A thought.......
There is clearly a need for reform in RAAus. I want to offer a context in which that reform needs to occur, based on the notion of accountability. I see plenty of evidence that our Board has struggled to understand what this means for them. Hopefully recent and perhaps coming events might stimulate a steep learning curve in this regard.
I feel qualified to do this having worked as a CEO in both Government and non-Government organisations for over 30 years, mostly employed by and accountable to Boards of Directors. I have also been a member of Boards of Directors, including Chairing two of them.
The accountability of a Board of Directors is to the owners of the organisation, who are the shareholders in the corporate world or in our case, us - the members of our association. The job of the Board can simply be described as 'to see to it that the organisation produces what it should for its owners.' Were that happening in RAAus, and we the members could see that was happening, all would be sweet. The problem is that we can't see that the organisation is producing what it should, mainly because they are not communicating their achievements, and problems to the membership in an open and transparent way. This failure coupled with clear evidence of instances when the organisation has failed to act appropriately on a range of issues results in the frustration, anger and resentment expressed by so many of us. Folks it doesn't have to be that way. What we need is for the Board to step up the accountability plate and start focussing on seeing to it that the organisation produces what it should, for our sake.
You will have gathered that in my view, the nature of RAAus demands that we have a Board of Directors as opposed to a Board of Management. A board that involves itself in management is OK for the local footy club or the Lions club, it needs to be that way. We need a Board that can see the big picture, think strategically, understand what it is the organisation needs to do and where it needs to go. It doesn't need to be fettered with the responsibility of managing the organisation as well, a task for which some board members may not be competent. In our case management best left to specialist and professional managers.The board needs to set the direction, delegate the task of management to the managers and make damn sure they are doing their job. I once heard a speech by a distinguished Chairman of a number of high profile national boards. He said, 'The most important job a board will ever do is to hire a CEO, and get rid of him if he isn't doing his job'. Failure to manage competently, or to tolerate mediocrity in management at any level should be abhorrent. If an organisation has a clear distinction between the role those who govern and those who manage, and the governors truly hold the managers accountable for the management, the organisation must be on the road to success.
I am certain there are plenty of our members with the vision and the capability to think strategically and drive this organisation down the right path. There are no doubt some among the current board. Perhaps removing from them the obligation to manage and instead obliging them to be accountable for what the organisation is doing, and holding the managers accountable might set us on a better road and deliver what we the members are entitled to expect.
Sorry to be preaching folks, but I really believe this is the way forward.
By they way, holding only a couple of board meetings a year is laughable, how on earth can the board know what's happening and be accountable if it is only meeting with its CEO twice a year - give me a break!
Erik