Re: Reducing the board size

I +1 holding a referendum on this.


On Wed, 2005-09-14 at 21:01 +0200, David Neary wrote:
> Hi all,
> There has been some discussion on reducing the board size on the board, 
> and the one point which is clear is that this discussion should be in 
> public.
> I'm in favour of reducing the board to 7 people. I would like to see us 
> have a referendum on the issue next month.
> The board has huge problems being pro-active. Any issue which is 
> slightly contentious has an opposition in a board of 11 people. It's 
> inevitable. And when there is opposition, there are many voices, and 
> when there are many voices, there is no resolution.
> With 7 people, this problem will be reduced (not removed, I'm not that 
> naive).
> In addition, a fringe benefit is that people who will want to get 
> elected will have to run. With 11 seats, no-one runs for election. There 
> is essentially only competition for the last 3 seats. I would like to 
> see board elections have an election campaign, with people saying what 
> they want to do, why, and saying why they think other people's approach 
> will not be effective.
> There are potential down-sides. If you look at the most effective board 
> members over the years, they have typically not been among the 7 most 
> popular. I myself would not have been elected this year. But there is no 
> denying that the board structure as it is is fundamentally flawed. I 
> think this is one step towards improving it.
> Cheers,
> Dave.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]