[comp.sys.dec] Why this DECUS volunteer voted NO

killeen@spcvxb.spc.edu (Jeff Killeen) (05/02/91)

	I am intruding on COMP.SO.VMS and COMP.SYS.DEC for what I hope will
personally be the last time.  For those of you who find this inappropriate I
apologize in advance.  I assure this is only because for the most part the
"CON" side has been excluded from the official communication channels and we
would like to see the DECUS electorate to make an informed decision after
hearing both sides of the issue. Therefore we must use what channels are
available. 

	The world in which DECUS exists is changing.  For DECUS to survive at
the same healthy levels it has in the past it must evaluate what these changes
mean to the Society.  Clearly we are moving from a user environment where
computer solutions are driven by proprietary vendor architectures to standards
driven architectures.  We are also moving towards computer solutions that will
be driven by the needs of a global community and not just the US marketplace.
The challenge facing DECUS is what will the role of a user society be in the
future that is closely tied to a proprietary vendor and is organized on
country by country basis? 

	When I joined DECUS it was to learn about my computing environment and
to influence the solutions provided.  The question I have been asking myself
more and more often is as Digital becomes a standards/global driven company
wouldn't my time be better spent with those Societies/Groups who seek to
influence standards or whose mission is to serve the open (generic) systems
market place?  Will DECUS go from a leadership role in shaping solutions to a
news reporting role as to how DEC implemented what the computer community has
already decide?  The DECUS SIG council (the SIG Council is the body of the
leaders of all the Special Interest Groups) has formed an audience task force
to address these questions.  The feeling being DECUS must address new
audiences, at different levels, and in a more open way if we are to be
significant in the future.  The DECUS Board was invited several times to have
a member join this task force.  To date no Board member has attend any of the
meetings. 

	Many of us are concerned that the DECUS Board is not doing their job.
They are not helping the Society obtain a vision of the future.  Anyone who
wishes to dispute this I would suggest they start by outlining what this Board
has done over the last two years to address the issues listed above.  In fact
outline where they have even acknowledged the issues exist.  IMO this Board is
very frustrated because they want to direct (order) the Society and not lead
it.  These by-law changes will give the Board absolute authority with little
accountability to the electorate since they choose to ignore the ADL finding
of a need to develop an informed electorate.  You are being asked to give
virtual absolute power to a group that was failed to provided leadership and
fulfill the normal role of a Board - which is to articulate a vision of the
future and through leadership skills helps us get there.  Again anyone who
wants to dispute this ask them to provide a reference of where this Board in
the last two years has articulated a vision. 

	I am voting no for one primary reason.  Now is not the time to
institute a system that gives absolute central control to any group and
detaches the decision making committees from the volunteer structure. 
If you except your volunteer work force to face the challenges ahead you
must lead them and not order them.  The Board's very own concept document
states on page three under "STANDING COMMITTEES"... 

	"The work of the Chapter is not performed by the [Board Group].  It
	is to be performed by the Standing Committees..."

...The Chairs of these standing committees are picked by one person -
the President.  The members of the committees are picked by the
President and his hand picked committee Chairs.  There is no effective
check and balance on a President who has poor leadership skills.  A
President could choose to rule by power plays rather than leadership
and consensus.  That is what many feel has happened today and why you
are seeing DECUS's name in the press like you never have before.  If
this rule by power plays rather than consensus continues at a time when
volunteer/leadership buy-in is so needed to face the challenges of the
future DECUS will fail.  This is very similar to the late 70's and early
80's when the US auto company executives ordered their workers to build
better cars.  They failed to realize it wasn't setting quality as a goal
that brought the Japanese success.  It was consensus management that had
the Japanese workers feeling they were part of the system which lead to
their full buy-in of the company's goals. 

gpwrmdh@gp.co.nz (05/03/91)

Enough!

I am fed up with reading about the internal politics of DECUS US in
comp.os.vms and comp.sys.dec. Please restrict this discussion to 
comp.org.decus only and keep comp.os.vms to the operating system and 
programming discussion that it is intended for.

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin D. Hunt			
GP Print Limited		USEnet address : martinh@gp.co.nz
Wellington			PSI address    : PSI%0530147000028::martinh
New Zealand			Phone	       : +64 4 4965790
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------