[foundation-board] board discussion: FC tasks and Chapters
Jordan S Hatcher
jordan at opencontentlawyer.com
Tue Mar 20 14:36:47 UTC 2012
On 16 Mar 2012, at 17:54, Becky Hogge wrote:
> Please see responses inline:
>
>
> On 15 March 2012 18:14, Jordan S Hatcher <jordan at opencontentlawyer.com> wrote:
> Thanks for pulling this out into a separate set of proposals. In the future, I think we should consider numbering them so that they can be debated or approved by item a bit easier.
>
> I have several questions on all of the items below -- as I'm still going through the board pack and don't want to raise questions for points that may already be answered there, I will respond once I've had time to review the materials.
>
> I'm happy to approve ITEM 1
> only at this time.
>
> Thanks
>
> Jordan
>
> On 14 Mar 2012, at 09:59, Laura James wrote:
>
>> The following items relating to staffing have been pulled from the board agenda into email at Martin and Becky's request. I think that most of these require fairly straightforward approval/rejection, so I have set them out below in a form which I hope will make it straightforward for each board member to respond to each line item.
>>
>> Please note that as we have 7 board members, a majority of 4 is needed to approve any item.
>>
>> Many thanks,
>>
>> Laura
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ITEM 1
>
>> Request that Foundation Coordinators to be set target to create role descriptions for all contractors and to review pay rates, both to be implemented before end 2012 (in response to issues detailed in Foundation Coordinator report)
>
>
> I approve.
>>
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
> ITEM 2
>
>> Request that the board consider creation of a renumeration committee (in response to issues detailed in Foundation Coordinator report)
>
>
> I approve of the Board considering this. In considering it, I would want to know how such a committee would be resourced (presumably in part from work emerging from ITEM 1). Although I think this work is important, I don't know if I have the right skills to sit on it myself, and I wonder which of us does. I'd like to understand a bit more what the role of such a committee would be.
I agree as del that we should consider it, however like Becky I'd like a bit more detail. My understanding is that normally board level renumeration committees are about board level and executive compensation. As we don't have any compensation on either of these areas, this proposal seems to be more about improving several areas in how we pay people as a day-to-day operational matter. I'd particularly like to know what the board can offer here as a committee as opposed to just hearing proposals for OKFN management.
I'm happy to contribute to a planning or an ideas session here, though I think any execution based on the plans generated by the proposed committee be turned over to the day-to-day management to run with.
>>
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
> ITEM 3
>
>> Request that the board to agree to the executive team dedicating significant time to strategy development in the near term as a priority, which may mean that other activities such as management of individual projects, conversion of contractors to employees, process improvements, etc, are put on hold or done to a very basic level for this period. This will ensure the strategy is developed as quickly as possible whilst maintaining basic operational management at a level similar to that offered during the first 2 months of 2012.
>
>
> I'm happy for most of the listed activities to be de-prioritised, but I'd like to know about which process improvements will suffer. It looks like Laura's already done sterling work improving a lot of organisational processes and I wouldn't want us to lose out on momentum.
How does this fit with the proposal for a board strategy day in May contained in the Board Report?
Strategy sessions can often result in just being talking shops, and I wouldn't want to derail the progress we are making on other issues in favour of something that seems like it can be deferred until later.
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
> ITEM 4
>
>> Belgium: Chapter incorporation
>>
>> 1) Request for confirmation that we are happy to move to sign an MOU following the standard template https://docs.google.com/document/d/1x8hvgLhklXma7bS0dKgJL9Xs2-Q6xlWgu2JV3S-oJGg/edit (Recommendation from Laura&Kat: that we accept Belgium as a chapter. They are a robust group we've worked with extensively. Their incorporation articles were reviewed by Laura and look acceptable within the MOU requirements.)
>
> I approve.
>>
>> 2) We have the option of nominating someone to their board as part of the MOU. Do the board wish to take this up and nominate someone, and if so whom? (Recommendation from Laura&Kat: this is very much down to the board to choose, but we are very confident in the professionalism of the team not to need close supervision. )
>
> I would like to discuss this at the Board meeting. Right now I cannot put myself forward due to other time commitments. I imagine other Board members will be in the same position. I'd like to hear other board members views on this.
>>
>> 3) Request from the local group for central funds to pay for travel costs for a high profile international speaker at a big event they are running http://appsforghent.be to help boost their profile. Speaker TBC. (Recommendation from Laura&Kat: accept this request subject to it being a reasonable amount & an estimate being received before we confirm. (funding from Omidyar chapter support pot))
>
> I accept this request subject to it being a reasonable amount & an estimate being received before we confirm.
>>
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
> ITEM 5
>
>> Austria: Chapter incorporation
>>
>> 1) Request for confirmation that we are happy to move to sign an MOU following the standard template https://docs.google.com/document/d/1x8hvgLhklXma7bS0dKgJL9Xs2-Q6xlWgu2JV3S-oJGg/edit (Recommendation from Laura&Kat: that we accept Austria as a chapter. They are an active local group and have been for some time.)
>
> I approve.
>>
>> 2) We have the option of nominating someone to their board as part of the MOU. Do the board wish to take this up and nominate someone, and if so whom? (Recommendation from Laura&Kat: this is very much down to the board to choose, but we are confident in the competance of the group not to need close supervision. )
>
> I would like to discuss this at the Board meeting. Right now I cannot put myself forward due to other time commitments. I imagine other Board members will be in the same position. I'd like to hear other board members views on this.
>>
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
> ITEM 6
>> Switzerland: Chapter incorporation
>>
>>
>> 1) Request for confirmation that we are happy to move to sign an MOU following the standard template https://docs.google.com/document/d/1x8hvgLhklXma7bS0dKgJL9Xs2-Q6xlWgu2JV3S-oJGg/edit (Recommendation from Laura&Kat: that we accept Austria as a chapter. They are an active local group, we've met them and they seem competant.)
>
> If the recommendation is that we accept Switzerland as a chapter, I approve.
>>
>> 2) We have the option of nominating someone to their board as part of the MOU. Do the board wish to take this up and nominate someone, and if so whom? (Recommendation from Laura&Kat: this is very much down to the board to choose, but we are confident in the competance of the people involved not to need close supervision. )
>
>
> I would like to discuss this at the Board meeting. Right now I cannot put myself forward due to other time commitments. I imagine other Board members will be in the same position. I'd like to hear other board members views on this.
For the above three Chapter recommendations:
* I think that the Board should be approving these
* I would like more detail on each when it comes to board approval
* I'd like to discuss the original requirement to have interlocking boards a bit more with Laura and Kat in particular. I saw this as an important oversight function as well as one that can provide consistency and harmony within the OKFN as we grow chapters. The comments above seem to focus on the competence of the new chapter boards -- I would hope that every single proposed chapter has competent people and so this should be a given. It's about having a tied together organisation when taking into consideration all of its parts.
In terms of a Chapter proposal form to go to the board, if it was thought appropriate for everyone, I would like to see in each proposal:
- Proposed name
- Jurisdiction
- Any notes on coverage of the group -- examples may be if Italy, is it the north, the south, the whole thing, any regional coverage differences such as would an OKFN-Spain cover Catalonia?
- Names and short bios of the principal organisers
- summary of community building to date by the organisation
-- a timeline with the summary would be good
-- relevant mailing lists
-- traffic of mailing lists
-- events held to date
-- any other activities
- if incorporating, form of incorporation
- a risk assessment/summary from Kat/Chapter coordinator about this organisation in particular
- any other information the board thought appropriate
At this time I would like to see an overview of at least some of the above information before I feel comfortable voting on these three proposed chapters.
Thanks
Jordan
>
> Cheers
>
> Becky
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-board mailing list
> foundation-board at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-board
____
Mr. Jordan S Hatcher, JD, LLM
More at: <http://www.jordanhatcher.com>
Co-founder: <http://www.opendatacommons.org>
Open Knowledge: <http://www.okfn.org/>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/private/foundation-board/attachments/20120320/e1bf4d8b/attachment.html>
More information about the foundation-board
mailing list