I have some experience with this, too, sozobe. Deb and c.i. are right on target. Give the idiots limited choices (so you don't have to explain as much) and above all, KEEP THEM BUSY AND FOCUSED so they won't have the time or energy to come up with half-assed ideas of their own. They'll still gripe & complain through the process (sorry, nothing will stop that) but in the end, when it's successful, they'll all be very proud of themselves and offer to volunteer again. Then you can decide whether or not you want to continue to lead them.
(Would you believe me if I said I'm actually quite diplomatic in person?!?)
I'm actually NOT leading this one -- just the chair of one of many subcommittees, not chair (I've been saying president, really chair) of the whole shebang. That's part of the difficulty for me, actually, since the keeping 'em busy stuff is what I'd like to do but don't actually have the authority to do. I kept this one
because I wasn't leading it (was leading a few of the ones I quit), and thought that would be less stress. And I'm sure it is. This is probably the worst of it, caught between not having the necessities (tax ID #, stationery, businesscards, information to use for sales pitches such as WHAT the workshops will be about) and a looming deadline. Once the necessities are there, and they are (supposedly) in process, I can make some pretty good headway. Hopefully.
Thanks so much for the sympathy + understanding. And even the concrete offer for help a la Craven (wow). Helps a lot.
I did this sort of thing once, fifteen years ago and I swore that I would never ever do it again. The event was sucessful and I've still got people mad at me. I have no advice, other then toughen your hide, that others have not offered, and good luck.
Committees - god's little way of showing us what hell is like....
The Bureau of Charitable Institutions is ,I believe a Fed operation that requires registration so that you can solicit for charitable stuff. I believeit is required for tax free donations and to allow the donors to claim a deduction. It compliments the 501-3C title.
All I know is we ran afowl of this and , as an environmental group , we were slapped on the wrist by our grants agency. Dumasses gave us the grants and then didnt follow through on anything till the end of our phase 2 work to restore habitats for fish and riverine grasses. They then acted like we were some criminal conspiracy.
edited for spelling (Im still not sure about afowl-I think that may have to do with chickens but hey, you know what I mean.)
I don't have any words of wisdom, soz. Just lending my support.
Good info, farmerdude. Thanks. I'll look into it.
dlowan, yes, didn't Kafka write a little book about that?
Acquiunk and Swimpy, thanks. Acquiunk, I strongly suspect I will make a similar vow when this is all over and done with.
(And how the heck are ya, Swimp?)
Ooh, sorry, soz. I just assumed you were leading it. You seem too sharp to be taking any other role. Now I understand your frustration. And I do sympathize. (((Big hug)))
Well, that's a flattering assumption!
I am trying to get away from leading all the time, more into being a role player. I don't think it's necessarily a virtue to always or only be in leadership positions. Good to diversify. I'm learning a lot.
You're right, it's not necessarily a virtue, but if you have a talent for leadership, it can be very frustrating working in a subordinate role to those who do not have a similar talent (or the expertise) to lead. Wouldn't you agree?!
Er, YES!
On the plus side, the chair is pretty willing to listen to my advice, and has actively solicited it. (I was the president of a different committee of which she was a member, and she's seen me in action.) But yeah, still a lot of sitting on my hands (deaf equivalent to biting my tongue.)
The magic word is "delegate."
c.i.
Unfortunately, one needs to have another magic word -- "authority" -- before one can implement that there magic word.
Plus, delegate to what? Sometimes it is the better part of valor to just do the work. I remember delegating some irrigation pipe sizing for 96 houses, and then spending my next weekend correcting it all. Who knew he couldn't add? Years later I have warned this or that person who then hired him anyway (nice presentation) and ended up doing all the work themselves. I presume he is still selfsatisfied and still can't add. Not to be mean. Delegate when you know your staff, after some reconnoitering.
I delegated back in the med world and virtually everyone under me moved up, it all worked really well, and we are all still friends. Some of those I delegated to now head departments. But, delegating to lousy comes out lousy.
"Delegating to lousy comes out lousy". INDEED! (Hey, I've been quoting you a lot lately, haven't I? Well you've been particularly pithy, I guess.)
Soz, I am pithy or unreadable or blather, have multiple personae, at your service.
On the good side, I have had - back when I was tech (head) at some university labs - some of the world's best beginning help. I was at the time a person with a ba in bacteriology who had x number of years in starting labs, but, you know, no genius.
Well, I had to fire one dishwasher, who tended not to show up, and that nearly killed me. As some kind of yinyang reward, all the dishwashers after that were exceptional people. And the boss wasn't bad either. (I don't mean me, I mean my boss..)
There was Freddie, who was premed, was one of the twelve who stopped ucla under reagan. Sharp and funny, work got done and then we all talked.
Another lab - there was Gail, dishwasher for us at another small lab, now (or last I looked) one of the world biggies in Immunology. I was the second tech there and the first was the guy I trained previously ...it was a little microcosmic space. Anyway, Gail was from Oklahoma and very very funny, first of all, efficient secondly, and then we talked. She and hub still friends. He is high up in North Dakota gov, she was anchor at local nbc and a newpaper editor, now runs a charity org. Both now way beyond me in savvy.
Then there was next Gail, who was a dental student.....
then there was Toha, a vietnamese immigrant, who checked in the specimens and spun the bloods down for sera, went to the local city college..she got, fairly soon after that, a biochem doctorate out of Caltech.
so most of the people who did lab miscellany were sharp and past sharp, interesting people.
But then, when I switched to landarch, where I started out knowing nada yet again, I ran into people who ....couldn't toe the line like anybody in those old labs could without blinking.
I don't really know what the difference was, philosophically. Did the land arch helpers have no driving interest? Were they spoiled? Not true of the profession as a whole, just one or two of the beginners that I ran into. Re the profession as a whole, it is little appreciated for vast savvy and work.
In my later years in that minibig firm, people came in expecting 9-5. Just about as I left to do a solo practice, which is to say, opened an office downstairs, still friendly, it was easier to just do it.
That's interesting about the scientists, Osso. That makes sense to me but I'm having a hard time formulating a theory as to why. Prestige? Knowing that it's on the way to a Ph.D rather than not leading anywhere it particular? Culture?
Another little rant if I may be so presumptuous (you have all been so kind, and there are far worse things in the world than the following):
This committee has a yahoo group which we use to communicate between meetings. I followed up on some group correspondence with one person individually -- sent an email directly to her rather than the group. I talked about how I was contacting local sports teams, like the Bears, White Sox, Cubs, etc. Today, she wrote posted to the group saying, "[sozobe] - I just remembered few other sport teams that you may have forgotten - So far you mentioned Bears, Cubs, Sox, Fire.. Here is three more - Chicago Wolves (hockey), Chicago Blackhawk (hockey), and Chicago Bulls (Basketball)."
I didn't give her a complete list, I gave her examples... that's what "etc." means. But what really irritated me was the reply from another committee member, "Janet (and [sozobe]), you covered most professional sports teams (way to go!)" Janet just took what I had already told her and restated the obvious -- and gets credit for it! (I get the parentheses.)
Tiny tiny tiny petty petty petty but annoying! (This is why I vent here instead of saying something impolitic...)
Culture, plus every one of those lab helpers, except the fired one who I never got to know, was a lively curious person. Not that the people in landarch were so slow, but there was..., no, never mind, I just don't know..not that much difference, they were curious and somewhat driven too. I think there was a decade difference, and people's experiences were different.
Anyway, on your latest vignette, gag. No more individual emails? (Maybe, or maybe not...) A general note with a comment to so and so about being glad she supported my idea of seeking out sport teams... You'll take care of it, but it is nuts-driving.
