Management Committee structure and process

Susan.GOFF's picture

This entry is just to make really sure that everyone has read their management committee policy and roles documents so we know what we can expect of each other (in terms of time and tasks) - and - feels good about putting the ideas into practice...

The intention of the new policy, structure and roles, is to find a way for the management system to be more action oriented, more able to reach into the membership and invite engagement with making the organisation a living action learning and research system. 
The new approach will have some hiccups as we apply the "theory" for the first time, so it would be good to keep reviewing it at our MC meetings, and fine tune. This is already happening, with Di adjusting the role of secretary for example. 
Di is adding the secretarial role distinctions to the document, as worked through by Marg F, Di and Donna last week (thank you so much, wonder women, for organising this.
Thanks to this work, we know who to direct secretarial type requests to and how not to over burden anyone... By way of explanation, Marg F addresses constitutional matters (special general meetings, registrations with Associations registry etc), Di addresses Executive matters (such as minutes and action plan), and Donna addresses book keeping and administration matters that voluntary support cannot meet (such as sending out the journal in the mail, ensuring membership forms are sent out, and doing the many tasks associated with auditing and banking). We have a strict budget for Donna so please clear all requests that will require her time through me/or John as our budget keeper. 
At the end of the Roles document you will find a diagram of a chart which explains the relationships between us all. 
You will see the Management Committee (MC) comprised of two sub-structures, the Working Group (WG) and the Executive. These two sub-structures are connected to each other in two ways: by way of the reciprocal membership of the two Vice Presidents - and by having whole Management Committee meetings (we are suggesting twice a year). 
Important to note, that the Working Group is being positioned as the key driver of business for ALARA, that BOTH Vice Presidents are active on both WG and Executive and are our essential linkages as they filter the development of ALARA between local and international enterprises - important that Iain and Stewart share their ideas about the role and future of ALARA and create clear boundaries between their roles - fee free to open up this discussion between you on this MC meeting. Many of the roles are yours (each MC members') to make within policy boundaries.... 
The principles beheind this restructure are mutual trust, respect for professionalism, and faith in our ability through reflective, collaborative action and learning, to co-generate an energetic and integratd idea of what ALARA is, what it does and who with (rather than for), and where it is taking AL and AR in Australia. 
The Executive looks after legal and financial responsibilities and supports the work of the WG - understanding that the Exec has final reponsibility to members and formal regulatory bodies such as the ATO for the ongoing integrity and viability of ALARA.
The new timetable (on "supported collaborative autonomy" thread) puts this idea of supported CA into practice. I welcome critical reflection and contrbutions.
The action plan is the key means for everyone staying up to date with their responsibilities. Currently this is on the web in a working mode - still a bit clunky - but the idea is that you check out the whole action plan to get an idea of what everyone is doing, add your tasks, and update them on completion. Di is monitoring how this is going technically and managerially - thank you Di...We wiill be using this document for all our meetings. 
Also note a decision making process in the Roles document. This is for when/if we don't reach consensus easily - yet to be tested.
The Policy document (as distinct from the roles doc) is simple and outlines the elements of structure (thanks to Marg O for helping us shape this up with input from Ernie, Ted, Ross, Shankar and Eileen Piggot Irvine). 
Missing from both documents is the "Advisory Group" - which I am keen to add to and wil give a separate discussion theme in this meeting. 
Also, what was called the Alumnni on the original policy document is now our ALARA Council of Treasures (ACT) - or our network of life members as descirbed in our "Treasures" policy to be endorsed if possible, this meeting (another thread). 
That's it. So far, my sense is that it is working well into its early days.... and thank you everyone who is making this idea a reality.

MCrolesandstructure.doc123.5 KB
ALARACorpGovPol.doc75 KB
Susan.GOFF's picture

Can we review how we think we are going with our roles?

Many people have read this site but no comments yet... perhaps we can begin our meeting review here. 


How do we think we participated in reference to our individual role descriptions?

How does the Working Group feel about going on and working with each other on their activities? Do you want to set up some shared activities here?


Can each WG person outline what they believe their action strategies will be between now and the next MC - if we endorse the proposed meeting schedule?


How does the Executive feel we are working together with our responsibilities and roles? 


And are the VPs developing an understanding of their combined and distinct responsibilities and roles?


Is this new policy a viable way of working?


What could be better?

What about the kind of leadership we are developing.... supported collaborative autonomy, critical reflection, deliberation and praxis?

Susan Goff

colliver's picture

A buddy

Susie ask several questions. I am clear about my role, but I've been in it for a while. I get the overall structure, and will moreso as we work within it.

What I've found in the meeting is that it's hard to respond to and interact with all the agenda items with the same earnestness I have for my own topic.I've read most everything, but fournd my braint running dry and only wanting to think through on three things not 10. I haven't responded to World Congress stuff much, for exmaple.

THis leads me to observing a natural concentration of interaction around some functions - for me it is web, publishing and membership, and maybe SIGs, for the website side of things. I already have a buddy (Marg) working in another function (publications) so that gives me support. I can work this out informally, don't need formal agreements.

My second observation is related - when I read an item here in the meeting, if it lies outside the areas where I'm already doing a lot of work for ALARA, I do need to know what the topic proponent wants from me, and more than "What do you think?". I'm not saying I'm a paragon in my own proposing here, just noting that I have limted brainspace, and so need this kind of direction. Then I can sit down, read the associated materials, and form a point of view.

Ross Colliver, TTDG, 0411 226519

Margaret.OCONNELL's picture

Using poll tool for endorsement/dissent?

Would it be worth switching on the polling tool to use for endorsement of actions? This woudl not only cut down time required to respond, but also time to scroll comments to measure responses.

Ross, is this possible?

Cheers, Marg :o)

View my activities at OR

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.