Re: how does an exec meeting work?
- From: "GAGS" <absolutecrapgags.nw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 10:53:15 +0100
"Ewan Scott" <ewanscott@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:515652ppuc9ja9b00a3qhaloj1bhrr293q@xxxxxxxxxx
to
It's the occasions 'in the middle' where sometimes there can be a bit of
mis-understanding leading to a bit of 'friction'. For example, you want
andbuy some expensive camping gear and there's enough money to support the
purchase, however, your programme isn't geared to doing a lot of camping
thatexperience might be very low, then it would be correct for the GEC to
question the purchase and maybe ask whether it was appropriate (at this
time) or the best use of funds. Leaders can then sometimes get the idea
it'sthe GEC is saying no and being a nuisance and blocking leaders whereas
actually saying 'think again'.
That may or may not be the case. But it isn't really up to the GEC to
say no anyway.
Which is what I said. :-)
Let's say a group has some old equipment and the
leaders don't like using Patrol tents and Dining Shelters, Tilley
Lamps and Primus Stoves ( If there are any unwanted ones around - I'll
buy them). So, they don't do much camping. They feel that if they
have new six man Khayams, battery powered, or wind up lights, a camp
kitchen and a mess tent, that they would do more camping, then the
Exec has no right saying you don't camp now so you can't have in
future.
Absolutely correct. I would still assert that it would be correct for a GEC
to question whether it was an appropriate purchase at that time (what I said
above!) and thus ask the leader(s) to review their request and back it up
with something that will show the purchase will be appropriate and will be
used (which is what you said). The GEC would be correct in saying 'hold on a
minute' if evidence showed there was little use of it in the past and no
plans for use of it in the future.
If my Exec operated in that fashion we would never have planted 150m
of hedging, we would never have developed the Archery facility, the
kayaking facility or the pioneering or sound and light facilies.
if an exec operates on the basis that you don't do it now, so we won't
fund it tomorroe, then it is failing.
Correct.
It does not matter one iota if a
group spends £1,000 on computer equipment and it gets used only once
or twice.
I think it does matter! No one wants to see £1000's worth of assets being
left to gather dust. If there was a plan at the time of purchase to make
full use of it then that's fine, even if, due to unforeseen circumstances,
it doesn't get used as much or hardly at all.
It is the leaders' job to say: 'We would like to buy this', it is the GEC's
job to say: 'Why?' If the leaders say: 'Because we're going to do this and
have plans to do this - and all have been carefully thought out', then the
GEC should be saying: 'Great! How can we help you?' However, if the leaders
say: 'Don't know really, haven't given it much thought at the moment, just
think it may be okay for us, etc', then the GEC is perfectly entitled to
say: 'Okay we want to go along with you on this, but can you have a few more
thoughts about how it's going to be used and come back with some more
concrete ideas next meeting? Once you've got things clearer in your head
then we can look at ways in which we can realise your plans'.
It at least is an attempt to do something. The key is making
sure that the funding for any such project does not impinge of what is
already being done.
Correct.
There is an argument that the 5th has the equipment and the 6th
doesn't, so the two groups can share kit. The reality is that if the
6th borrow the 5th's kit it raises difficulties about drying, storage,
repairs to damage, even in how it gets used. Better to neither a
borrower nor lender be.
Of course!
It's about the two teams - leaders and GEC - working together on the same
aim. I think a GEC would be failing in its responsibilities if a leader came
to it and said out of the blue: 'Can we have £x's to buy all this stuff' and
the GEC said: 'Fine, here's the cheque, do what you like' without any
concept of what the stuff was, how it was to be used, what scouting it would
support, etc.
Coomons and Lords, GSM and GEC, is the sort of parallel I think about.
Seems to me that some people have got their responsibilities mixed up!The responsibilities of the Execs are in B&W, however, they can, as
It's all in POR in B&W. Some people it seems need to do a bit of bedtime
reading!
always be interpreted in different ways.
Off course! I've seen many a case where people want to totally divorce the
workings of an EC from the leaders and programmes it's supposed to support
and strongly believe that's what it says in POR, etc.
That is the problem here. We
look at things in basically the same way in this case, but the Exec
that is the subject obviously reads things differently - that is if
they have read POR at all!
Agreed!
Crikey! I've only been back a minute and now I'm agreeing with you!
GAGS
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: how does an exec meeting work?
- From: Ewan Scott
- Re: how does an exec meeting work?
- References:
- how does an exec meeting work?
- From: poison dwarf
- Re: how does an exec meeting work?
- From: GAGS
- Re: how does an exec meeting work?
- From: Ewan Scott
- how does an exec meeting work?
- Prev by Date: Re: Headquarters email address
- Next by Date: Narrowboat Weekend
- Previous by thread: Re: how does an exec meeting work?
- Next by thread: Re: how does an exec meeting work?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
