Changes between Version 7 and Version 8 of projects/leadership-committee/process

Timestamp:

Nov 16, 2011, 6:31:29 PM (14 years ago)

Author:

Hilary Goldstein

Comment:

--

projects/leadership-committee/process

@@ -25 +25 @@
 Direction is long term. Infrastructure, Collaboration, Message/Communication and, at times Staffing, can be opportunity based and more time-sensitive.
 
-HG: weekly staff meetings are where issues are discussed and decisions made.  many issues are tabled for future meetings, but decisions are made on a weekly basis.  These meetings include staff, co directors, sometimes support team members and other lc members who do a lot of work with MF/PL.  Whether these meetings are open to more involvement/participation is a question to consider.
+HG: weekly staff meetings are where a lot of the day to day issues are discussed and decisions made.  many issues are tabled for future meetings, but decisions are made on a weekly basis.  These meetings include staff, co directors, sometimes support team members and other lc members who do a lot of work with MF/PL.  Whether these meetings are open to more involvement/participation is a useful question.
 
 === Scope ===
@@ -62 +62 @@
 What have the benefits of the decision-making process to date been? What have the drawbacks been?
 
-HG: what I see as an important clarification is to decide what decisions should be made by staff, directors, lc and support team.  for example - some sample ideas: should there be an approval process for equipments charges of a certain amount; conference requests; new member requests; when tech upgrades are needed; etc.  at what point can working groups have autonomy over operations and what decisions need larger leadership review?  I think that's the critical question.
+HG: I think the above questions are important, but I think we also need to start brainstorming which kinds of content decisions should be made by staff, directors, lc and support team.  for example - some sample ideas: should there be an approval process for equipments charges above a certain amount; conference requests; new member requests; when tech upgrades are needed; etc.  at what point can working groups have autonomy over their work and what decisions need larger leadership review?  I think that's the critical question.