Guest Susan Posted July 15, 2010 at 02:13 AM Report Share Posted July 15, 2010 at 02:13 AM I haven't been here since the new change, so am still struggling to find my way around. Has there been any discussion on a corporation BOD versus a Team Management form of governance? And if so, what are the advantages/disadvantages of Team Management? Are both governed by Robert's Rules? I know nothing of Team Management but a BOD I sit on is wanting to change. (Hope I can find my way to your answers!) Thanks.Susan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kim Goldsworthy Posted July 15, 2010 at 02:33 AM Report Share Posted July 15, 2010 at 02:33 AM Has there been any discussion on a corporation BOD versus a Team Management form of governance?And if so, what are the advantages/disadvantages of Team Management?I know nothing of Team Management but a BOD I sit on is wanting to change. Bad news:1. You won't find the phrase "corporation Board of Directors" in RONR. - The Book mentions briefly "corporations" and mentions a lot of things about "Executive board" in general. But not the two as a single unit. So I don't know what YOU mean by that magical phrase.2. You won't find the phrase "Team Management" (whatever that is) in RONR. Not even close.I think you are asking a question about management, or about philosophy of how to govern a nonprofit, and not asking a question about parliamentary law. You are asking a question of structure and hierarchy, which is stuff OUTSIDE of a meeting context.Are both governed by Robert's Rules? Badly worded question.When they (i.e., both bodies) meet to transact official business in the name of the organization, they will use parliamentary procedure. Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised (RONR 10th ed.) is a BOOK on the subject of parliamentary procedure.We hope your bylaws have included a phrase mentioning Robert's Rules of Order as the parliamentary authority.If your bylaws do not mention RONR by name, then the "board" or "team" (whatever) will use the common parliamentary law, and not necessarily adhere to one particular handbook on the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted July 15, 2010 at 11:23 PM Report Share Posted July 15, 2010 at 11:23 PM I haven't been here since the new change, so am still struggling to find my way around. Has there been any discussion on a corporation BOD versus a Team Management form of governance? And if so, what are the advantages/disadvantages of Team Management? Are both governed by Robert's Rules? I know nothing of Team Management but a BOD I sit on is wanting to change. (Hope I can find my way to your answers!) Thanks.SusanThis is not the first time I've seen a post about "Team Management," but I'm as clueless about what it is as you are. I'd ask some of these board members what this "team management" approach involves and determine for yourself whether it is compatible with the characteristics of a deliberative assembly as discussed in RONR, 10th ed., pgs. 1-2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Susan Posted July 19, 2010 at 06:48 PM Report Share Posted July 19, 2010 at 06:48 PM Bad news:1. You won't find the phrase "corporation Board of Directors" in RONR. - The Book mentions briefly "corporations" and mentions a lot of things about "Executive board" in general. But not the two as a single unit. So I don't know what YOU mean by that magical phrase.2. You won't find the phrase "Team Management" (whatever that is) in RONR. Not even close.I think you are asking a question about management, or about philosophy of how to govern a nonprofit, and not asking a question about parliamentary law. You are asking a question of structure and hierarchy, which is stuff OUTSIDE of a meeting context.Badly worded question.When they (i.e., both bodies) meet to transact official business in the name of the organization, they will use parliamentary procedure. Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised (RONR 10th ed.) is a BOOK on the subject of parliamentary procedure.We hope your bylaws have included a phrase mentioning Robert's Rules of Order as the parliamentary authority.If your bylaws do not mention RONR by name, then the "board" or "team" (whatever) will use the common parliamentary law, and not necessarily adhere to one particular handbook on the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Susan Posted July 19, 2010 at 06:50 PM Report Share Posted July 19, 2010 at 06:50 PM Sorry for the confusion. Geez, I really dislike this new configuration on this forum page!!! Thanks for your assistance. Basically TM is a consensus form of governance. I didn't know if it adhered to parliamentary authority or not. Susan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted July 19, 2010 at 06:55 PM Report Share Posted July 19, 2010 at 06:55 PM Sorry for the confusion. Geez, I really dislike this new configuration on this forum page!!! Thanks for your assistance. Basically TM is a consensus form of governance. I didn't know if it adhered to parliamentary authority or not. SusanI suggest you read the last paragraph of the Introduction to the 10th Edition of RONR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted July 19, 2010 at 08:30 PM Report Share Posted July 19, 2010 at 08:30 PM Basically TM is a consensus form of governance. I didn't know if it adhered to parliamentary authority or not. Any form of governance which relies on "consensus" is not supported by RONR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.