'Fractured Dynamic'

[NT5224]

So I've just been reading the independent consultants review of the RAA board performance .

 

It makes fascinating reading. Can anybody explain what is meant by a 'fractured dynamic'? I'm not familiar with the term. Its certainly not appeared in any of the monthly RAA circulars to date...

 

'It was also clear that there is currently a fractured dynamic on the board

 

which is hindering the board in being able to focus on the performance of its key functions'.

 

Hmmm.....Comments?

 

Alan

 

 

[slb]

They can't agree? i.e. fractured = split

 

dynamic = may be No.4 i.e. they were very loud in their differences?

 

dynamic

 

[dʌɪˈnamɪk]

 

ADJECTIVE

 

1.  
   (of a process or system) characterized by constant change, activity, or progress.
   "a dynamic economy"
    
    
   synonyms:
   modern · liberal · advanced · forward-looking · forward-thinking ·
    
    
   [more]
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
   
2.  
   (of a person) positive in attitude and full of energy and new ideas.
   "a dynamic young advertising executive"
    
    
   synonyms:
   energetic · spirited · active · lively · zestful · vital · vigorous · strong ·
    
    
   [more]
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
   
3.  
   relating to the volume of sound produced by an instrument, voice, or recording.
    
    
    
    
   
4.  
    
   electronics
    
    
   (of a memory device) needing to be refreshed by the periodic application of a voltage.
    
    
    
    
   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NOUN

 

1.  
   a force that stimulates change or progress within a system or process.
   "evaluation is part of the basic dynamic of the project"
    
    
    
    
   
2.  
    
   music
    
    
   another term for dynamics.
    
    
    
    
   

 

 

 

 

 

 

[kasper]

Or take a look at pg22 where directors rate the chairman ... there is a very clear separation between 1 director and the rest. 

 

 

[Thruster88]

The link from today's e newsletter (board evaluation)  isn't working for me. Could someone provide a link, thanks.

 

 

[pmccarthy]

I just read the whole report, sounds like there’s is one ratbag director who is stuffing up the whole show. I don’t know any of them or who that would be. I hope they sort it out.

 

 

[old man emu]

Ratbag, or prophet being ridiculed in his own country?

 

 

[onetrack]

The term "fractured dynamic" is not one that I've heard (and I've been in business, and the business world for over 50 years). But what the writer is referring to, (with a rather poor expression of English) is a dysfunctional board.

 

The dynamics of a corporate board refer to the energy and momentum of a group of directors whose aims are all aligned, as regards the corporate direction and goals.

 

When the dynamics "fracture", it simply means that the group is no longer operating with a common aim - i.e., further progression of the corporate body - and individuals are pursuing personal agendas, or hidden agendas, that are working against the smooth functioning and common aim of the board.

 

Essentially, when this happens, it means the group leadership is weak, or the aim of the board is poorly identified, poorly spelt out, and not followed with vigour.

 

Below is an interesting and informative little article from Harvard Business Review, about effective corporate and board leadership and guidance.

 

In particular, the five "disrupter" elements need to be studied and absorbed by those who wish to improve their leadership and guidance ability, in relation to corporate boards and corporate aims.

 

A More Effective Board of Directors

 

 

[spacesailor]

" a fractured dynamic on the board"

 

Just a Bureaucratic Upmanship !.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[frank marriott]

Not an unexpected result given that the “take over” was based in division.  Only achieved by the unprecedented soliciting of 800 proxy votes by a core few (legal yes, ethical and in the best interest of the organisation - well that is up to the individual member to decide for themselves).

 

Good leadership requires inclusive decisions, effective debate and informed reasoning to achieve a desired outcome which will then be supported at all levels within the organisation.  Dictorial stlye decision making can only achieve contempt.  

 

Open and inclusive communications is essential.

 

Interestingly the director’s remuneration comes up again.  The big statement by M.Monk of “it will not happen on my watch” ‘might’ be tested - the obvious question, as was raised at the time giving rise the the statement, why was the process included in the new constitution if was not intended to be used.  (Again emphasising “open, effective, inclusive and factually correct communication)

 

 

[billwoodmason]

Wasn’t there a reference in the Sport Pilot before last in Monke’s column about four directors in opposition to his actions and he asked the readers if it was time for him to GO, inviting readers to comment?. No reference to it in this month’s mag tho.

 

 

[facthunter]

How would the average reader know whether that is the case? If you want a vote on issues, you need to be open and have people informed. We tried that, and how many bother to vote. Apathy gets you where you are.. Nev

 

 

[NT5224]

Glad that others have found and read the report. It’s  obviously an important document.

 

 I noted as Frank does that the review seems to be paving the way to  a proposal for board remuneration.

 

Two years ago I voted (by proxy -I was in the Middle East), against the current corporate structure. I felt strongly that the changes worked against the interests of  the rank and file membership and recreational  aviation, but was happy to accept the will of the majority  and throw support behind the new arrangement. 

 

Reading the independent consultants report is illuminating. People are people,  and every decision-making group has personalities who clash. That’s to be expected (Im on a board myself and so is my wife).  But what the report says is that these issues are not being managed and are hindering the performance of the board. It’s not pointing the finger at individuals but commenting on the performance of  the board and it’s processes as a whole. A recommendation has been made that this same underperforming board is remunerated. 

 

Who recalls the arguments made  two years ago that moving to the new board structure would save the organisation money?  The report states some board members don’t pull their weight and read board papers or contribute. To my mind those are wasted positions. 

 

I gotta admit the current board have made a number of positive changes and got some early runs. However  the findings of this consultant report paints a rather  different picture to  that  which is communicated between RAA and it’s membership. It’s worth a read.

 

But finally, kudos to the board for publishing the report, warts and all. It was good  corporate practice to do so. Let’s make sure it’s widely read.

 

Cheers

 

Alan

 

 

[pmccarthy]

One of the main jobs of a chairman is to manage the board so it works. If someone is pulling the other way it is the chairman’s job to have a quiet word and sort it out.

 

 

[nomadpete]

And what if a 'quiet word' fails to achieve cohesion within the board? Does that mean the chairman has failed and must step down? That would only empower the disruptive individual (if, indeed he/she is disruptive - in their own mind that are not). It can be difficult to bring any bunch of people together with a common goal. Our Board members do not get to choose their fellow board members.

 

 

[facthunter]

 Once you elect people, they are there by a structure that is not dependent on them being the "first choice or even approved" by the other board members. An elected person could only be removed if they contravene some corporate law  or criminal  law. as "Not a  suitable person to serve" concept which would have to be substantiated/justified if applied. Boards have  quorums and have issues they "vote" on and rules about a chairman's casting vote if tied otherwise so unanimity is not required. The system is able to cope with dissent also. SO what's the big deal?.  Nev

 

 

[Downunder]

What if the problem IS the chairman....?

 

 

[pmccarthy]

I don’t know the people or facts in this case. But I have a lot of years as chairman and know what the responsibility is. The chairman is “ first among equals” and no more than that, but he or she must make the board function. If counselling didn’t work then the chairman would consider his position. A disfunctional board cannot serve the members well.

 

 

[frank marriott]

I don’t know the people or facts in this case. But I have a lot of years as chairman and know what the responsibility is. The chairman is “ first among equals” and no more than that, but he or she must make the board function. If counselling didn’t work then the chairman would consider his position. A disfunctional board cannot serve the members well.

Getting close to the issue I suspect, given my experience with the attitude of the current chairman when I was on the board. A major reason I would not even consider standing under the new set up.

 

(And I am aware of certain current issues)

 

 

[kaz3g]

Very difficult to discipline an elected Board member if they won’t be disciplined unless their actions become unlawful or fail to comply with organisation rules that allow for dismissal if in breach.

 

this could occur for example if the Board members actions bring the organisation into disrepute and his membership of the organisation is cancelled on that basis.

 

Another way would be if the Board voted by majority for a spill.

 

but also difficult to run an organisation if one member constantly acts rogue.

 

Kaz

 

 

[NotSoSuperSonic]

Are you Mob sure the public release of the review of the RAAus Board is not a diversionary or misdirection type tactic?  The action seems a bit too honest and transparent for RAAus, and doesn't match their standard 'Modus Operandi'.  Cheers

 

 

[facthunter]

 Anything's possible, but publishing an external revue is pretty much a required action/ response, once it's  concluded.. One should not be blind to what the Organisation does well, when it does, and also criticise  (fairly ) what it fails to do well if and when it does. They are not entitled to rely on undue secrecy, (like any other GOVERNING body)  Nev

 

 

[kaz3g]

 Anything's possible, but publishing an external revue is pretty much a required action/ response, once it's  concluded.. One should not be blind to what the Organisation does well, when it does, and also criticise  (fairly ) what it fails to do well if and when it does. They are not entitled to rely on undue secrecy, (like any other GOVERNING body)  Nev

 

Just remember the golden rule...always release before a long weekend.

 

kaz

 

 

[facthunter]

  That applies with the MSM, where what they print and when they print it and IF they don't bother to print it says it all. The golden rule is "those who have the Gold make all the rules". If you aren't a sceptic here by middle age you have been somewhere else, not here.   Nev .

 

 

[Mike Borgelt]

The joke here is that CASA wants to give dysfunctional organisations like RAAus and GFA monopoly control of their respective aviation activities under Part 149.

 

So much for aviation safety and "safe skies for all".

 

Some years ago GFA hired a professional sports administrator out of the UK. He lasted a few weeks beacsue he found out how it dysfunctioned and fled back home. The full story was never revealed to the members.

 

Time to end this farce.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

how hard is it to organise a vote to increase members fees? can't be that hard, all the other decisions are made by the CEO