CAP Members' Input Sought on Corporate Governance

[RADIOMAN015]

Still nothing.

Same here, I'm wondering if certain ISP's (that have a lot of CAP members on it) see it as a spam attack and reject the emails completely without even passing it on. 

Based upon comments made, about the survey it appears that there's no drastic changes in the leadership organization proposed anyways.
RM
 

[jimmydeanno]

How can you presume what the changes being proposed are before the study is even complete?  It's a study on CAP governance.  I'm sure they can look at the org chart and figure out the areas that could be made more efficient.  Just because the survey doesn't say, "Do you agree with the current structure enabling the NB to overturn NEC decisions and visa-versa?" doesn't mean that they haven't identified it.  It also doesn't mean that when the study results are delivered to the BoG that they aren't going to present something that suggests that radical changes are needed.

[ZigZag911]

Mine arrived late Thursday or early Friday, can't recall which....pretty straightforward. I answered it, as they anticipated, in about 15 minutes, perhaps a bit less.

From the questions asked, I think much of the focus is going to be on the relationships & roles of BOG, NEC, NB.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

I got mine and completed it during the past week.

I first went "huh?" at the "blank" choices between "strongly agree" and "strongly disagree" but figured out what others have...that it's just "agree" or "disagree" or some nebulous area in-between.

Some of the terminology went over my head, having only been an undistinguished worker bee at the Squadron level (including a stint as a deputy CC) but it wasn't bad overall.

I did vent my spleen a little (tactfully) in the "comments" box about the bog-awful way uniform issues have been handled, particularly the CSU, with emphasis on little to no input from the membership (not that it'll make a fig of difference, but anyway...).

Do I think input from a lowly Captain (coming up on Major in a couple of months - I hope) is really going to result in any kind of sea change?  No, but the brass asked my opinion (a dangerous thing to do! ) and I gave it.

NED FOR NATIONAL CC!

[ZigZag911]

I also addressed wing/region CC selection, and the problem of elected national officers needing to curry favor with subordinates to get elected!

Perhaps a trend is surfacing...I've felt for a long time that wing CCs should focus on their wings alone; national governance, assuming it requires input and representation from every wing, ought to be vested in others: either elected reps, or past wing CCs (give 'em something to look forward to after their term!)

[RiverAux]

Odd how they asked entirely different questions about how the BoG and NB are doing. 

They probably should have taken this chance to ask members questions about their views of how squadrons and Wings are dealing with some of these important issues. 

[ZigZag911]

Odd how they asked entirely different questions about how the BoG and NB are doing.   

Perhaps because they have entirely different roles?

[RiverAux]

Well, I'm not entirely sure how different their roles are in practice as each seem to talk about the same sort of issues at their meetings, but leaving that aside, a lot of the questions they asked about the BOG applied equally well to the NB. 

[a2capt]

Is the survey one that once you open it, you have to finish it? I'd like some time to think about it, particularly the last option, of adding anything else, that I don't see covered point and shoot questions.

[ßτε]

Is the survey one that once you open it, you have to finish it? I'd like some time to think about it, particularly the last option, of adding anything else, that I don't see covered point and shoot questions.

No. You can save your responses and finish it later.

[coudano]

but there is a deadline to finish it,
i forget maybe the 30th (??)

[a2capt]

Deadline isn't a problem, I'm aware of that - I just want to formulate a reply for the last entry that is well thought out, but want to get the rest out of the way. Who knows, maybe they read this stuff, maybe enough of it may say the same or similar things that it might make a bit of good...  better than the alternative.

[Rowan]

I still haven't received it.   

[ProdigalJim]

Did mine today. Tried to offer a gentle poke at the College of Cardinals way we choose CAP's top leadership...I think maybe mil-style promotion boards, which then result in a pool of qualified candidates upon which the NEC can vote. A screened slate, as it were.

[JeffDG]

Did mine today. Tried to offer a gentle poke at the College of Cardinals way we choose CAP's top leadership...I think maybe mil-style promotion boards, which then result in a pool of qualified candidates upon which the NEC can vote. A screened slate, as it were.

My comments regarded the circular governance model.  My solution is to divorce the role of Wing Commander from National Board, and make the NB member elected by the members of the Wing.  NB selects a subset of itself to act as NEC.  NB elects Nat/CC.  Nat/CC appoints Region/CCs and Region/CCs appoint Wing/CCs

The NB is concerned with setting policy, the Wing/CC is concerned solely with executing policy.

[RiverAux]

My primary comment was to eliminate the equality of the NB and NEC.  NEC should only be allowed to make decisions that would further implement policies or regulations approved by the NB or BOG.  We don't need to get into another situation where the NEC approves something and then the NB rejects it (and presumably the issue could continue ping ponging back and forth forever). 

[JeffDG]

My primary comment was to eliminate the equality of the NB and NEC.  NEC should only be allowed to make decisions that would further implement policies or regulations approved by the NB or BOG.  We don't need to get into another situation where the NEC approves something and then the NB rejects it (and presumably the issue could continue ping ponging back and forth forever).

I concur.

The NB should be setting policy at a high level, and letting committees (including the NEC) work out the nitty-gritty details.

In reality, with the prevalence of electronic comms right now, I don't see many situations that would come up between NB meetings where a special meeting could not be pulled together where the NB could at least obtain a quorum.  And the power of the NEC to act on behalf of the NB between meetings thus becomes moot.

Yes, the NB is large and unwieldy for discussing detailed issues...that's a feature, not a bug.  They shouldn't be getting that deep into details.  They should be empowering committees to deal with the details.  If debate arises on the details back at the NB, then it needs to be recommitted to the appropriate committee.

[RiverAux]

The NB should be setting policy at a high level, and letting committees (including the NEC) work out the nitty-gritty details.

Its not really clear to me what high level policy the BOG should be working on and what the NB should be working on. 

[PHall]

My primary comment was to eliminate the equality of the NB and NEC.  NEC should only be allowed to make decisions that would further implement policies or regulations approved by the NB or BOG.  We don't need to get into another situation where the NEC approves something and then the NB rejects it (and presumably the issue could continue ping ponging back and forth forever).

I have a much cleaner solution. Eliminate the NB. Too many bodies, all with their own agenda.

The NEC and the BoG is all we need to do the job.

[RiverAux]

My primary comment was to eliminate the equality of the NB and NEC.  NEC should only be allowed to make decisions that would further implement policies or regulations approved by the NB or BOG.  We don't need to get into another situation where the NEC approves something and then the NB rejects it (and presumably the issue could continue ping ponging back and forth forever).

I have a much cleaner solution. Eliminate the NB. Too many bodies, all with their own agenda.

The NEC and the BoG is all we need to do the job.

In this world, how is the National Commander selected?  Who would be selecting the members of the NEC? 

I don't see how further concentrating power in CAP is going to help us any.