COMMON - The Saga Continues
That said, we think there are a couple of points/comments that we would like to make related to the past week's goings-on.
Before we do that, however, we would like to celebrate the good news today that a new branch of COMMON and an associated YiPs (Young i Professionals) group have been launched in South Africa. Back after a 14 year absence! After a long respite, the i and Power Systems community there seems to have decided that there's a need for an organization to unite and serve them. Best of luck to the newly re-born COMMON organization in Africa.
Now on to the comments:
1. Just to be absolutely clear. This isn't--and never was--just about money. As we stated in last week's post, the financial issue merely forced us to re-evaluate our involvement. We had been unhappy with the direction that COMMON has been taking for some long time. Like many other volunteers, we had tried to influence that direction from within the organization, but we haven't seen significant change in direction. We have been asked for input by the Board of Directors of COMMON and will be attempting to formulate our thoughts over the next few days to respond to that request, but we thought it would be good to hear a few more ideas from our readers first.
2. We're not the only speakers and volunteers affected by this. We personally know of others who will not be attending for similar reasons. While on the surface finances may be the issue, many have indicated to us via private e-mails that they have similar concerns to our own.
3. COMMON needs to reflect the needs and wants of its members. The current voting system really doesn't allow that to happen. Somehow, both the needs of the organizations that send the attendees and the attendees themselves need to have a far greater say in what happens at the board level. Right now the number of people who actually vote in the board elections is very very small. And this will likely continue to be the case because the vote attaches to the company who pays the membership. That company gets one vote, even if they send 20 or 30 people to the conference. We on the other hand, who never get to attend sessions or really participate as "real" members, get two votes! Why? Because it is cheaper for us to buy two individual memberships than a corporate membership and as a result we get twice as much voting power. That doesn't make any sense.
4. In the "old" days when COMMON didn't have a full-time professional staff running the organization, it made sense to only roll-off a limited number of board members each year. It aided in continuity. These days, however, there's staff to provide that continuity. And the limited number of changes that occur on the board each year just seems to make it harder to steer the ship with new blood. It also serves to discourage good people from standing for the board. We've talked to many excellent candidates who ultimately decided not to run because they felt that they couldn't have a significant impact as a lone voice. Heaven forbid we have "political parties" standing for electio, but if a larger group of people were elected to the board each time it would at least make it possible for a group of like-minded people to run with a specific agenda.
5. Last, but not least, we feel COMMON should decide on and focus on its raison d'ĂȘtre. In our mind it has focused on survival for far too long. It has been doing anything and everything to earn the dollars to keep it running without asking "Why" or even "If" it should continue to exist. Without knowing the answers to those questions everything else is irrelevant. In this day of instant answers via internet lists, world-wide internet Webcasts, Facebook and other social-networking sites each and every group needs to ask these questions.
What is the need? Is having a relatively large annual conference and a smaller event each year the primary mission? Are there other things an organization of the i faithful may be doing? Yes, we said "i faithful" since that's the community we are a part of and feel we can speak to. The COMMON organization has decided to embrace the Power Systems community as a whole. Does that dilute its support of i or does it strengthen it? Shouldn't there be a place for an organization devoted to i? Questions such as these are ones we're struggling with and think should be explored.





Recent Comments