[Board] President elect and limiting terms

[Jeff McKenna]

Hi Arnulf, Cameron, Peter,

I would agree that having a President Elect (or "Vice President") that
will take over the president role after the current president's term,
is a no-brainer.

Like Peter, I've been involved in another Board with a similar
process. The Board's "executive" is made up of the current President,
the past President (who stays on one year after term), and the VP.
Only the executive plus the Treasurer have signing privileges to
manage the financials (issue to bring up later, but I want to
establish this).  Some very important decisions may come to the
executive over the years.  It is great to have several involved for
these types of decisions.

On that Board, the presidential term was/is 2 years.

Honestly, one of my very initial reactions to Arnulf's email was "wow,
I'm just adapting to new role, one year is way too short". In fact
today/tonight is my first public appearance as president, so-to-speak.
 It takes months to learn what the role is, how to adapt to daily
important email messages on your plate, change your focus, manage your
other commitments.

In fact I've begun taking some leadership modules, and I am beginning
to grow into the position (Arnulf had several years to grow into that
position).  I'm learning that leadership is about having a vision and
helping your organization attain that vision - and this takes time.

So I am a strong +1 for establishing a Board executive.  I am a strong
-1 on a short one year Presidential term.  I'm even hesitant to put a
limit on it now (I feel I've just begun).

-jeff



On 2013-03-23 9:05 AM, Arnulf Christl wrote:
> Folks, I just cast my ballot for the president and president elect
> of the IGS and this reminded me of a task I did not conclude when
> still on the board of OSGeo.
> 
> My suggestion was to have a double election and add a president
> elect / vice president to the game but we never got to actually
> talk this through to the end. Having this in place would bring more
> continuity to the organization and take some weight off the running
> president.
> 
> So far this was not too much of an issue but before the end of my 
> presidency I did have to commit to several activities which would
> take place after I had left. Fortunately Jeff could take on some of
> them (thanks for this) and others were happy to have me give talks
> even although I was then just a commoner.
> 
> The second thing I had originally planned to bring to the board
> before me term ended was to limit the term of the presidency to a
> fixed time (after which there is no way of returning?). It appear
> that being president elect for one year and then president for
> another is a good idea. This would help the active presidents to
> end their term without having to explain why. For me it was
> exceptionally painful to not run for another presidency because
> there was this general sentiment that I "step down" instead of just
> end a regular term. Which somehow required me to give a reason
> which I sort of did but in an awkward and unhelpful way. It felt
> like disappointing so many people and caused more friction that
> necessary.
> 
> Having a president elect role would also allow the individual to
> grow into their position and take on the responsibility gradually,
> likewise allow the president to take a holiday or drop off the grid
> for a while without the organization appearing to be headless.
> 
> My proposal to the board is to have a dialog about this. The more
> I think about it the more of a no-brainer it seems to be and many 
> organizations do it that way. Nothing is permanent, everything is
> in a flow and our organization should not be an exception. Having
> a president and president elect allows to have smooth transition.
> 
> 
> All the best, Arnulf
> 
>