Myles, When we get the bodies on the ground, and the resources to implement the plan, it will work. Until then these are just pretty words. It has always been so in the PNZ.
Myles, I suggest you extract the "performance measures" and ask the Board which one of them is responsible for achieving each performance measure, and what the consequences will be if they do or don't achieve them by the time limits given, and then you will find out how serious they are about this plan.
The gatling gun comment was a joke - nothing more! And for Claire, I was talking about "performance measures" not performance reviews. No, I didn't have any performance reviews (or measures)in my time. There isn't much point in having performance measures in an all volunteer organisation if you don't have someones name beside the measure, and that person acknowledges responsibility for achieving that measure. Until that happens noone is responsible for anything.
Thanks Bryan but i am well capable of knowing what to look for. I also think that this board is more than capable and some are not afraid to amit if they get it wrong. They will get the support if they ask for it and dont think they know everything. Communication and democracy is what will grow this sport not autocracy as we have seen in the past.
Hi Myles, There are at least 16 performance indicators (and several subsets)for a Board to achieve in the strategic plan by 2013. You tell me how many volunteers are going to be needed to acheive even 50% of these objectives in that time frame. This type of strategic planning is straight out of "Corporate Planning 101" where a Board has huge resources to put to the task of implementation. In an organisation like ours the best we can do is choose one or two objectives per year and put our meagre resources to work on them - and if that is autocracy so be it.
Bryan i am aware that this might be a large task and one that is ambitious. However if they do acheive 50% of what they have put on paper it will be a darn sight more than any board or previous Mgmt structure has done. As i have said if this board communicates with it shareholders( the players) and keeps them informed then they will get the support that they require. If they don't they will be like every other mgmt structure and i will have questions for them to as i have for previous Mgmt.
14 comments:
Good start PNZ now that the words are there it will be the actions that really do the work.
Myles.
Myles,
When we get the bodies on the ground, and the resources to implement the plan, it will work. Until then these are just pretty words. It has always been so in the PNZ.
Bryan
Myles,
I suggest you extract the "performance measures" and ask the Board which one of them is responsible for achieving each performance measure, and what the consequences will be if they do or don't achieve them by the time limits given, and then you will find out how serious they are about this plan.
Bryan
The above post has been removed. I have had words with Bryan in the past and have always provided my name. This poor person was too afraid to do so.
While I have no problem leaving my name, other writers may be put off by someone who states their preferred "weapon of choice is a Gatling gun."
Who wants to be a target?
Bryan, you seem to have a downer on the PNZ - what's pushed your button?
James
Hi Bryan
What were the consequences when you were the CEO of not achieving your 'performance measures' or didn't you have any performance reviews?
Claire
Hi James,
The gatling gun comment was a joke - nothing more!
And for Claire, I was talking about "performance measures" not performance reviews. No, I didn't have any performance reviews (or measures)in my time. There isn't much point in having performance measures in an all volunteer organisation if you don't have someones name beside the measure, and that person acknowledges responsibility for achieving that measure. Until that happens noone is responsible for anything.
Bryan
As editor of this Blog I would like to know who James is. I do not know a NZ petanque player by this name. James, can you please let us know.
Thanks Bryan but i am well capable of knowing what to look for. I also think that this board is more than capable and some are not afraid to amit if they get it wrong. They will get the support if they ask for it and dont think they know everything. Communication and democracy is what will grow this sport not autocracy as we have seen in the past.
Myles.
p.s
tom there are to james that i know of.
Hi Myles,
There are at least 16 performance indicators (and several subsets)for a Board to achieve in the strategic plan by 2013. You tell me how many volunteers are going to be needed to acheive even 50% of these objectives in that time frame. This type of strategic planning is straight out of "Corporate Planning 101" where a Board has huge resources to put to the task of implementation. In an organisation like ours the best we can do is choose one or two objectives per year and put our meagre resources to work on them - and if that is autocracy so be it.
Bryan
Bryan
Hello Tom
I am living overseas but am with family here at the moment. One of my family also plays petanque which is why I was having a look around your site.
James
Bryan i am aware that this might be a large task and one that is ambitious. However if they do acheive 50%
of what they have put on paper it will be a darn sight more than any board or previous Mgmt structure has done. As i have said if this board communicates with it shareholders( the players) and keeps them informed then they will get the support that they require. If they don't they will be like every other mgmt structure and i will have questions for them to as i have for previous Mgmt.
Myles
Hi Myles,
That is fine, and the Board will always get my support if they ask for it.
Bryan
Post a Comment