Organisation update

[robbo203]

gnome wrote:

 It was the membership of the SPGB which overwhelmingly passed, at its 2017 Conference, a motion to conduct a survey of its membership with the Executive Committee empowered to agree the precise terms of reference.  Ex-members were (rightly) not included and neither were Companion Parties. Once the findings of the survey have been collated, others will have access to it, as has already been stated, and will be welcome to comment on it should they choose.

 Dave – just a thought.  Once the findings of the survey have been collated why not then actively make sure ex  members and companion parties have access to these findings and actively solicit any comments that  they might want to make as additional or supplementary  information the committee might want to append to its final report?  The key here is to be proactive.  You cant  expect people to know anything about what is happening just becuase the information is "accessible" on the internet.  You've got to shove it under their noses! My old mate, the late John Howel, used to tell me a story about when he was a salesman for some US company operating in the UK (if I remember correctly) .  In response to the old adage "you can bring a horse to water but you cant make it drink" his boss came out with a witty riposte. "John", he said in his American drawl, "your job is not to make the horse drink; your job is to make it thirsty" I like that,  The same lesson should be applied to the way the Party conducts its own propaganda.  Ex members are likely to become more "thirsty" on hearing what is happening in the Party than any other target segment of the population

[Bijou Drains]

gnome wrote:

Sorry to bring all you far-flung 'advisers' back to reality but none of you seemingly has any idea about the difficulties the party is presently facing.  The handful (literally) of comrades, some, no doubt, "aging (sic) and stagnant", who are currently undertaking the administration of the party had a mammoth task identifying the email addresses of existing members (we only presently have around 220 valid email addresses) let alone contemplate including those who have left "going back say, 10 years".  Those without email addresses will have had their survey sent to them by post.It was the membership of the SPGB which overwhelmingly passed, at its 2017 Conference, a motion to conduct a survey of its membership with the Executive Committee empowered to agree the precise terms of reference.  Ex-members were (rightly) not included and neither were Companion Parties. Once the findings of the survey have been collated, others will have access to it, as has already been stated, and will be welcome to comment on it should they choose.

Hi GnomeI wasn't having a pop, I meant stagnant in terms of size. As I have suggested previously perhaps working in a way that allows regional members to take on more of the task currently being undertaken by members in the South East would be a way forward. I had put my name forward for the EC last year, but consideration of the time involved in travelling back and forward to London once a month (which would probably require an over night stop on occasions, made me realise that at this point in my life (with work and family commitments) that this would not be possible. This does not mean that I, and very probably others in the regional branches and central branch, would not be willing to take on tasks for the party if possible.It is clear that if it is a mammoth task even to identify email addresses of party members, etc. that the administrative side of the party is in a bit of disarray. This is not a criticism of the members who have taken on these tasks, they have striven to complete them, however it seems obvious to me that we need professional admin help. I know that in my area getting hold of a admin specialist on a self employed basis to carry out these tasks would not be difficult. This would then release party members from the admin tasks, which a professionally qualified worker would do more effectively and efficiently than a lay person could do, and allow party members energies to be used more usefully to carry out the task of spreading socialist ideas, which only socialists can do.

[ALB]

robbo203 wrote:

It doesnt surely take that much for the committee to enlarge its brief to carry out a second survey using the data on the computer system and perhaps a third survey with regard to the companion parties.

I am afraid it is not as simple as that. The data on the computer system was out of date and incomplete and had to be completed by trawling through emails from members to Head Office, application forms, and asking branch secretaries. There has been no email list for communicating with members individually.Nor can the committee change its brief just like that. It was set up in response to specific resolutions voted by Conference this year. The survey is only the first part of its brief. There have been surveys in the past but nothing concrete has emerged from them. This is why this committee's terms of reference include making specific proposals to amend the Rulebook.For the record, here's what its terms of reference are:

Quote:

A. To consult the membership on the current and future organisational structure of the Party, in particular on how Party members and sympathisers can participate, including electronically, in setting priorities.B. To look at the implications, in terms of amendments to the rulebook, decision-making procedures and workload at Head Office, should the Party become a national membership organisation.C. To submit a report to the EC in time for it to be presented to 2018 Annual Conference.

As you can see, the survey is only the first part of its work.  The second part is equally important. Changes to the way the Party makes decisions, e.g. converting branches into "activity groups" or allowing any 5 members to propose motions to a general meeting of members, electronic voting, or whatever, will require a change to the Rules, which can only be done by a vote of the membership.

[Bijou Drains]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

Tim, i may well be a pessimist (i prefer to consider it realism) but i am also a very patient person…I've waited this long so i can wait a bit longer to see how things develop, as i recommended in a previous post. We can learn from our mistakes…but we have to know what have been the mistakes to rectify them.

I was only pulling your leg, Alan. I know you are anything but the stereotypical East of Scotland, Calvinist ifluenced, doom monger I paint you as. I expect all of those years watching Hearts/Hibs/Feranti Thistle (delete as appropriate) have left you a cheery arsed delight to be with

[robbo203]

ALB wrote:

robbo203 wrote:

It doesnt surely take that much for the committee to enlarge its brief to carry out a second survey using the data on the computer system and perhaps a third survey with regard to the companion parties.

I am afraid it is not as simple as that. The data on the computer system was out of date and incomplete and had to be completed by trawling through emails from members to Head Office, application forms, and asking branch secretaries. There has been no email list for communicating with members individually.Nor can the committee change its brief just like that. It was set up in response to specific resolutions voted by Conference this year. The survey is only the first part of its brief. There have been surveys in the past but nothing concrete has emerged from them. This is why this committee's terms of reference include making specific proposals to amend the Rulebook.For the record, here's what its terms of reference are:

Quote:

A. To consult the membership on the current and future organisational structure of the Party, in particular on how Party members and sympathisers can participate, including electronically, in setting priorities.B. To look at the implications, in terms of amendments to the rulebook, decision-making procedures and workload at Head Office, should the Party become a national membership organisation.C. To submit a report to the EC in time for it to be presented to 2018 Annual Conference.

As you can see, the survey is only the first part of its work.  The second part is equally important. Changes to the way the Party makes decisions, e.g. converting branches into "activity groups" or allowing any 5 members to propose motions to a general meeting of members, electronic voting, or whatever, will require a change to the Rules, which can only be done by a vote of the membership.

  OK fair enough.  I take the point about the committee not being able to change its brief but is there anything to stop its findings be made proactively available to others outside of the SPGB along the lines I suggested in response to Dave's post? Perhaps the EC could initiate or sanction such a move? Certainly this wouldnt be a problem as far as companion parties are concerned and I think Marcos is right to stress the need to involve these parties.  With regard to ex members I agree that it might be a more difficult problem because of the difficulty of accessing contact details.  But even if you were to focus on only the most accessible contact details if would surely be better than nothing, If  the exercise bore fruit it would justify the effot involved in a more thorough or comprehensive search for contact details.  Personally, though its not for me to say, I would recommend sending out the findings to even just a sample of ex-members at first  and seeing what transpires….  You never know what might happen until you try it.  This is one of the things that I think the SPGB needs to do to reorgainse itself – namely to be more experimental in its approach and try new things even at the risk of failure

[Brian]

ALB wrote:

robbo203 wrote:

It doesnt surely take that much for the committee to enlarge its brief to carry out a second survey using the data on the computer system and perhaps a third survey with regard to the companion parties.

I am afraid it is not as simple as that. The data on the computer system was out of date and incomplete and had to be completed by trawling through emails from members to Head Office, application forms, and asking branch secretaries. There has been no email list for communicating with members individually.Nor can the committee change its brief just like that. It was set up in response to specific resolutions voted by Conference this year. The survey is only the first part of its brief. There have been surveys in the past but nothing concrete has emerged from them. This is why this committee's terms of reference include making specific proposals to amend the Rulebook.For the record, here's what its terms of reference are:

Quote:

A. To consult the membership on the current and future organisational structure of the Party, in particular on how Party members and sympathisers can participate, including electronically, in setting priorities.B. To look at the implications, in terms of amendments to the rulebook, decision-making procedures and workload at Head Office, should the Party become a national membership organisation.C. To submit a report to the EC in time for it to be presented to 2018 Annual Conference.

As you can see, the survey is only the first part of its work.  The second part is equally important. Changes to the way the Party makes decisions, e.g. converting branches into "activity groups" or allowing any 5 members to propose motions to a general meeting of members, electronic voting, or whatever, will require a change to the Rules, which can only be done by a vote of the membership.

Now that the distribution is mainly completed and the collating already started the committee is looking at breaking down B. into three separate categories: Rules; decision-making process; and workload.  None of which can be treated in isolation of each other due to their interconnections and interdependency on one another.  It probably means we'll be working flat out to get the report in front of the EC by the 19th January 2018.  Presently, I'm listing the lessons learned from the distribution exercise, which will more than likely have a major impact on the workload issues and problems at HO.

[Anonymous]

This is only a managerial move

[alanjjohnstone]

I think we all understand our problem of too much work on too few shoulders. It is not just a national organisational issue but i am sure every branch locally suffers similarly and may well explain their lack of activity.One solution would be bringing those "far-flung" members within the Party and WSM closer.The blog knows only too well that such a suggestion is easier said than accomplished (as we have made our own overtures to coax more involvement from around the world) which is a bit of a quandary because computers should have ended political isolation. I think this is a concern that has to be addressed and as now been explained, this review was not set up wide enough to include looking at things from a WSM level – a weakness of the original conference motion.And it must be something the SPGB and the Companion Parties return to – how to make the WSM a more unified and identifiable entity – the base of world socialism.There is no need for rancour or animousity in this debate but the risk of offending comrades feelings shouldn't discourage criticism. 

[Brian]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

I think we all understand our problem of too much work on too few shoulders. It is not just a national organisational issue but i am sure every branch locally suffers similarly and may well explain their lack of activity.One solution would be bringing those "far-flung" members within the Party and WSM closer.The blog knows only too well that such a suggestion is easier said than accomplished (as we have made our own overtures to coax more involvement from around the world) which is a bit of a quandary because computers should have ended political isolation. I think this is a concern that has to be addressed and as now been explained, this review was not set up wide enough to include looking at things from a WSM level – a weakness of the original conference motion.And it must be something the SPGB and the Companion Parties return to – how to make the WSM a more unified and identifiable entity – the base of world socialism.There is no need for rancour or animousity in this debate but the risk of offending comrades feelings shouldn't discourage criticism. 

In my opinion, at this present moment in time, we need to stay firmly focused on the issue and problems at hand by returning the survey/questionnaire sooner rather than later.

[alanjjohnstone]

Indeed every member should be urged to return this survey  ASAP, as you say. See my message #15It will also be an excellent measure of our membership numbers…those willing to be counted. 

[ALB]

By the way, if there's anybody out there who has some time to devote to Party admin work there is one important post that needs to be filled — Standing Orders Committee. This is the committee that prepares the agenda for Conference and ADM. There is currently a vacancy. The work can be done electronically from home (and currently is). The printing and sending out of the agendas can be done by somebody else at Head Office.There is also a vacancy for Central Branch Secretary which can (and was) done from home. This involves keeping the branch membership list up-to-date, reminding them to pay voluntary contributions, and welcoming new members,

[Anonymous]

ALB wrote:

There is also a vacancy for Central Branch Secretary which can (and was) done from home. This involves keeping the branch membership list up-to-date, reminding them to pay voluntary contributions, and welcoming new members,

Except that under the terms of the revised Rule 2 members are not required to pay contributions, voluntary or otherwise.Relevant extract from Rule 2 – Members contribute to the achievement of the Party object in accordance with their abilities and means which may include the propagation of ideas, active participation, financial contributions and encouraging others to become Socialist.  (emphasis added)

[Brian]

gnome wrote:

ALB wrote:

There is also a vacancy for Central Branch Secretary which can (and was) done from home. This involves keeping the branch membership list up-to-date, reminding them to pay voluntary contributions, and welcoming new members,

Except that under the terms of the revised Rule 2 members are not required to pay contributions, voluntary or otherwise.Relevant extract from Rule 2 – Members contribute to the achievement of the Party object in accordance with their abilities and means which may include the propagation of ideas, active participation, financial contributions and encouraging others to become Socialist.  (emphasis added)

Nonetheless, has we move forward, this post is going to be very important in regards to "keeping the branch membership list up-to-date" and putting out the welcome mat.  Indeed, I strongly suspect – once the cross referencing is completed on the survey/questionnaire with other lists – we'll find that many Central Branch members (and others) will be lapsed through lack/loss of contact.  Especially when it comes to the older members!

[Anonymous]

ALB wrote:

By the way, if there's anybody out there who has some time to devote to Party admin work there is one important post that needs to be filled — Standing Orders Committee. This is the committee that prepares the agenda for Conference and ADM. There is currently a vacancy. The work can be done electronically from home (and currently is). The printing and sending out of the agendas can be done by somebody else at Head Office.There is also a vacancy for Central Branch Secretary which can (and was) done from home. This involves keeping the branch membership list up-to-date, reminding them to pay voluntary contributions, and welcoming new members,

We may have a taker for both these jobs…

[Brian]

The distribution figures are 220 by email and 133 by post.  Please note that due to some anomalies this total figure of 353 is the approximate figure for membership. To arrive at a definitive figure will require further work by someone other than the adhoc committee. Once the returns for the survey/questionnaire are all in I'll post them here.Please fill in the survey/questionnaire a.s.a.p.

[Author]

Posts