Travel Out Loud

CISV’s Organizational Review is separated into 2 main parts with 5 smaller reports. The IEC has also published their assessment of the report at the same time. All of these documents can be found on CISV Resources. I will report on all the reports. This is the IEC Summary and Additional Recommendations Report (8 pages).

My general thoughts:

The first thing that struck me is that the margins are not equal on this report. The left one is around 1.5 inches while the right one is 1 inch. This amuses me.

The tone of this report from the IEC is that BlueSpark pointed out aspects of our Organizational Culture that they were unaware of. Reading the chart about organizational culture should be quite obvious to the International Executive Committee. Perhaps the IEC is so enthusiastic about the recommendations because they are too far removed from participating on a chapter level and want an easy way out?

The Report:

The IEC goes through the recommendations of the Board and the Committees first. There are no changes from the BlueSpark proposal. A few details are stated (we shall have 9 Governors, BlueSpark suggested 8-12). The Conferences and Events Planning Committee would replace the AIM Planning Committee and also plan RTFs.

The IO would become more like a “Senior Management Team.” This team would work with the Governors to create “clear direction and priorities” for staff members and volunteers.

The Advisory Conference would be held every 3 years in a cost effective location with an official representative from each chapter. Cost equalization would be in effect for these representatives only. Basically, this would be held in Europe and if you are not the official representative, and you’re coming from Asia or the Americas, you’re out of luck as far as cost goes.

The Regional Meetings (Asia-Pacific, Europe, and the Americas) would stay the same and would actually take on more importance because chapters would only meet once every three years.

What will chapter representatives talk about during this conference?

Chapters will be asked to consider and support the three year strategic plan of the organization as well as consider and advise on major policy issues. The content of the triennial conference will be aimed at supporting and inspiring the work of the Chapters.

Here is what the IEC had to say about the Junior Branch:

We believe it is time to emphasize the quality of multicultural leadership training that our Junior Branch provides at the local, national and international level.

How can you argue with that? The goals and objectives of the JB are strong and are working for us.

For cost and timing, the IEC does not expect this plan to lower costs in the interim or over time.

The IEC would like to be as transparent as possible through the transition. They welcome open communication. They will consider alternatives.

This review concludes with a little bit of information about BlueSpark Consulting. On paper they look awesome:

With significant experience with membership and voluntary sector clients (such as Central YMCA, Fairtrade Foundation and UNICEF), BlueSpark offered a proactive, pragmatic and personal service. Founding partner Mike Caudrey was our lead consultant. Originally an accountant, Mike has over 20 years of consultancy experience. Much of his work has been in helping voluntary and member based organizations to introduce the most effective and relevant governance and management structures and practices.

What I think:

It is a lot easier to agree than to challenge.

What are your thoughts on critical thinking, IEC?

For AIM, I think we should hire a local company to put on the AIM. I don’t think there should be a triennial Advisory Conference as it doesn’t sound like much work/product would come out of it- but it would be a great party.

I think that some chapter members critisized how money was spent on an international level in the chapter survey sent out by BlueSpark last year. I agree that money should be spent differently as far as who gets funding to attend AIM or who gets funding for RTFs. At this point, all of that money comes from participants’ fees. It is difficult to measure how 1 committee members’ attendance at AIM improves the Village experience for little Johnny. I do not think that this concern directly leads us to think that chapter members must be involved in strategic thinking for CISV International. That is why we have Trustees who sit on the International Board of Trustees. The amount of effort we can muster in our terms as volunteers is limited and I don’t think a chapter president should have to or will want to do everything for their chapter as well as make informed decisions about the international organization.

As far as this plan not saving money over time, that is just, as the British would say, hogwash. This plan WILL save money because we’re eliminating jobs that require travel to AIM, and all of the travel expenses of the IEC and Trustees. There will be travel expenses for the Governors but that will likely be cheaper over the course of a year than a single AIM’s travel expenses. It isn’t kosher or politically correct or CISV-correct (new term?) to say that a goals is to lower expenses as that connotes lowering quality. CISVers don’t like these kinds of objectives for a project, just look at our organizational culture and our true values.

Even though the IEC says that they will consider alternatives, I doubt it. I was lucky enough, as a Youth Trustee/NJR for the USA along with Brett’s daughter, another NJR, to Skype with Brett Vottero, IEC President, on Saturday night. After talking to him, he seemed pretty set on this plan. I didn’t specifically mention an alternative plan that I have in mind but I did ask him why there aren’t 2-3 options to chose from. He said [in so many words] that ‘we paid BlueSpark Consulting because they are an expert in the field and you should expect one recommendation. You wouldn’t pay a doctor or a lawyer to give you multiple solutions, you would want one expert recommendation.’ You’re wrong there, I would want a few recommendations and the expert’s selection of the best of those few.

At my local chapter board meeting on Monday, our chapter president went through the report briefly. Her assessment was that this really didn’t concern us and it wasn’t something that we need to take time to deal with. We are planning a Village and a Youth Meeting this year and are in the thick of preparing delegations & leaders for programs. — this is my observation at a local level. This is still not of great importance to chapters and we don’t see how this review will help us [yet].

Just because we’re a volunteer-based organization and we’re not “professional” does not mean we shouldn’t receive a professional report.

We’ve heard what the IEC & BlueSpark i.e. Mike have to say. I think we can do better. I challenge you all to hash things out and create better options. I know we can do it.

Imagination trumps the Western idea of "efficiency" in the case of reorganizing a 60 year old organization. Let's keep that in mind.