A letter to Governance

[Martin Regan]

JH:

Fab, now Mike Gunn should step down as well?

Justin: you may not see this as an important issue. That's fine. But perhaps you should think twice about treating it as an unimportant one.

If Mr Gunn believes that the Chairman of a Committee tasked with governance can, at the moment of an election, take the floor and use the reputation for impartiality it has rightly earned over the years, to deliver an ultimatum to the electorate - without even reference to his own committee then in my view he should.

[NickFaulks]

Majer did not express a view between candidates - he said that if council elected one he would resign. The Governance Committee, in effect, delivered a threat to the electorate.

What I believed I heard him say was that he could not remain as Chairman of the Governance Committee if he had to contend with a CEO who had declared himself to be above governance. I thought it was less of a threat than a promise.

Whatever it was, he was absolutely clear that it came from the Chairman and not the Committee. If it really did come as a complete bombshell to his colleagues, even in the light of his earlier report ( into which they may have had no input ) I can see how they might conclude that the GC is not a Committee worth being on.

[Michael Flatt]

The word I remember was 'dysfunctional' and Chris declared whom he thought was the source of it. I don't recall anything being said about the CEO being above governance and if it was implied I entirely missed that.

[NickFaulks]

The word I remember was 'dysfunctional' and Chris declared whom he thought was the source of it. I don't recall anything being said about the CEO being above governance.

That was my impression of his view of the ultimate root cause. Only he really knows.

edit : By the way, it would be a good idea to introduce the practice, used in other organisations, of taping the proceedings. I expect he chose his words with care and it would be helpful to have an exact record of them.

[LawrenceCooper]

The word I remember was 'dysfunctional' and Chris declared whom he thought was the source of it. I don't recall anything being said about the CEO being above governance.

That was my impression of his view of the ultimate root cause. Only he really knows.

edit : By the way, it would be a good idea to introduce the practice, used in other organisations, of taping the proceedings. I expect he chose his words with care and it would be helpful to have an exact record of them.

Board meeting were/are taped to help with accurate/timely production of minutes

[NickFaulks]

Board meeting were/are taped to help with accurate/timely production of minutes

I did wonder when I wrote that, because of course I didn't know. A verbatim report would be educational.

[David Pardoe]

This hiatus is starting to have a familiar look....throwing the babies out with the bath water comes to mind..

Let folks please remember that the ECF and UK chess has not had a bad year last year, by any means.... and many events have run very successfully, including the British, in spite of the inevitable hiccups that always will occur...
My experience of chess committees (at all levels..), is that they can be pretty hostile places at times, with personal feuds, bickering, and smart alex rule bending aplenty...
I remember one occasion when it looked, as the evening meeting wore on, that we were heading for complete disintegration... with the committee looking alarmingly in danger of falling apart. So much so, that I decided to shelve my particular list of issues, in order to avoid the whole thing falling apart, with the potential of almost every member standing down from the committee..so it appeared.

Do we need some kind of anger management course, or social skills course, or team building weekend...?
As I said, the Board is bound to contain people with widely differing views, which will inevitably lead to feuding and arguments..
This does not mean the body cant work, or is dysfunctional...but such bodies do need some good handling and management, if constructive progress is to take place.

I have said that I wonder if the ECF has got itself into a corporate straight jacket, which is difficult to operate..
Should we look at how other bodies run... like The UK Bridge, etc...

.... and of course, we are a voluntary body, run by unpaid people, giving up there spare time..... we are under resourced, and needing all the help and voluntary support we can muster.
I think maybe it is time for taking a step back to reflect on matters... can some fences be repaired... can we take stock and regroup.

[Michael Flatt]

The pool of chess administrators is small and there is little emphasis on bringing in fresh blood.

Looking at how other organisations function or don't function might provide a distraction but really we should have sufficient talent within the chess community to sort things out ourselves.

When management consultants arrive in a company they canvas opinion from all including those who regularly get overlooked by the existing ossified management. They then repackage what they learn and feed it back. There are usually people in the organisation that have the solution but for whatever reason it takes an outsider to represent those same ideas to get them accepted.

[Roger de Coverly]

Should we look at how other bodies run... like The UK Bridge, etc...

The English Bridge Union is structured as a Company limited by Shares. The Shares and hence the AGM votes are held by the County Associations. Their website talks of the share allocation varying by the relative size of the local bodies.

In order to take part in Bridge at a competitive level and part of the EBU's rating and reward structures, it's necessary for Clubs to register and for individuals to become "members". Membership is free for individuals, but they are charged for each session of Bridge they play, with the proceeds being forwarded by local clubs to the national body. Most Congresses are organised by the national body, which is why they lose more of their potential income to VAT.

That's an outsider's view, insiders may be able to correct me, if the details are not quite as stated.

Needless to say, an individual's influence extends no further than the extent to which he or she can influence their local County Association, the AGM attendee for that organisation and the instructions given to the AGM attendee.