[Board] [EXTERNAL] President and President-elect
cameron.shorter at gmail.com
Sun Sep 1 16:31:21 PDT 2013
On 01/09/13 01:10, Seven (aka Arnulf) wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> On 31.08.2013 15:47, Smith, Michael ERDC-RDE-CRREL-NH wrote:
>> While I like the idea, I think the one year as president is a bit short.
>> Perhaps 1 year as president-elect and then 2 years as president (assuming
> thanks for your thoughts. I do believe that two years make a lot of
> sense but don't think we should extend it to three years.
> Some rationale: Obviously it would collide with our staggered approach
> to the board elections. While we could change that too I think that we
> will get a hard time finding directors who want to commit for three
> years. Asking for two years of commitment is already quite a lot of
> volunteer time. Especially the uniqueness of the president roles makes
> it even more strenuous. While you are on the board there is always an
> option to disappear for two, three weeks into holiday or some such in a
> exposed role of single president this shows a lot more.
While I see value in the concept of a fixed president term, I'm wary of
writing it into fixed requirements of a board. I'd suggest it should be
set as a "strong recommendation", or "expectation" which can be
overruled by the board of the day.
I like the idea of a president elect, but see practical limitations with
the concept. I think in most cases, I'd want to select a president elect
as someone who has had experience on the board, and who has demonstrated
leadership qualities on the board, probably after 1 year in that role.
That would give them 1 year on the board, 1 year as president elect,
then possibly being voted out at the next election.
Maybe better would be 6 months in the board, 6 months as president
elect, 12 months as president. The president role only being open to the
4 newly elected roles.
More information about the Board