First Draft of Proposal for Management Teams

Gathers to analyze and address the relations between systems at different levels: the systems that emerge among us as members of the occupation itself, local and regional systems, and large-scale systems (national or international, for instance). We are committed to developing workable proposals for concrete action at all three levels. Our conversations aim to link the movement's practical and theoretical concerns together in the service of collective and individual growth.

First Draft of Proposal for Management Teams

Postby JerryB » Tue Nov 29, 2011 3:37 pm

Management Teams

The operation of Occupy Eugene is evolving. It started with pure consensus with no leaders, then when that proved unmanageable we went to 90% consensus (80% in some circumstances) and we went to the spokes council system (Committees) to make working groups more manageable. The spokes councils select a spokesperson to present the results of their work to the GA.

By now most of the Committees know which people are the most effective in their groups. In many cases an individual has shouldered most of the responsibilities, but these individuals are overworked and getting burned out.

We propose management teams to help the committees get things done and to help out those de facto leaders who are so overworked, to allow them to take an occasional break, and to train and have replacements in case of illness or other business.

1. Management teams shall be composed of at least three people with at least one person of a different sex. Each of the team members shall share or rotate equal responsibilities, duties, and power.
2. Each committee shall choose their management team and define their duties and responsibilities. Those duties might include being contact people, facilitating the meetings, taking notes, book keeping, organizing, overseeing work parties, training others, and presenting requests and proposals to the GA.
3. Each team will be free to use different management tools to allow the committees to be more efficient, but the emphasis should be on cooperation and compromise of the committee to bring about the best outcome. For example if the Finance Committee has ten financial requests for projects, they might decide to use instant runoff voting or preferential voting amongst the committee, to determine the projects that are the highest priority, and to determine the best use of limited funds. If they need to purchase supplies they should get at least three bids, and could use preferential voting of the workgroup, to choose the best option since there might be other factors besides cost to consider.
4. The GA should choose a negotiations and PR or Media team or workgroup (which chooses their team) that will represent OE and the views agreed upon by the GA. It is important that outside agencies or the media speak to the best communicators that know the will of OE, and to have the same consistent people the outside agencies can contact and work with.
5. The GA shall oversee and approve of the work of the committees and shall determine the scope and responsibilities of the committees without having to be involved in the minutia of the individual workgroups.
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2011 10:20 pm

Return to Systemic Change Working Group

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest