If the entire board deals with the question of how to become or how to remain able to work, it is running in circles, and tasks are not carried out. Both are only possible if the committee has agreed on basic internal rules and procedures and if it accepts that it needs to evolve constantly as a body.Ī board needs to keep pace with the organization’s development, to fulfill its oversight obligations at each stage of development of the organization, and at the same time support the organization, promote its development and frame its strategic direction.
But can that really always be assumed? Is it not in fact extremely difficult to come together as a group to figure out individual strengths and weaknesses, and build up trust? Two things that I think are essential for functional boards: a) the ability and willingness to delegate and b) the ability and willingness to accept and promote different positions and constructive confrontation within the board. That it manages them well and effectively, always acting and communicating openly and professionally. We often take for granted that a committee composed of individuals with different expectations, experiences and knowledge can find its way into its tasks just by itself. For simplicity, here I use the term “board” for all these bodies.
For the Wikimedia Foundation, it is the Board of Trustees, at Wikimedia France, it is the Conseil d’administration, with Wikimedia Germany, it is the Präsidium, and of course there are a number of other different names. For all the differences among the 40 regional organizations ( chapters) and one thematic organization in the Wikimedia movement, there is one feature that is found at all the registered Wikimedia organizations: a volunteer-based supervision and control committee.
0 kommentar(er)
