GRASSROOTS 101: Thirteen cures for Bad Meeting Syndrome

From the diaries--Chris

We've all had this experience: We attend a meeting of the Concerned Citizens of Whoville. Lots of ideas are thrown around, in no particular order -- some awesome, some awful. Maybe an argument breaks out over strategy. A few people urge caution at every turn, finding reasons why every idea won't work, or is too "risky." Others build castles in the air -- plans and schemes which require dozens of volunteers, piles of cash, and years to come to fruition.

Then we all go home.

Until the next meeting.

And at that next meeting, the exact same thing happens: We argue. We brainstorm. We doodle. We wonder when the meeting will be adjourned so we can go home and do something useful, like folding laundry.

And everyone wonders: What happened to all those plans from the last committee meeting? Did anything get done since last month? Who was supposed to do those things? (Not me!) When will we ever save Whoville?

For those wanting to break this endless cycle of bad committee meetings which are all talk, no action, here is a short list of how you can stop having unproductive meetings, and start actually winning your grassroots battles.

13 specific pieces of advice follow after the jump...
NOTE: This advice is pitched at organizers, but is also meant for attendees -- so that you can hold your meetings' leaders more accountable, or start your own Whoville Concerns group if necessary. Not every suggestion will apply to every situation, so go ahead and pick and choose whichever ideas resonate.

(1) FORM TASK FORCES, NOT COMMITTEES

Don't have committees. Have task forces instead. What's the difference, you ask? Good question.

A committee is a group which feels obliged to meet regularly -- and perpetually. There is no limit to the potential work they might do, and no finish line in sight. Procrastination becomes rife.

The most likely result of a committee meeting is that three sub-committees get formed. That just means more meetings, and more deferment of direct action to tackle the problem you met to address in the first place.

Committees tend to generate endless lists of ideas -- for someone else to do. Committees get boring quickly, and attendance drops, because there's always another monthly meeting where nothing much happens.

A task force is a group convened to address a specific problem or goal, within a limited time period. It has a clear purpose, and a definite lifespan. When that task is completed, it can disband -- or re-form itself to address the next task. But not until the first one is achieved.

(2) DITCH ROBERTS' RULES OF ORDER

If you have to follow rigid rules of procedure in order to keep a meeting together, you might as well pack it in now. Roberts' Rules exist for one purpose: For someone in power to keep rowdies in line.

To be blunt: If the organizers of a group can't keep conversation flowing productively through firm but good-humored direction, and the attendees won't listen to each other unless someone cracks the whip with a musty rulebook, you've got the wrong organizers and the wrong attendees.

If you are in that situation, the mature folks in the room should recognize each other, and form their own group to get things done -- leaving behind the rest to call out "Madame Chairman, Point of Order!" every three minutes.

(3) TITLES, BYLAWS AND MINUTES, OH MY!

Here's a little secret: No one reads minutes. Except the most pedantic and least useful members of your group. What you need from a meeting is a quick checklist of agreed-upon actions, with assignments of who does what.

People also love to talk about titles and bylaws, because it brings out everyone's combative or nitpicking streaks... and navelgazing is a whole lot easier than actually doing anything.

Who will be Chief Indian, and who will be Vice Chief? What constitutes a quorum? Were the minutes of the last meeting biased toward one faction or the other? However will we structure our complex organization... of seven people?

All these debates are substitutes for work.

So don't waste time on titles, bylaws and minutes, except to the extent you have some legal requirement to do so -- for example, the annual meeting of a nonprofit organization. If minutes are required, they should be as brief and pithy as possible. Don't bother with a blow-by-blow of every little thing said, because it just invites quibbling from the above-mentioned pedants.

Do yourself a giant favor: Let the actions that people take shape the group over time, rather than postponing action until you've all agreed on an ideal structure. There is no such thing, anyway.

(4) S/HE WHO WORKS, LEADS

When you get to the point where you actually need titles, bylaws, or minutes, you'll know it. You will have been through enough together that the real "doers" will have emerged, and the talkers will have faded into the woodwork -- to avoid the work that everyone is being assigned, and held accountable for. Your leaders will be, de facto, those who actually followed through on the tasks they agreed to take on, and helped others to do the same.

(5) ENCOURAGE BRAINSTORMING...

The free flow of ideas is essential to a lively conversation, and if you talk long enough, people do sometimes come up with surprisingly clever ideas. So long as the group is able to recognize a good idea when it appears, and then to follow through on it, brainstorming is the fun and lifeblood of a good meeting.

(6) ... BUT HAVE A CLEAR AGENDA

But you also must have some kind of agenda going in. If people don't leave feeling that they've tangibly moved their issues forward, they won't come back.

An organizer of any meeting has an obligation to everyone who shows up: Attendees should leave feeling they got at least one meaningful thing done, and with an assignment for the next thing they can reasonably achieve before the next meeting. Such results only happens through real planning and conscious direction.

If your agenda for a meeting is just general discussion of broad topics, you have two options: cancel the meeting until there's more specific things to do, or have a working meeting.

A working meeting is one where you have a specific group task to achieve. It can be as simple as folding, labeling, sealing and stamping those 500 flyers. Conversation flows (and ideas emerge) informally. Nothing may come of that talk, except social bonding, which is important. Or great ideas may emerge, precisely because people are not trying to "perform" as often happens in a formal meeting. And if nothing else, you've got your flyers ready to mail out. Other ideas for working meetings: hand-painting signs together; going over voter or tax rolls looking for new supporters; having everyone bring in their address book, to send notes to friends to get involved; a homegrown telethon to drum up members or support... and so on.

It's guaranteed that people will go away feeling better about a working meeting than an unproductive one around a conference table.

(7) IF IT'S IMPORTANT, DON'T RELY ON EMAIL

How many times have you said or heard this phrase in a meeting: "I emailed him about it, but I never heard back"?

If it's important, don't just email someone. We all know how much email comes over the transom every day, and how little of it gets (or deserves) our attention.

Didn't hear back about that email? Then call the person. Send them a postcard. Send a fax, too. Knock on their door, if necessary. Do all of the above. In short, make a real effort to get an answer. Only then are you absolved of the burden of getting an answer -- and you'll at least never rely on that source for answers again. People are distracted in our society. We get far too much unwanted email, too much junk (snail) mail, and too many telemarketing calls. Americans are also working multiple jobs to make ends meet. So when you need to get in touch, it pays to contact people in every way you can. You may annoy 5% of people by being so persistent, but most will be glad that you got through.

(8) KEEP THE NEW BLOOD FLOWING

All groups experience attrition: People move away, lose interest, get mad, flake out, and, well, die. A steady (but not overwhelming) stream of a few new faces per meeting helps keep things fresh, keeps people on their better behavior, and introduces different perspectives.

Naturally you want to avoid a revolving door. If you have a totally different group each meeting, that's not progress. But a well-organized group constantly attracts more people, because it will have buzz and excitement that others want to get involved with.

If meetings get too large, that's the point where you can finally consider sub-task forces or new projects. Too many members? That's the least of your problems.

(9) MAKE IT FUN AND COMFORTABLE

This should seem obvious: People are more likely to get things done at (and come back to) meetings if they are held in a comfortable place, where everyone can see each other's faces, and not have to sit in the way back. There should be something to drink and munch on, but nothing so elaborate as to be a distraction.

Seems obvious... But how many grassroots meetings are held in a small room with 4-6 people around a little table, and the rest in the peanut gallery behind them (where the conversation leader can't see that they've got their hand up), with not even $5 worth of soda and peanuts on hand? It's kind of silly, but people truly are happier in a meeting if they have something which keeps their hands (and teeth) busy.

(10) KEEP IT BRIEF AND TO THE POINT

Another key to continuity and success in meetings is: Keep meetings short and brisk. 90 minutes is stretching it; an hour is ideal. If people are having such a good time, they'll stick around and keep talking more informally -- which is when a lot of the best ideas and strongest bonds come about.

(11) IDENTIFY TALENT, PLAY TO STRENGTHS

An effective organizer recognizes people's strengths, and makes use of them. Some people like making calls and have a good telephone manner... Others hate it. The same goes for everthing from door- to-door work, opposition research, design, writing factsheets, to decorating the gym for a party.

Some of the most valuable people in any group are lone wolves. Put them in a group situation, and they are almost useless. But put them onto a specific task that taps into their strengths, and which they can tackle on their own into the wee hours of the night, and they'll amaze you with what they produce. There's no sense using someone who could design a website around your campaign, or someone who is adept at reading complex regulatory statutes, or someone who is a good public speaker, to do something else which they don't enjoy and wastes their talent.

And when others see what a great piece of work one of these people has produced, they'll be motivated to do something equivalent with their own, particular skills.

(12) CONTINUITY IS KEY

An underlying theme of many of these suggestions is continuity -- how to ensure that one meeting actually builds upon the previous one, rather than repeating it.

It seems elementary, but this rarely happens: The leaders of any group must check in with partic- ipants in-between meetings to get a status report on tasks they were assigned, nudge them along, provide help if they are stuck. And to remind them that they will be asked for a report on their assignment when you all get back together.

If you just wait until the next meeting and ask, "So, how did everyone make out with your assignments," you'll get a bunch of blank faces back. Unless you enjoy feeling like a teacher whose students never do their hoemwork, take steps to avoid that awkward and irritating moment by reaching out beforehand.

(13) LEVERAGE EVERY CONTACT TO GAIN CRITICAL MASS

The most difficult phase of organizing any campaign (whether political, or issue-oriented) is getting over the hump. Until you gain critical mass, things look bleak... How can a handful of people sitting around your kitchen table change anything?

Remember that every person who has expressed an interset in your committee, task force, cause (or whatever you choose to call it) has a world of contacts that even they may not be aware of. Even the most reclusive person can be a vehicle for spreading your message, even if it consists of bringing a small stack of flyers with them to the dentist's office.

With every person who gets involved, squeeze out as much good work and contacts as they can stand. Do they have a sibling, a co-worker, or a friend, who could come to the next meeting? Would they be willing to put your next announce- ment into an envelope, and send it to their local Christmas card list? Turning a Gang of Four into a Gang of Eight is as simple as each person bringing just one friend to the next meeting... And while such exponential growth has its limits, in my own town, we were able to expand a tiny band of 40 people into 4,000 paid-up members, and stop a major multinational corporation to destroy the place we lived with a massive, polluting plant -- despite the company spending nearly $60 million in its failed efforts.

You can prevail, whatever the issue is that matters most to you. Ending bad meeting syndrome is one place to start. Good luck out there.

Tags: Activism, community organizing, organizing (all tags)

Comments

40 Comments

Thanks for reading

Your comments, experiences of bad and good meetings, ideas, and of course recommends, would be most welcome.

by Hudson 2006-02-26 09:18AM | 0 recs
Also

If you're interested in diaries about the nuts and bolts of activism, there are a couple of others are my page, http://hudson.mydd.com

Other links to diaries or blogs about the mechanic of how to get things done (as opposed to the philosophy) would be of interest. For me, MyDD is a place where one can get down a bit more to specifics, as opposed to just rants about Bush... Which are always good, too.

by Hudson 2006-02-26 09:21AM | 0 recs
Right On.

Yep. This happens in my local Democratic Party ALL THE TIME. I'm glad you posted these ideas. It will help me focus my efforts a little better.

I've personally come up with many ideas to reform local Democratic Parties particularly in Florida, but across the nation, at my blog Reform Florida's DECs (Democratic Executive Committees):

http://reformfloridasdecs.blogspot.com

I probably place too much emphasis on structure as you would like - but I certainly agree with the fact that way too many grassroots organizations are overly focused on it.

Thanks and keep posting stuff like this. Its the stuff that matters.

by gatordemocrat 2006-02-27 09:32AM | 0 recs
Re: ACTIVISM 101

This is good stuff. I get very frustrated with the College Democrats here, as nothing seems to ever get done except a lot of griping about Republicans. I'll see if we can put some of these cures to use.

by bluenc 2006-02-26 04:31PM | 0 recs
Re: ACTIVISM 101

Cool, hope you stick with it...

At some point, if you're getting nowhere, you can always decamp with 2-3 of the other people who get it, and start your own group.

If you do, some people will say you're being "divisive." But you're not stopping anyone else from making change their own way -- you're just trying to blaze another path. The two can be complementary.

Anyway, it's better to be accused of being divisive by a few layabouts than to waste your own time in an unproductive venue.

by Hudson 2006-02-26 07:06PM | 0 recs
Re: ACTIVISM 101
Activism 101 starts at the beginning, A good U.S.
start would be counting the popular vote and not ignoring it, for any number of public and private justifications. THESE REASONS have no partisan affiliations.Or maybe to rephrase it, they should not! If properly instituted, the popular vote would serve us all.
The written verifyable ballot would do even more.
Birch Bayh former In Senator introduced the thought at:
http:www.nationalpopularvote.com/npv/
by northwest 2006-03-02 10:24AM | 0 recs
Copied, pasted, printed.

This came at a great time.  I have been going to my local Democratic Town Committee meetings for two years and we don't seem to accomplish anything.  It's very frustrating.  We're getting ready to pick new officers and I hope that will be the kick in the  ass we need to really move things forward. There are some great ideas here and I plan to share them (giving you full credit, of course!) with my fellow committee members.  

by Mariposa 2006-02-26 06:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Copied, pasted, printed.

Glad to be of service... Not every piece of advice works for every group, but maybe 1 or 2 of the items will help you push things along.

I should probably mention that I wrote this not to lecture people, but in the hopes of saving others from my own fate of sitting through a gazillion discussions that went around and around and around, until people either gave up or solved the problem.

I'd much rather spend 90 minutes handwriting postcards to every elected official in my district than having an empty but vicious debate about some minor philosophical dispute, which is where so many meetings among like-minded activists wind up...

by Hudson 2006-02-26 07:03PM | 0 recs
Four more tips

(1) Have one person keep stack, but with a good view of all other people, or with others spotting. (2) Have one person keep time. warn people (with agreed-on hand signals) if they go over. (3) Have no one person keep contact info. Introductions, report-backs, specific discussions, etc. can all involve contact info, and if one person writes all the contact info on the board (or pad, or whatever), then this can bog down as each person gives their info, and then the guy at the board confirms this info, and writes it down, and so on. Have each of the spokes, etc. write down their organizational and contact info before the meeting proper, someplace where everyone can see it. (4) Have two, possibly three, moderators. Ask for volunteers at the end of each meeting. If there is only one, it's a bit intimidationg for those who haven't gone before. If there are two or three, it's not.

by Left for the Left 2006-02-26 08:39PM | 0 recs
Respectfully, I disagree about Roberts

It's easy to say "you've got the wrong organizers and attendees", but my experience is that you work with the attendees you've got... not the ones you'd wish you had.  

Sure, you can accomplish a lot by focusing the energy of the most productive members, but if you have open meetings or a volunteer organization, it is in the interest of the group to have the be able to "control the rowdies"... AND you do want a set of explicit rules to be able to fall back on when there's a conflict among people who otherwise work well together and have an impasse about how things can be discussed or decided.

That's just my experience. You don't have to be a rigid and overbearing parliamentarian. And use of Roberts doesn't have to be musty or heavy-handed.

I agree that if you're too obsessed with process, you can lose sight of objectives and productivity. But that doesn't mean that process can't be useful.  

Any tool can be abused - that doesn't mean it doesn't have a legitimate use.

by Malacandra 2006-02-27 04:44AM | 0 recs
Re: Respectfully, I disagree about Roberts

I was using the word "rowdies" ironically to indicate how people in charge view people who might have different ideas about which way to go... That may have not been obvious enough, my bad.

In my experience, the effect of using Roberts' Rules is to:

(1) Make those unfamiliar with the rules reluctant to speak;

(2) Limit the spontaneity and cameraderie of a meeting;

(3) Create a stilted and overly-formal atmosphere.

All three virtually guarantee that a group is not going to expand its ranks, and that many good ideas will be lost. To me, Roberts is a relic of the past that should be left on the shelf.

by Hudson 2006-02-27 05:14AM | 0 recs
Re: Respectfully, I disagree about Roberts

The best use of Roberts I've ever seen was at the California Democratic Convention during the process of voting on resolutions. The woman in charge displayed the kind of combination of authority and openness that modeled the use of Roberts as an enabling methodology, not a crutch or a bludgeon.

I think it's too bad when people are reluctant to speak at a well run meeting, but unless you have a particularly overbearing and authoritarian chair, a) it's usually pretty obvious if you've sat through a half meeting how to get the attention of the chair and have an opportunity to speak and/or phrase a motion.

As far as spontaneity goes, you've got to have a balance between it and being able to stay on topic. Too much spontaneity can be just as destructive of a meeting as too much rigidity. I've been to too many diffuse, scattered meetings where people feel free to stray from whatever is the issue at hand.

I agree that a stilted and overly-formal atmosphere is to be discouraged. I also feel that a chaotic and overly-casual atmosphere can be similarly destructive.

In the end, I'd rather attend a meeting run by someone who can apply Roberts in a lightweight and judicial manner, than attend a meeting that follows no rules at all... OR attend a meeting run by an authoritarian who dictates by force of personality with no recourse to any procedural methodology.  

I would welcome you to one of our DFA meetings to demonstrate how a light-handed application of Roberts can support both freedom of action and the discipline to allow us to accomplish our goals and objectives.  

Judicious application of rules permit those with ideas to have the ability to present them... while keeping those who want to hijack a discussion or pontificate at length on tangental issues from being disruptive.

by Malacandra 2006-02-27 07:25AM | 0 recs
Wtih all this great experience and advice....

you can all go get real jobs and participate in a capatilist society, instead of hurling stones and crying for a socialist one.

by truthiness 2006-02-28 10:07AM | 0 recs
Uhhh

The word you're groping for is spelled "capitalist."

by Hudson 2006-02-28 03:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Wtih all this great experience and advice....

Here you wrote:

I am willing to listen to your opinions and discuss them, because I concede that I may not have all the facts and may be wrong, but I have yet to encounter anyone who shows the same willingness to honestly discuss and debate issues on this site.

And yet, without any cause, here you've launched into attack mode (something you do quite often), and still you claim to come to this community in search of "honest discussion"!?

Now, clearly you're a true believer and supporter of your republican't president, yet you're here in search of "honest debate;" so I would expect you to have better sense than to sheepishly fall back on the commonly used caricature that conservatives like to paint liberals with, that we're socialists or worse, gay socialists.  I mean, come on man, pay attention and know your enemy, if you've read anything that's been posted here at MyDD you'll be hard pressed to find anything that would strike a reasonable person as Socialism (note I said reasonable, which automatically excludes republican'ts/conservatives).

If you've paid attention you, am sure, if you're honest with yourself, will have to have noted that we're interested in winning elections, period... and, on a personal note, I'm interested in crushing and thoroughly trashing any notion that conservatism is at all respectable -- I want conservatism and republican'ts to be thought of by real Americans as utterly deserving of contempt... I want real Americans to gag and throw up a little in their mouths every time that they hear those words, conservative and republican't.  Now, this is just my own personal wish... as for the rest here at MyDD, I would say that we're not after any revolution... we just want republican'ts to stop trashing our country... and we want our elected Democratic leaders to stand up in defense of America against the republican't puss that festers and that consumes us from within.

by bedobe 2006-02-28 09:50PM | 0 recs
When Robert's Works

best, is in larger groups, I've found.  If you have a group of ten people who know each other and have good working relationships, then there isn't much use for a book to tell them how to get along.  If you have forty people and fifty-thousand "ideas" then some form of order is a good idea.  

by cather 2006-02-27 07:13AM | 0 recs
Re: When Robert's Works

Exactly.

by Malacandra 2006-02-27 07:26AM | 0 recs
Re: When Robert's Works

However, Robert's tends to cause large groups to break into factions. The larger faction gets its way entirely, the smaller faction goes home angry. Consensus-based decision making is, in my opinion, a better way to work through disagreements than parliamentary procedure.

by Satori 2006-02-28 12:09PM | 0 recs
A Committee Horror Story

my uncle tells is about his experience in the Methodist Church.  The refrigerator was broken in the "fellowship hall" (The United Methodist word for dining hall).  My Uncle was in charge of the layperson committee on getting things done, so he got the fridge replaced, and was kicked off of the committee for "not going through the appropriate channels."  Sooner or later every organization will have to decide if they want their committees intact, or if they want a working refrigerator.  Hudson seems to be in favor of the latter.

by cather 2006-02-27 07:37AM | 0 recs
Re: A Committee Horror Story

yeah, we methodists are notorious for our committees. it's not unusual for us to put together a committee on committees. ah well, comes with the turf i guess.

by bluenc 2006-02-27 12:37PM | 0 recs
Presbyterians Too.

by gatordemocrat 2006-02-27 01:40PM | 0 recs
Re: A Committee Horror Story

You haven't committees until you've seen Unitarians.  I was on the board of trustees for our local church for three years, and I never saw ten people who could pack thirty minutes' worth of business into two hours like they could.

by beerwulf 2006-02-28 02:29PM | 0 recs
Re: GRASSROOTS 101: Thirteen cures for Bad Meeting

Nice piece.

In general, my experience is that groups work best which have few meetings and lots of work getting done outside meetings. The meetings you do have are greatly improved if you can devote a piece of each one to information that folks doing all parts of the project may need, so as to enhance a shared knowledge base and culture. Outside presenters can do this, so long as they are brief and willing to play a supportive role in what is really your group's working meeting. For example, I've seen pollsters and direct mail specialists do this kind of presentation usefully. Make the meeting desirable beyond just the work.

by janinsanfran 2006-02-27 11:05AM | 0 recs
Re: GRASSROOTS 101: Thirteen cures for Bad Meeting

Great point -- wish I'd remembered to include something on this.

If meetings begin with a (brief) presentation from someone with either very useful info, or at least the ability to entertain... and if that doesn't take up too much of the meeting, this can be both a "draw" to keep attendance up and educational.

by Hudson 2006-02-27 01:42PM | 0 recs
Re: GRASSROOTS 101: Thirteen cures for Bad Meeting

Please, give us more! More, more, more!

When I finally settle down, I plan on throwing myself into local politics and building my political future from the ground up.  I need all the nuts-and-bolts advice I can get!

by One Hand Clapping 2006-02-27 06:48PM | 0 recs
Re: GRASSROOTS 101: Thirteen cures for Bad Meeting

Thanks!  

Is there an organizers and action blog?

We have ideas and agendas galore, but a shortage of skill in getting elected.

by demondeac 2006-02-27 08:09PM | 0 recs
Re: GRASSROOTS 101: Thirteen cures for Bad Meeting

This is precisely what the progressive blogsphere needs A LOT more of... concrete action, and how-to information clearing houses.  We've got plenty of opinion platforms, but not very many -- and certainly no visible -- action oriented progressive websites (of course, MoveOn goes without mention, they are probably the best organizers out there at the moment and, too, Wellstone Action camp (though their online presence is not significant.)).

by bedobe 2006-02-27 09:39PM | 0 recs
Here's One Site...

my blog,

http://reformfloridasdecs.blogspot.com

is all about reforming local Democratic Parties, and provides specific ideas to rebuilding them properly. Even though it is focused on Florida, the ideas presented can be applied in practically every local party around the nation.

by gatordemocrat 2006-02-28 10:16AM | 0 recs
Re: Here's One Site...

This is a great start, thanks for taking the initiative.  Now, clearly there are quite a number of grassroots activist organizations out there that provide invaluable how-to practical advise to community organizers/activists. However, to my mind, I've yet to see a grassroots/action-centric website/organization come to the fore in the progressive blogsphere that we can rely on for nuts-and-bolts advise (such as the one that you've provided here and on your blog; though, not to be too critical, Blogspot.com is rather limiting and may not be the best platform to host a features rich website).

I've gone through the some of the content in your blog, and clearly you offer a lot of great lessons-learned advise, but Blogspot.com does not offer an easy way of accessing this great content.

At any rate, an online-grassroots University for Dem activists would be a great resource -- maybe one or two people here at MyDD.com could get together to make this happen.  As I mentioned above, I can think of two great online grassroots resources, MoveOn and Camp Wellstone (http://www.wellstone.org/camp/index.aspx ), but the progressive blogsphere does not seem to have grown an activist organizations of its own just yet.

by bedobe 2006-02-28 01:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Here's One Site...

For environmental activists, one of the few nonprofit groups which I've encountered that is actually highly responsive to calls for advice and guidance is the Center for Health, Environment, and Justice (CHEJ).

CHEJ was founded by Lois Gibbs, famous as the housewife who led the groundbraking Love Canal fight.

Unlike so many environmental leaders, Gibbs has never lost touch with the grassroots. CHEJ has wonderful publications that give all kinds of nuts-and-bolts advice that activists can act upon in a crisis situation. Link below:

http://www.chej.org

Check out the website, or better yet give 'em a call if you have such a situation on your hands. They have very low-cost publications.

CHEJ staff were hugely helpful to me when the first of several such crises struck my community (we won both of our major battles, the second despite our opponent spending $58 million on p.r., lawyers, experts-for-hire, saturation ads and mass mail, lobbyists, campaign donations, etc.).

by Hudson 2006-02-28 03:36PM | 0 recs
Thanks

I would very much like to see a "University for Dem Activists" form and I would love to be a part of its formation.

This is a great idea due to, as you said, the limiting factors of blogspot.

by gatordemocrat 2006-03-06 07:39AM | 0 recs
Re: GRASSROOTS 101: Thirteen cures for Bad Meeting

As a dyed-in-the-wool meeting hater from back in my days as part of a local music scene organization, I think these are great comments. We saw so much atttrition in our group from overly long meetings where we discussed the same picayune things over and over. Meeting after meeting devoted to parsing bylaws! Ugh. And while I agree that Robert's Rules can create a stilted atmosphere, there needs to be attention paid to people who have a tendency to make long, rambling statements, flogging their own personal beefs. Following the recount in Ohio, we had a meeting of participants that was nearly two hours long and then this one woman got up to make a long, rambling statement about how we needed to have longer meetings so more people could have more "input."

by anastasiap 2006-02-28 09:48AM | 0 recs
Brilliant

This is an excellent guide.  I've been struggling with some of these issues with my own political organizing for our local DFA group.  Kudos for the well thought-out tips.  I completely agree about Roberts Rules.

by hotshotxi 2006-02-28 10:19AM | 0 recs
A Few More Suggestions

Have a clearly stated Mission Statement for your group.

Obviously you should have one before the first meeting, but a Mission Statement can evolve overtime, so it's good to revisit now and again. The Mission Statement should express your group's Values, Vision and Goals.

When things need to be discussed break into smaller, moderated groups. Sometimes meetings drag on because everyone needs to get up on their soapbox or worse one or two people need to get up on their soapbox and take over the meeting. Smaller groups allow for more participatory discussions.

Just my two cents.

by brookeb 2006-02-28 11:21AM | 0 recs
Re: A Few More Suggestions

I agree that your purpose (i.e, your mission) should be very clear to everyone involved, and invoked whenever conversation or proposals stray too far afield.

I'd be cautious, however, about investing too much time up front in your Values/Vision/Mission statements, because these can become another distracting battleground where factions emerge over petty, semantic differences.

A more mature, organized group can usually incorporate such a process -- the group I founded did a strategic plan after six years. But even then, I thought it was mostly hot air, and in retrospect our time would have been better spent on just more direct action. The process was, however, useful to keep some of our more longwinded board members busy and out of the executive director's hair...

by Hudson 2006-02-28 03:41PM | 0 recs
Robert's Rules

Great post. I've worked extensively with Robert's Rules as a bylaws committee chair and later state chariman of a political party, and they are completely counter-productive if your goal is to get things done.

Consensus-based decision making is the way to go. Just remember, when your group decides something needs to be done, make sure someone owns that decision. If someone is resposible for every action item, and everyone is on board with the decisions, the ingredients for getting things done are in place.

by Satori 2006-02-28 12:06PM | 0 recs
Re: GRASSROOTS 101
I'd be more than happy, as a professional organizer and activist,  to start a blog dedicated solely to helpful tips on organizing for the less-initiated.  I've worked on issue-based campaigns and electoral campaigns alike.  In 2004, I was one of the organizers for MoveOn.org in Ohio and for the past couple of years, I have helped organize and run grassroots campaigns for progressive groups.  I'm sure I have lots of notes and even some crusty ideas up in my noggin to help set up a sort of online school for organizing.  
I'll host the site at http://progressive-organizing.blogspot.c om for now.
by rickman 2006-02-28 01:34PM | 0 recs
Re: GRASSROOTS 101

Please see this post http://mydd.com/comments/2006/2/26/1443/ 62720/31#31

by bedobe 2006-02-28 01:51PM | 0 recs
Re: GRASSROOTS 101:

That last line should have read:

http://progressive-organizing.blogspot.c om

by rickman 2006-02-28 01:35PM | 0 recs
Re: GRASSROOTS 101: Thirteen cures for Bad Meeting

Whoa, I just saw that this has been front-paged. Thanks, Chris.

by Hudson 2006-02-28 04:15PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------