Conference 7.286::dcu

    
    
    Based on all the XX's in this report, it looks like Phil was held out
    for sacrifice by the other "Exec Cmmte" members... Perhaps it wasn't in
    the best interests of the entire board for Phil not to attend the 
    "training", but I have a hard time with someone getting raked over the
    coals, esp. in this case where it seems the training was geared to have
    Phil lockstep with the rest of the board.  It's healthy to have
    disagreement and different ideas... perhaps the BOD should take the
    "Communication and Conflict Resolution" course along with the DCU mgmt.
    
    
    
    personally, I hope Dave, Chris, and Phil are elected and that Chuck's
    contract comes up again for 1/1/95... Better start looking for a new
    job Chuck...
    
    As for "member focus" groups... I can only hope the DCU mgmt doesn't
    get to "select" the members for the groups... Because, I have a feeling
    they'll get the notes postings and ensure that any names found in Notes
    don't get invited... so that they can still have their allusions that
    the all the membership is happy with their performance and ability to 
    communicate.
    
    
    	John

    
    RE: . 1
    
    I attended a similar "exercise" in December and it was established that
    my expectations that the Board would meet for whatever time was
    necessary to accomplish its work was a false expectation on my part
    (Paul's too).  You see, leaving meetings before the meeting is done is
    not a sign that you don't allocate enough time to perform your Board
    duties, it is a sign that the meetings are running too long.  It was
    very clear to me at that point what these meetings were; march to this
    tune and in this direction and everything will be fine.
    
    It also doesn't help trying to defeat the sitting Chairman of the Board
    in an ongoing election.  Hardly the direction and march they had hoped.
    But I will continue to do what I feel is the right thing and in the bestinterests
    of the MEMBERSHIP at large.  I cannot allow any hurt feelings on the
    part of other Board members or DCU management to get in the way.  I
    expected flack from the other Board members and my expectations have
    been and continue to be realized.
    

    
>perhaps the BOD should take the
>    "Communication and Conflict Resolution" course along with the DCU mgmt.
    
    That is my understanding of what the "training" that Phil did not
    attend was supposed to be. Perhaps Phil can fill in some details.
    
    		Alfred

    
    What details do you want?
    

    

Minutes from 25 January:

   > He (Mr. Cockburn) further noted that it is far better to reward the
   > members by paying better rates than to reward some members after the
   > fact in the form of a bonus dividend or interest refund.
    
   "Far better" according to whom?  Was the membership specifically 
   asked about this?  I don't remember such a question.

   > Mr. Cockburn emphatically stated that it would be irresponsible for
   > any Board member to approve any bonus dividend or interest refund to
   > the membership at this time.
    
   Where does this guy get his gall? 

   > Mr. Cockburn explained that Mr. Gransewicz is incorrect in stating
   > that the members have a negative opinion of DCU.  DCU has improved in
   > every category of the member survey.

    Even a fool knows that you can make a survey that will return what
    you want it to.  Since BoD and DCU management members are reported
    to be reading this file, I'd like to know how the volumes of data
    here are figured into the mix.  My guess is that they aren't.  My
    further guess is that they're reading this file primarily to figure
    out how to counteract the dissenters.

   > He also added that a bonus dividend would equal a small, insignificant
   > amount of money for each member, but would significantly reduce DCU's
   > capital ratio.

   Blew it again, Chuck.  The amount of $$ in the dividend is irrelevant.
   The VALUE of the goodwill you would generate, however, is something
   you clearly don't understand.
   
   > She added that DCU's mission is to grow capital.

   This is why there is a much larger number of dissatisfied members 
   than is being admitted to.

   
   Re: Executive Committee Meeting of February 3

    Why was it so important to finalize Chuck Cockburn's contract by 
    January 1?  What's in the contract after all?  I wonder whether 
    January 1 was important or whether it was just to be sure it took
    place before the upcoming election.  

    Regarding the interogation of Phil about his not attending the 
    teambuilding...  They're getting nervous as election time approaches
    AND with good reason.

    
    Steve

    

>    Based on all the XX's in this report, it looks like Phil was held out
>    for sacrifice by the other "Exec Cmmte" members... Perhaps it wasn't in
>    the best interests of the entire board for Phil not to attend the 
>    "training", but I have a hard time with someone getting raked over the
>    coals, 
    
    Interesting.  This level of concern wasn't voiced when discussion
    against the bonus dividend wasn't posted, nor when another director's
    attendance practices were questioned.

    And from all accounts another director's attendance practices didn't
    raise so much fuss from the Board either!
    

    
    RE: .6
    
>    Interesting.  This level of concern wasn't voiced when discussion
>    against the bonus dividend wasn't posted, nor when another director's
>    attendance practices were questioned.
    
    Again, I can't be held responsible for the fact that other Directors
    won't write to this conference.  As far as I know their keyboards and
    fingers are fully functional.
    
    And I think you are referring to repeated threats of resignation and
    not attendance practices, even though that was brought up subsequently
    with regards to the same person.
    

    
    >    What details do you want?

    Was the purpose of the meeting, that you (Phil) missed, to improve
    communication and help resolve conflict? Was it at least advertised
    as such (if you believe the real purpose was otherwise?)

    			Alfred

    
    I can't remember what it was billed as.  But after spending four hours
    of DIGITAL time at the first one, the one "problem" that was "resolved"
    was the issue of leaving meetings early.  The "resolution" was that the
    meetings were too long, not that people needed to allocate more time to
    take care of business.
    
    I sure wish candidates would indicate AHEAD of time if they only have
    X numbers of hours to spare for a meeting.  Dave & Chris, how much time
    can you devote to a Board meeting if you're elected?
    

    
    Re:
    
>    Dave & Chris, how much time
>    can you devote to a Board meeting if you're elected?
    
    I believe that serving as a director should be looked at as a privilege
    granted to oneself by the membership. Given that I would, if elected,
    be willing to put in a substantial amount of time per month. Even 20
    hours a month including meetings does not seem excessive. Of course I
    would like there to be some norm as to how long board meetings are
    scheduled for and I would work to try and get the necessary business
    conducted within that time. If the time scheduled for the meetings were
    too short I think the right answer is to schedule more time for future
    meetings.
    
    Dave
    

re:  .10
I would not be a candidate in the election if there was not sufficient
time in my schedule to be a Director.  So, I guess I echo Dave's comment
earlier. Within reason, I'll commit whatever time is necessary to get
the job done.

A director needs to understand that time must be allocated for attending
meetings, preparing for these meetings, interacting with members, talking
to other directors and management, etc.  In my view, not having sufficient
time to fully attend the majority of meetings on a regular basis is
inexcusable.  

I think I have ample time to do this work.  I've discussed this same
issue already with my Digital management, and they've expressed support.
My schedule is flexible enough to allow me to do Digital's work and still
have time to give DCU a good deal of time.  If I couldn't do it, I 
wouldn't be asking!

Chris

    
    I'd be careful not to immediately put this on the Director's.  Anyone
    running for a BoD of any kind should only do so with the understanding
    that it is not a casual or frivolous thing and there will be a time
    commitment involved, BUT I wouldn't fault anyone for drawing the line
    at sitting through meetings that run long because they are poorly
    managed.
    
    Steve
    

    RE: .13 You make a good point. I've served on a number of boards
    and when meetings are run well and people work together meetings
    run shorter. When either the meetings are run poorly or people do
    not try to work together meetings will go on for what seems like
    forever. I know that when I took over as Chair of a school board
    our meetings averaged 45 minutes to an hour shorter then under some
    previous Chairs. I like to think I had something to do with it.

    However, the Chair can not do it all and even the best Chairs will
    see meetings go ridiculously long if the members of the board refuse
    to work well together or if the administration doesn't have their
    act together. Or if there is just plain a lot of work to be done.

    The minutes don't indicate why DCU board meetings are going long.
    I suspect that different people at these Board meetings have
    different opinions about the reason for the length of the meetings.
    I wouldn't even begin to offer an opinion without attending a meeting.

    			Alfred

    
    RE: .13 & .14
    
    So do you think it is "reasonable" to set a certain time, say 6:00 pm,
    at which to leave each and every Board meeting, no matter what is being
    discussed?
    
    As experienced Board people, how about some input on some more
    hypothetical situations:
    
    What about regularly arriving late to meetings?
    
    What about regularly leaving meetings for incoming and outgoing
    phone calls?
    
    What about doing other work during a DCU Board meeting?
    

            
>    So do you think it is "reasonable" to set a certain time, say 6:00 pm,
>    at which to leave each and every Board meeting, no matter what is being
>    discussed?

	That sounds a bit much. Sometimes, as I said earlier, there is just
	plain a lot of work to do.

>    What about regularly arriving late to meetings?
 
	This is generally a sign that one is over committed. Such was the
	case when I was working on my MS and a board I was on scheduled
	meeting on days when I had classes. (Note: These were additional
	meetings beyond those scheduled when I signed up for course work)
    	I know that I personally would drop something if I found this
    	happening to me in the future.
   
>    What about regularly leaving meetings for incoming and outgoing
>    phone calls?
 
	This is just plain rude. Though if it happens rarely because of a
	temporary and non reoccurring emergency I can see cutting some slack.
	If it happens in meeting after meeting that's pretty bad. One way
    	to avoid this is to have meetings in a different facility then 
    	the people in the meeting work in. If, for example, the Board had
    	a lot of people who worked in one facility common sense would tell
    	you that that would not be a good place to hold a board meeting.

    	Sure it's convenient for the board members but since it's in a
    	work location people who work for Digital are very likely, and 
    	logically, going to think that the people in the meeting can be
    	interrupted for Digital business.   

>    What about doing other work during a DCU Board meeting?
 
	Depends. I know people who can and do time slice very well in 
    	meetings. I would judge the appropriateness by what's going on
    	and how on target the person is during discussion. Some can do
    	it some can't. If I'm at a meeting and someone is just reading
    	out loud a document that was included in my pre meeting package
    	(because not everyone read theirs) then I can see getting other 
    	things done.

    			Alfred

    
    I have not served on any boards, but I have attended alot of meetings
    (heck I work for Digital don't I).  But, I feel compelled to comment
    because I have seen alot of the items you listed here.
    
>   What about regularly arriving late to meetings?
    
    If this happens frequently, then I find this disrespectful.  I can
    understand losing track of time, getting caught in traffic, etc. for
    the occassional late arrival.
    
>   What about regularly leaving meetings for incoming and outgoing
>   phone calls?
    
    I can understand the exception for emergencies and time dependant
    issues, but generally this should also never happen.
    
>   What about doing other work during a DCU Board meeting?
    
    If the work is not directly related to the meeting, then this should
    NEVER EVER HAPPEN/BE ALLOWED.  I were the meeting facilitator, I would
    request the person(s) to either stop doing the other work or leave the
    meeting.  I find this type of action to be *EXTREMELY* irritating and
    disruptive.
    
    To me, a meeting is a group of individuals getting together for a
    common good.  People attending the meeting should be open to others
    opinions and leave all hidden agendas outside of the meeting.  Courtesy
    should prevail *ALWAYS*.
    
    ~Jon.

    
    Re: .15
    
    > So do you think it is "reasonable" to set a certain time, say 6:00 pm,
    > at which to leave each and every Board meeting, no matter what is being
    > discussed?
    
    No, an appropriate time to leave is not my point.  What I am addressing
    is that if an agenda says we have work that will occupy 2 or 3 or more
    hours and the meetings consistently run say more than 10% or so longer
    than planned, then the problem is the way meetings are being planned
    and run.  If that type of thing is happening to the DCU BoD, then anyone
    who objects has a legitimate gripe.  
    
    
    > regularly arriving late to meetings, making/taking phone calls, and
    > doing other work.
    
    All of this is unnacceptable.   People who do this are NOT committed
    to the work at hand.  They have some other agenda at work.  IMO, it's
    an ego thing.  It's their way of showing you how important they are.
    I'd call them on it.
    
    Steve