Bylaws and Governing Documents

I read in the October issue of HMMmm an article by Robb Ruyle decrying the seemingly constant tinkering with local and national bylaws. I, too, find bylaws dull reading. But having been a part of bylaws creation and revision for three very different organizations, I understand the need and importance for periodic reassessment and amendment.

Mr. Ruyle wrote: isn’t it amazing that our Republic has endured for more than 220 years with only 37 amendments to its Constitution… That may be, but the legislative branch has been churning out and tweaking thousands of laws since day one. And the Constitution is reviewed and interpreted by the Supreme Court on a far more frequent basis than any set of Mensa bylaws.

Bylaws and other governing documents are there to tell members how things are/should/must be done. More importantly, those documents tell future members how things are/should/must be done. While we may all understand the current traditions and get along with each other just fine and dandy, who among us can know what sorts of people will take up the reins after we have retired to our easy chairs?

In Chicago Area Mensa, HalloweeM Chair Janet Century has created what we call “The Truck Document.” This is a zillion page description of every detail of running HalloweeM—best room lay out advice, contact information for vendors and rentals, several years’ worth of data about how many tubs of flavored cream cheese we use, etc. The idea is make sure that the event and the group will not suffer if the entire ‘WeeM Team gets run over by a truck (well, we expect a fair bit of emotional suffering, of course).

When I was LocSec, I started “The Long & Winding Project” which was to track down and write up for posterity all sorts of odds and ends details—how to fill out the USPS Form 3526, the code for the storage locker, the story behind our changes in banking EINs, etc. Again, the point is to ensure that whoever is running the group a dozen years from now will not have to reinvent the wheel, comb through twenty years of business minutes, or track me down in my nursing home to find an answer.

Bylaws, ASIE/Standing Orders, Truck Documents, Long & Winding Projects—they all serve the same purpose: to make it easier for current and future members to keep the organization we love running smoothly. Bylaws that were written before the Internet provide no guidance for groups wishing to hold their ExComm meetings in a chatroom. Old bylaws still prohibit groups from sharing officers—when we now want them to be able to pool their volunteer resources more easily. The IRS changes what it asks for and thus Local Groups have to change what they require from their treasurers. Times change, and so do the needs and members’ wishes about how things should be done.

On Grapevine, Beck Zoole Elkana wrote: I'd like to see everyone involved in Mensa work with the future in mind. Sure, there's a lot that can be done that *looks* good. There's a lot that can be done that might make some people feel better for a while, or that might settle old scores. Lovely. But what is the best thing to do for those who will be members 30 years from now?

Think of bylaws review and amendment the same way you would view cleaning and changing the furnace filter—not particularly interesting, but absolutely necessary lest too many years’ accumulation of gunk reduce your efficiency. Go ahead and clean it—your family will appreciate the improved warmth when the cold snap hits next year.

Closing in on GNYM

As of the end of September, Chicago Area Mensa is only 75 members behind Greater New York Mensa!

Retention Questions

Would holding dues down keep the members who are dropping out because they don't meet enough pleasant people? Will it keep icky members from quitting in a fit of pique because not enough other members gave them the warm fuzzies they feel they deserved? Will it help the members who hook up with someone, break up, and then drop out because they want to distance themselves from the pain? Will it keep members from dying?

Retention is hovering near 90%. How much better is reasonable to expect?

Groupthink and the AMC

Another question from this past spring: Some are worried that the goal of collegiality on the AMC precludes active disagreement and leads to groupthink. What do you think?

According to Wikipedia, the word collegiality connotes respect for another's commitment to the common purpose and ability to work toward it. Collegiality does not mean that the board members expect to bond together as friends. Rather it strikes me as meaning an ability to work together as respected peers rather than adversaries; this seems like a proper and reasonable goal for 21 board members to aspire to. I do not believe that mutual respect precludes disagreement when it comes to priorities and processes. 

Regarding “groupthink,” Irving Janis, who did extensive work on the subject, calls it: “A mode of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group, when the members' strivings for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action.” Nope, no groupthink on this board! I see no striving for unanimity. If anything, I see many AMC members striving to stand out from the pack: preening, posturing, and bragging about how they are the lone voice of truth and fairness on the Board. I also don’t see the 21 AMC members comprising a cohesive in-group, nor do I foresee us becoming such. A little more cohesiveness would be a good thing; right now there is a great deal of animosity and mistrust and that makes it hard to really address sensitive topics and difficult projects—we need a bit more collegiality, actually. 

A little more research about “groupthink” turned up this: Social psychologist Clark McCauley identifies three conditions under which groupthink occurs: • Directive leadership. • Homogeneity of members' social background and ideology. • Isolation of the group from outside sources of information and analysis. Once again, I don’t see any of those traits on this AMC. So perhaps it’s really not a case of groupthink when the AMC appears to circle the wagons defensively—perhaps it is simply a matter of actual agreement by a majority of the members.

Committees & Time

More Questions from Campaign Season:
What national committees would you want to be on, and why?
By fiat, I’m the Chair of the Communications Committee and a member of the Marketing and Name & Logo Committees. Traditionally, the Communications Officer is also on the Finance Committee, since I am responsible for two of the biggest budget areas.

Everything else I’m on Is because I’m really interested in it or because the Chair has requested that I be on it: Gifted Children, LG Study, LG Charter, and SIGs Advisory.

That's a total of eight committees.

How many hours a day do you expect to be able to devote to Mensa tasks?
I don't work outside the home, so my time is flexible. Somedays I spend only half an hour checking Mensa email and forums— other days, like when I'm working on a big project, I might spend four or five hours on Mensa tasks.

The “Spirit of Volunteerism”

I have read that some members fear that the 2007 AG events and controversy has killed the “spirit of volunteerism.” That sounds dreadful and certainly antithetical to the Mensa as it has been for 60 years. But the more I think about it, the less I understand. What tasks previously done by volunteers are now being denied to them?

As far as the AG went, the paid staff were assigned only two roles: Hotel liaison and Treasurer. That’s it. They also assisted with logistics, registration, and beer keg schlepping. Other than that, Mensa members did everything: Chair, Registrar, Hospitality, Programs, AV, Action Desk, Kids Trek, LDWs, Tours, Games, Security…

Which members are no longer volunteering—and why? A quick look at my Local Group shows that we have openings for a:
• Scholarship Chair—the previous guy has gone underground since a painful breakup.
• Webmaster—the fellow who had been doing it has decided he should spend more time finding a better paying job.
• South Suburbs Area Coordinator—the lady who had that position for years has grown frail and ill.
• Monthly Meeting Hospitality—this has been open for more than a year because it’s a hard job that seems to bring more complaints than compliments (remember, Chicago’s Monthly Meetings are the size of many RGs). The one guy who had been doing a great job at it quit in disgust when members wouldn’t quit sticking their fingers in the chip dip. Fortunately, we have Stacey, who is always quick to pick up any slack, so the position is “open” for someone new, but the tasks are still being done—by a volunteer.

I see no connection between anything any local or national leader has done and these gaps in our volunteer roster.

How ’bout volunteering at the national event level? Let’s see…groups of members are still excited about hosting AGs. Groups of members are still bidding on MindGames. Several member-run colloquiums are in the planning stages. Members are planning and running LDWs all over the country. Even the grievously-offended-by-the-AG southern members are putting together an RG in Memphis and advertising it nation-wide.

So how, exactly, has the “spirit of volunteerism” changed?