Category: Conflict Resolution 2015 Q&A

Nikisha Sanders 2015 Q&A: Conflict Resolution, Group 1

Jenny McDevitt

When Elections was ordered to remove Nikisha Sanders from the 2015 Election ballot, the committee was told to erase all information about her candidacy from the website. However, Elections firmly feels that there is no situation in which candidates, whether former or current, should be silenced or erased from Election information. As in all circumstances, Elections’ policy is to only edit and/or post candidate-written information with candidate permission. Therefore, with Sanders’ permission, we have posted the Q&A responses she completed prior to her removal.

Please describe your approach to conflict resolution. Read More

Dan Lamson 2015 Q&A: Conflict Resolution, Group 2

Elections Chair

Note: Dan has withdrawn from the race, but he completed his answers before withdrawing, so they will be posted to the site.

According to the 2014 Strategic Planning retreat summary, Board has difficulty “recognizing the positive aspects of people they have had complex relationships with”. Do you believe this is a current problem in the OTW? What do you think can be done to create a more professional environment?

First off, I don’t necessarily believe that you need to see the positive aspects of people to be a professional and work with them. In real life, I deal with all sorts of people I may not like, but can work with them fine. I tend to try to look for the best in people, but am not always successful, it can be hard.

I think the bigger issue here is making things personal. As I said in a previous answer, making things personal is a bad idea. We can agree to disagree, and do it disagreeably. I am not in any way the kind of person who would make someone do it my way or else. I want what is best for the org, if my vision does not mesh with yours, tell me why and there’s a real chance you could win me over. I think open discussion and the free flow of ideas can accomplish a lot in a professional environment.

So to sum it up, I think we can all be patient with each other, work together and be grownups and that will really help the org be professional. This goes both ways though, org staffers have treat others as they want to be treated. Without this thought in mind, some people can be pretty mean.

Several of the Board’s minutes for their closed sessions this year had items like this: “Discussion of how to proceed in a complaint against a staffer.” Under what circumstances do you think it appropriate for the Board to file complaints against individual staffers? Do you foresee any potential problems or conflicts of interest with regards to something like this?

Board members are elected to serve the organization here. Being elected doesn’t mean they have to take abuse from staffers or volunteers. If a staff member is behaving in a way unbecoming of them–being abusive or harassing a board member, the board member has just as much right as anyone else to do something about it, through channels. If the reasons were less than professional, then I would say they do not have a right to make or file a complaint, but if a staffer can file a just grievance for an offense against another staffer, then I think that board members should be able to do the same.

I do not foresee any situation where there will be a conflict of interest for me. I have never had any CCAP issues personally or nor to my knowledge have any members of my staff while I have been a chair or co-chair.

The Board has retained an outside lawyer on a pro bono basis to advise them on various issues, including the involuntary removal of volunteers from the Org. What impact do you think this decision has had on the Org’s culture? Do you believe this is a useful tool for conflict management? Under what circumstances do you think external legal counsel specifically retained by and for the Board alone, in opposition to other volunteers in the Org, might be an appropriate step to take?

I don’t see a problem with an outside lawyer. I am not sure it has had a noticeable impact on org culture. I have not seen or heard of one, at any rate. Non-profits and big companies alike do this kind of thing all the time. Outside counsel is brought in, generally at the request of the organization in questions legal team. Our Legal Committee asked for this to happen because no one on our legal team shared the outside counsel’s specific expertise with nonprofit law. Lawyers specialize in various fields and our lawyers are awesome at what they do but we don’t have one of every type. Further, bringing in outside counsel is a best practice. If you have any questions about this, I would refer you to the org’s legal team who could explain it in much better detail.

I think characterizing this use of outside counsel as being used by the board against staff is disingenuous. To my knowledge this attorney was brought in to deal with a complex tax issue that no one else in the org could answer. Also–the fact it was pro bono is really cool–it was probably going to be a big bill otherwise!

There have been repeated complaints about the behavior of Directors toward staff and volunteers who have expressed that they have no avenue for addressing this sort of behavior. While Directors may now remove each other, most of these reports indicate that the rest of the Board was either dismissive of the concerns or actually supported the abusive actions of their colleagues. What are your feelings about exploring and instituting a process by which a requisite number of chairs, staff, and/or volunteers can call for a vote of the membership to consider the removal of a Director who has engaged in unprofessional conduct, abusive behavior, or otherwise violated the organization’s Code of Conduct?

I support this proposition wholeheartedly. I am a fan of both accountability and also freedom of choice. Recall is a common form of action in many governments. It would be a complicated issue for us to tackle, but I feel it should not be limited to only chairs, staff and volunteers. I would like to see us able to give voice to the members on whole somehow, so if the members feel the organization is not treating them well or fairly, they can also take action. (Perhaps members could initiate a vote of chairs or some other mechanism to give them voice?) I foresee this as being a multi-stage discussion with a framework founded on a path for chairs, staff and volunteers first, but potentially growing if we can find a way.

I am not sure how the situation would work at all, but I think we could work something out as an organization that will give voice to those board works for. An aside: I would like to think that if there was a situation with board members(s) behaving in unprofessionalism, abusive behavior, code of conduct violating activities or some other egregious activity, that other board members would take action and remove them. The staff/member action would need to have a threshold to meet, to protect unpopular board members being removed because of personality issues.

Matty Bowers 2015 Q&A: Conflict Resolution, Group 2

Elections Chair

According to the 2014 Strategic Planning retreat summary, Board has difficulty “recognizing the positive aspects of people they have had complex relationships with”. Do you believe this is a current problem in the OTW? What do you think can be done to create a more professional environment?

It’s a problem in certain areas of the organization. For everyone else though, we came to the realization that if we wanted the OTW to succeed, we needed to get over the past and start working together, regardless of whether we liked each other or not.

Board can help solve this problem by taking the lead and setting a good example for the rest of the organization. Board should always act professionally towards volunteers and each other, in both formal and informal gatherings. Fostering teamwork is also a good idea; as people work together they often find common ground and realize we are all working towards the same goal – the success of the OTW.

Several of the Board’s minutes for their closed sessions this year had items like this: “Discussion of how to proceed in a complaint against a staffer.” Under what circumstances do you think it appropriate for the Board to file complaints against individual staffers? Do you foresee any potential problems or conflicts of interest with regards to something like this?

Unless a volunteer is actively threatening, blackmailing, or otherwise acting in an illegal manner towards a Board member, I do not think it’s appropriate for Board to file a complaint against a volunteer. Board holds a position of power over every volunteer; filing a complaint is not only an abuse of power it also creates a conflict of interest. Since Board is the ultimate authority, they can proceed to discipline anyone they’ve filed complaints against as they see fit. Volunteers have no recourse – there is no one they can present their case to, no one who can act on a complaint filed against a Board member. Board answers only to themselves, there are no checks on their power. They can simply ignore any and all complaints filed against one of them.

I would like to see this changed. Volunteers should have recourse should a specific Board member, or the Board as a whole, decides to inappropriately file a complaint against them. We either need to give a current committee or an outside group the power to advocate for the volunteer in cases which involve Board members.

The Board has retained an outside lawyer on a pro bono basis to advise them on various issues, including the involuntary removal of volunteers from the Org. What impact do you think this decision has had on the Org’s culture? Do you believe this is a useful tool for conflict management? Under what circumstances do you think external legal counsel specifically retained by and for the Board alone, in opposition to other volunteers in the Org, might be an appropriate step to take?

I think consulting with outside sources can, at times, be useful. There is value in bringing in an outside perspective, especially with experienced professionals.

That said, I do not think we should be shopping around to find outside consultants solely to back up a specific decision, especially in regards to conflicts between volunteers and Board. Outside counsel should always be a neutral party who can analyze the issue impartially; it should not be someone chosen by Board simply because they already agree with the decision Board wants to make.

There have been repeated complaints about the behavior of Directors toward staff and volunteers who have expressed that they have no avenue for addressing this sort of behavior. While Directors may now remove each other, most of these reports indicate that the rest of the Board was either dismissive of the concerns or actually supported the abusive actions of their colleagues. What are your feelings about exploring and instituting a process by which a requisite number of chairs, staff, and/or volunteers can call for a vote of the membership to consider the removal of a Director who has engaged in unprofessional conduct, abusive behavior, or otherwise violated the organization’s Code of Conduct?

I very much support such a process. This would be an important step to improving Board’s accountability for their actions, especially those towards other volunteers.

Katarina Harju 2015 Q&A: Conflict Resolution, Group 2

Elections Chair

According to the 2014 Strategic Planning retreat summary, Board has difficulty “recognizing the positive aspects of people they have had complex relationships with”. Do you believe this is a current problem in the OTW? What do you think can be done to create a more professional environment?

Yes, I do very much feel that it’s currently a problem. I think there should be clear guidelines so that everyone can know what the limits of acceptable behaviour are. Everyone should also learn to recognise that criticism of your work is not a personal attack, this is especially important for Board members, because they are in a position that invites criticism. If Board members are unable to make the distinction between disagreements about work matters and personal attacks they should seriously consider stepping down from their position for their own sake, and also for the good of the organization.

Several of the Board’s minutes for their closed sessions this year had items like this: “Discussion of how to proceed in a complaint against a staffer.” Under what circumstances do you think it appropriate for the Board to file complaints against individual staffers? Do you foresee any potential problems or conflicts of interest with regards to something like this?

Board members shouldn’t face abuse any more than anyone else in the organization. However Board members also need to keep in mind that they are in a position where their actions come under close scrutiny and where their decision might easily face criticism, and reasonable criticism of their actions in work-related matters does not constitute harassment or abuse. If there is reason for complaint, then like in any other such situation it should first be taken to the chair of the committee where the staffer in questions serves, and the same procedures should be followed as they would in any other similar complaint. If the matter does come in front of the Board, then the Board member who has made the complaint should of course recuse themselves.

The Board has retained an outside lawyer on a pro bono basis to advise them on various issues, including the involuntary removal of volunteers from the Org. What impact do you think this decision has had on the Org’s culture? Do you believe this is a useful tool for conflict management? Under what circumstances do you think external legal counsel specifically retained by and for the Board alone, in opposition to other volunteers in the Org, might be an appropriate step to take?

Frankly I believe it has had a very negative impact on the organization’s culture. It has heightened the fear that Board might at any time remove anyone from the organization by sidestepping accepted procedure. Personally I cannot see a situation where it would be necessary or appropriate to retain outside legal counsel for the Board alone for such a reason.

There have been repeated complaints about the behavior of Directors toward staff and volunteers who have expressed that they have no avenue for addressing this sort of behavior. While Directors may now remove each other, most of these reports indicate that the rest of the Board was either dismissive of the concerns or actually supported the abusive actions of their colleagues. What are your feelings about exploring and instituting a process by which a requisite number of chairs, staff, and/or volunteers can call for a vote of the membership to consider the removal of a Director who has engaged in unprofessional conduct, abusive behavior, or otherwise violated the organization’s Code of Conduct?

I very much believe that there should be some process like the one mentioned in the question that would trigger a vote for removal. The problem with a vote of the membership however is that the OTW has a large number of members and it might be difficult to get the requisite number of people to vote for any action to ever be taken. In some ways, having this process call up a vote by the Board would be more useful. I understand the worry that Board members would side with one of their own, so to speak, because I share that same worry. Personally I hope that this election will start to change that, because I have served with several of my fellow candidates and I firmly believe that they would never condone abusive behaviour, no matter who was involved.

Atiya Hakeem 2015 Q&A: Conflict Resolution, Group 2

Elections Chair

According to the 2014 Strategic Planning retreat summary, Board has difficulty “recognizing the positive aspects of people they have had complex relationships with”. Do you believe this is a current problem in the OTW? What do you think can be done to create a more professional environment?

While “having difficulty recognizing the positive aspects of people one has had complex relationships with” is probably an inescapable human tendency, I think it’s easiest to overcome in an environment in which all parties involved are strongly motivated to work towards concrete goals. Even if I have had issues with someone in the past, if I need their contribution to help something important to me succeed, I will be happy to focus on the ways in which they are competent and to interact with them as smoothly as I can. Electing directors with a history of working with others to get things done, and who know and care deeply about the success of the OTW’s projects should reduce the odds of unproductive and unprofessional behavior.

Several of the Board’s minutes for their closed sessions this year had items like this: “Discussion of how to proceed in a complaint against a staffer.” Under what circumstances do you think it appropriate for the Board to file complaints against individual staffers? Do you foresee any potential problems or conflicts of interest with regards to something like this?

I feel that complaints from Board about staffers should only be considered in extreme cases, such as a staffer being abusive to a director on a personal level. Disagreeing with Board policy, for example, even vehemently or repeatedly, should not be grounds for a complaint. In order to have a healthy organization, those doing the work must be able to freely express their views and opinions about the leadership, the organization, and its goals. If they can’t, those in charge are cut off from vital information, and those under them are left feeling frustrated and voiceless. It’s therefore extremely important that policies allow staffers and volunteers to speak their mind to the Board without fearing punitive measures.

Additionally, there is an obvious and inherent conflict of interest in Board filing a complaint when the party who will judge the merits of that complaint are Board themselves. To reduce the conflict, Board complaints should adjudicated by a neutral party such as Volunteers & Recruiting or Legal, not by the directors themselves.

The Board has retained an outside lawyer on a pro bono basis to advise them on various issues, including the involuntary removal of volunteers from the Org. What impact do you think this decision has had on the Org’s culture? Do you believe this is a useful tool for conflict management? Under what circumstances do you think external legal counsel specifically retained by and for the Board alone, in opposition to other volunteers in the Org, might be an appropriate step to take?

I am extremely unhappy about the entire idea of volunteer management being done in this way. The OTW has always prided itself as being a volunteer organization, run by and for fans. The Board are supposed to be leaders to guide the Org, not dictators imposing their will on the individuals who are its lifeblood. The entire idea that Board would be in such opposition to the other volunteers in the Org that they felt the need to resort to outside legal counsel says to me that something is deeply wrong. I don’t feel there are any circumstances that would make that appropriate, and I am concerned that it is a departure from our volunteer culture that could do lasting harm.

We have in-house structures to deal with human resource issues and conflict management. If they are not adequate, we should improve them, with advice from our own legal team.

There have been repeated complaints about the behavior of Directors toward staff and volunteers who have expressed that they have no avenue for addressing this sort of behavior. While Directors may now remove each other, most of these reports indicate that the rest of the Board was either dismissive of the concerns or actually supported the abusive actions of their colleagues. What are your feelings about exploring and instituting a process by which a requisite number of chairs, staff, and/or volunteers can call for a vote of the membership to consider the removal of a Director who has engaged in unprofessional conduct, abusive behavior, or otherwise violated the organization’s Code of Conduct?

I think that implementing a procedure for to hold directors accountable for abusive conduct is essential for the health and morale of the Org. The fact that a director can literally do anything short of violating U.S. law with no consequences is a huge temptation to bad behavior. Unprofessional conduct towards staff and volunteers creates a hostile environment in which it is more difficult to get work done, leads to loss of personnel, and makes the entire organization look bad. The mere existence of a process for removal of a director for abusive behavior would serve as a check to encourage Board members to consider their actions more carefully.

This responsibility cannot rest only in the hands of Board itself, for the reasons highlighted in the question. Accountability must work both ways between Board and the rest of the Org, and a policy where a reasonable consensus of chairs/staffers/volunteers could take action would ensure that this was the case.

Andrea Horbinski 2015 Q&A: Conflict Resolution, Group 2

Elections Chair

According to the 2014 Strategic Planning retreat summary, Board has difficulty “recognizing the positive aspects of people they have had complex relationships with”. Do you believe this is a current problem in the OTW? What do you think can be done to create a more professional environment?

No Answer Provided.

Several of the Board’s minutes for their closed sessions this year had items like this: “Discussion of how to proceed in a complaint against a staffer.” Under what circumstances do you think it appropriate for the Board to file complaints against individual staffers? Do you foresee any potential problems or conflicts of interest with regards to something like this?

No Answer Provided.

The Board has retained an outside lawyer on a pro bono basis to advise them on various issues, including the involuntary removal of volunteers from the Org. What impact do you think this decision has had on the Org’s culture? Do you believe this is a useful tool for conflict management? Under what circumstances do you think external legal counsel specifically retained by and for the Board alone, in opposition to other volunteers in the Org, might be an appropriate step to take?

No Answer Provided.

There have been repeated complaints about the behavior of Directors toward staff and volunteers who have expressed that they have no avenue for addressing this sort of behavior. While Directors may now remove each other, most of these reports indicate that the rest of the Board was either dismissive of the concerns or actually supported the abusive actions of their colleagues. What are your feelings about exploring and instituting a process by which a requisite number of chairs, staff, and/or volunteers can call for a vote of the membership to consider the removal of a Director who has engaged in unprofessional conduct, abusive behavior, or otherwise violated the organization’s Code of Conduct?

No Answer Provided.