stamerjohn@topaz.decus.org (04/26/91)
I published the following article in the DECUS Leadership news. In short, my opinion is the proposed bylaw changes should be rejected because it solves no documented problem and elimimates a current system which serves both general membership and active participants. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- A Change I Don't Want The first conclusion reached in the ADL report state: "DECUS has a strong claim to preeminence among the computer societies - High visibility in the industry is accompanied by positive accolades - The symposium wins plaudits for its quality and comprehensiveness - Membership levels are high, and rising steadily - The leadership cadre is active and highly capable - In essence, DECUS is doing lots of things well" I agree. We can improve at every point above and many more besides, but "in essence, DECUS is doing lots of things well." The central recommendation of the ADL report - the elimination of the Management Council - then presents me a dilemia. I find it far more logically consistent that our current organization aids our success, instead of the premise we are succeeding in spite of the Board/MC structure. DECUS current organization is an effective bicameral structure which empowers both the members and volunteers in the society. DECUS is a society of people. The Board, exercising authority delagated by the membership, is the final authority. This is true now under the current bylaws. DECUS is a participatory society. Our work is done by volunteers. Our volunteers are organizated into over 200 units, each which has its own style, its own opeating procedures, and its own elected leadership. Going at most only two layers (LUG->NLC, SIG->SIG Council), the volunteers select their representatives to the Management Council. The current bylaws then give operational duties, i.e. those things like budgets and staff support and turning Board policy into day-to-day instructions, to this group of volunteer selected leaders. If I take any two sets of people chosen from separate constituencies, the people will disagree. This does not make the system bad. What has disturb me most is the complete lack of case studies or even anecdotal stories on how interactions between the Board and Management Council have adversely effected the society. There are none in the ADL report, there are not in the Organizational Audit Review report, there are none in the Board minutes. There are lots of changes in the proposed bylaws I can support, but not this change. The current bylaws have been in place for 7 years. DECUS is doing a lot of things well. If the pot don't stink, don't stir it.