the follower is told what to do and only given limited amount of information.  If a leader has several followers, then the relationship still is between the leader and each individual follower, there is no teamwork, there is no connection between the different followers.  If you chart the relationships, you get a wheel/spoke, instead of an interconnected web.  This is an important point, as changing this is an important factor in moving a group to Stage 4.

As noted, the largest group of tribes are at this stage.  A perfect example of this is the movie “Office Space”.  Lumbergh, the manager, is the classic example of the “stage 3 boss”.  All his underlings are weak Stage 3 or Stage 2.  Stage 3 bosses prefer weak Stage 3 people or Stage 2 people, as they can dominate them.   The character of Milton is at Stage 2, who is pushed back to Stage 1 by Lumbergh.  And you see the result of this.

Stage 4 is next, and it’s a huge jump for Stage 3.  Here the theme is “we’re great”, with the unspoken completing being “and they’re not”.  This is actually the stage that tribal leadership should be trying to move people to (I’ll explain why shortly).  About 22% of groups are here.  And it can be very difficult to get here, both for the leader and for the followers.  The leader needs to move beyond the “I’m great” attitude, and think in terms of what is best for the group.  But once done, it’s the place to be.

The concept of “they’re not” is that usually Stage 4 tribes have a “rival” they are ‘fighting’ against.   For companies, it could be the competition, in colleges, it’s a rival college.  For tribes at Stage 4 to move to Stage 5, this rival needs to be more abstract.  So for a pharmaceutical company, their rival is not the competition so much as diseases.

Stage 5 is the final stage.  Here the theme is “LIFE is great”.  Unlike in Stage 4, there is no attitude of an ‘enemy’ to fight per say.  But one thing that is pointed out is that this stage is unstable.  What you want as a goal is to get to Stage 4, and move the group at times into Stage 5.  But in Stage 5, great things happen.

Servant leadership & tribal leadership

In learning about tribal leadership, I wondered where (or even if) servant leadership fits in.  The authors make no mention of it, and I have no idea if they know about it.  But in going over things, and the aspects of leaders in the different stages, it seems clear to me that the leaders of stage 4 & 5 tribes are likely to be servant leaders.  Servant leaders in stage 1, 2, 3 tribes would be working hard to get their tribe up to stage 4 & 5.  Now, this doesn't mean that a stage 4/5 leader is automatically a servant leader, but most likely they will be.  If you read the book, it’s also clear that the “stage 3 boss” is a leader-first leader, the opposite of the servant leader.

As many of us are involved in large groups, this work has value.  I first learned of it from Toastmasters when they ran an article in the August, 2011 issue of the Toastmasters magazine.  And they had the main author speak at their International Convention in 2011 and they gave out copies to people.  As I look around in many of my groups, I do see a lot of Stage 3 tribes.  I do see attempts at creating Stage 4 tribes.  And I see Stage 3 tribes that the boss is trying to disguise as Stage 4.  This is actually something the authors warn about: the fake Stage 4.

An example of this is in the Rypple video.  This quote was given:  “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed people can change the world.  Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.” – Margaret Mead.  I've heard it before and agree.  I've seen great things done in many of the organizations I am part of, lead by people with a vision for something better.  This is an example of a stage 4/5 leader. But author David Logan has this corollary: “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtless, uncommitted people can prevent the world from changing.  Indeed, they do so every day.” (he says that 70% of tribes do this.)  And sadly, I've too often seen this.  Someone trying to make a change, but is stopped by others in the organization because they lack the vision or want to come up with some reason to stop it or just don’t want change.  What is especially sad is that too often the people doing the blocking wrap themselves in the rhetoric of the Stage 4 leader or a servant leader, which in my mind means they really don’t understand the concepts.

A great concept and I encourage all leaders to check it out.

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.