Category: Retreat 2015 Q&A

Q&A Responses – Retreat

Jenny McDevitt

Your 2015 candidates are still hard at work answering the questions you’ve sent them! Today we’re pleased to provide you with the second complete group—you can read the candidates’ answers on the topic of the annual Board Retreat by clicking on the links below.

All 2015 Q&A responses so far.

More information on our Q&A process.

Andrea Horbinski 2015 Q&A: Retreat

Elections Staff

In 2013 and 2014, the Board had in-person meetings in North America, and there will be another this October. What is your opinion on Board retreats and their outcomes so far?

As a participant in the previous two annual meetings, in my opinion they were eminently worthwhile. Board retreats/annual meetings are a recognized best practice of non-profit organizations in general for the same reason that they have been very valuable for the OTW, and will continue to be: they allow directors and other key personnel the chance to work together in one location on specific issues facing the organization for a concentrated chunk of time and are an invaluable chance to build interpersonal relationships. That last aspect is particularly relevant to the OTW, which conducts most of its business digitally. For example, I would estimate conservatively that the 2014 retreat condensed at least three months of work at the regular organizational pace into just three days, on top of the opportunity for directors and staffers to connect with each other face-to-face. It was intense, but it was well worth it, and I think the outcomes of both the meetings were very positive for the OTW as a whole.

How would you as a Board member, go about choosing who and what committees are invited to the annual retreat?

We have chosen which committees to invite based on the topic of the annual meeting itself and have given committees discretion about which staff members to send based on their inclination/availability, although we have generally requested that they send at least one chair or co-chair due to their experience. This general method has worked well so far, and I would predict that we’ll continue to use it.

Last year the board’s in person meeting cost $18,355.21, 17% amount of the OTW’s total expenses. Do you have any ideas how to do this meeting a more cost effective way going forward?

The 2014 retreat was extremely cost-effective, particularly given the fact that 17 people attended it. 17% of the annual budget sounds like a lot, but particularly given the topic of the 2014 retreat (strategic planning for the entire organization) and the fact that the retreat brought the relevant stakeholders together in one room at one time in a way that would have been impossible over the internet, it was well worth it. Since the OTW at the time had (and still has) significant cash reserves, the cost of the 2014 retreat was not any kind of financial risk to the organization. (It’s also a reasonable assumption that the share of the budget devoted to the retreat will decrease over time as our overall operating budget grows.) That said, I sympathize with and share the desire to keep costs down, which is only responsible. That’s why the Board reviews potential locations and the budget, proposed venues, and logistical arrangements for each of the retreats in order to make sure that the costs for each item are reasonable, and we will continue to do so. (One of the reasons we chose to hold the 2015 retreat in Vancouver, Canada was the current favorable exchange rate with the U.S. dollar, which is the OTW’s operating currency; we effectively received a significant discount on all our at-retreat costs.) Do we as directors have a responsibility not to spend the organization’s money frivolously? Yes, absolutely. Is the annual retreat a frivolous expense? No, absolutely not.

Aline Carrão 2015 Q&A: Retreat

Jenny McDevitt

In 2013 and 2014, the Board had in-person meetings in North America, and there will be another this October. What is your opinion on Board retreats and their outcomes so far?

Even though I believe the initial idea had its merits, the in-person meetings have serious implementation issues and have achieved very few concrete results so far.

The retreats are always scheduled for the end of the year, meaning some of the directors present won’t be involved in the implementation of any plans or decisions made there. The retreat (and all decisions that take place there) happens without input from staff and chairs who were not invited, leading to inevitable miscommunication between parts of the Org and siloing of specific groups, furthering a division of “them against us” between staff and board that is already a big problem inside the organization.

The retreats so far also failed to accomplish any of their stated goals. The 2013 retreat led to no Board documentation. The 2014 retreat established tentative strategic planning goals that later, after committees saw them, had to be so revised that the OTW hasn’t even started implementation yet. This seems to suggest that the retreats are not as productive and important to the running of OTW as might be expected based on the resources spent on them.

In short, I don’t think the cost/benefit of them is worth it for the OTW.

How would you as a Board member, go about choosing who and what committees are invited to the annual retreat?

I’m not convinced that an in-person meeting that will, by its nature, exclude the vast majority of committees and people, is the best solution for an annual OTW meeting.

That said, if this format is kept long-term, I believe it’s essential to have a wide range of representatives present from diverse committees and in contact with the day-to-day work of the projects, to ensure the feasibility of any plan established. So I would make sure that besides admin-focused committees like VolCom and Strategic Planning, we also have chairs and representatives from the project committees.

Last year the board’s in person meeting cost $18,355.21, 17% amount of the OTW’s total expenses. Do you have any ideas how to do this meeting a more cost effective way going forward?

With the growth of the OTW and the diverse background of its staff and directors (which means transcontinental flights are required, no matter where the retreat is), the cost of the annual retreat will tend to increases each year.

I believe the best alternative is to shift the concept of a weekend-long focused work session to a more frequent, perhaps, online meeting using teleconferencing technology, like Skype. This would allow us to have more representatives present, while keeping both time requirements and costs lower and more manageable, as well as reducing the hassle for all involved allowing, for example, people to work without the drawbacks of jet-lag. Another advantage is that it allows people to join in without having to leave work for a few days, which might prevent some from being able to participate otherwise.

Atiya Hakeem 2015 Q&A: Retreat

Elections Staff

In 2013 and 2014, the Board had in-person meetings in North America, and there will be another this October. What is your opinion on Board retreats and their outcomes so far?

The 2013 retreat was supposed to produce a number of important documents better codifying the duties and obligations of the Board. Those documents appear to have been abandoned unfinished.

The 2014 retreat was originally going to include committee chairs. This idea was scrapped, and the retreat was re-tasked to involve creating a strategic plan, based on often out-of-date surveys and interviews and with no direct input from the project committees. A year later, implementation of a plan has not begun.

There has been no report yet as to what may have been accomplished at this year’s retreat, which, once again, did not involve chairs or staffers from the OTW’s project-related committees (AO3, Fanlore, TWC). In general, the retreats have been held with extremely little transparency either as to their agendas going in, or their results.

I think there can be great value to meeting in person; as part of my real-life job in academia I organized twice-yearly meetings for all the labs that were part of our collaborative grant. However, I do not believe that the OTW Board should go forward with in-person retreats for now. The amount of money that has been spent on the retreats is a significant portion of our budget, and the results so far have been basically non-existent.

How would you as a Board member, go about choosing who and what committees are invited to the annual retreat?

As I stated in answer to the question above, I don’t favor having in-person retreats at this point. However, I do see value in having a virtual annual meeting, as described below. I’d invite the chair(s) of each of the OTW’s committees to attend or to send official representatives to speak for the committee.

Last year the board’s in person meeting cost $18,355.21, 17% amount of the OTW’s total expenses. Do you have any ideas how to do this meeting a more cost effective way going forward?

Video conferencing was developed as a way for organizations to have meetings between far-flung members with the benefit of face-to-face interaction but without the expense and hassle of travel. It seems an excellent fit for us, as an online-only organization with volunteers all around the globe. Holding meetings via video would drastically reduce the costs involved, and would allow the Board to invite chairs and/or staffers to give the perspectives necessary to have an effective meeting about the Org’s direction. Non-Board attendees wouldn’t need to tune in for parts of the meeting that weren’t relevant to them, outgoing and incoming directors could both attend without unnecessary expense, and meetings could even be held more than once a year, if they proved productive.

Dan Lamson 2015 Q&A: Retreat

Elections Chair

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

In 2013 and 2014, the Board had in-person meetings in North America, and there will be another this October. What is your opinion on Board retreats and their outcomes so far?

I think they are very valuable to the org, and help plan for the future. I was not at any previous meetings, but I will be attending 2015’s as one of DevMem’s chairs. From everything I heard from participants, it was a very good experience and much was accomplished. Email and chat are great, phone calls are better, but doing in person meetings is often the best way to get things done quickly, and to cover a lot of issues. I also find that when I do things via email, I can get distracted by the internet or other things. At an in-person meeting, you are focused on the matter at hand and you figure it out.

Most orgs have in-person meetings all the time, because of their setup at brick and mortar locations. The OTW is different and so has to operate differently. From most of the reports I heard from the previous retreats, everything went well and a lot was accomplished. Further, it’s much easier to hate someone you are not in front of. These kinds of meetings in person can be healing in relationships.

You mentioned North America as a location, and I would not be averse to seeing it elsewhere, as long as cost is keyed into it.

How would you as a Board member, go about choosing who and what committees are invited to the annual retreat?

This is a complicated question. Ideally all chairs would attend because all committees deserve to be represented, but there’s only so much time in a day and a weekend. I like how each retreat we’ve had so far has kind of focused on various things. This is how they’ve been done in the past. In 2014 it was about the strategic plan and this year will have SP as well as some other things, like building development and budgeting. So as it stands, when the meeting’s theme falls under the purview of a certain committee, then they would be invited.

Last year the board’s in person meeting cost $18,355.21, 17% amount of the OTW’s total expenses. Do you have any ideas how to do this meeting a more cost effective way going forward?

If you couldn’t tell from my previous answers, I think the retreat is pretty important. Costs seem high, but when you think you have people coming from all over the world, it could be worse. A lot of people give up their time to be there, and none of the board or volunteers made money on it. So, I do not have any ideas on how to make it more cost effective, but if anyone does, I’d be happy to talk about it.

Alex Tischer 2015 Q&A: Retreat

Jenny McDevitt

In 2013 and 2014, the Board had in-person meetings in North America, and there will be another this October. What is your opinion on Board retreats and their outcomes so far?

I do not believe that there have been any noticeable results from any of the previous meetings. No great steps forward appear to have been made on any of the topics that were said to be discussed and I have not yet seen any of the documentation that was allegedly written at the first meeting. So far, my opinion is a very unfavourable one. Of course right about the time these questions will probably be published there will have been another meeting. Maybe there will be actual concrete announcements from that meeting other than a Board member resigning from their post shortly after. Until there is any proof of work done in person that couldn’t have been accomplished online, I’ll remain skeptical. I don’t doubt there could be hypothetical benefits to the idea. There just have been none so far.

How would you as a Board member, go about choosing who and what committees are invited to the annual retreat?
I would draw up the agenda for the meeting with specific goals to be achieved during the retreat and then approach the committees that are involved with the items that are to be discussed — especially with the concrete aspect of their implementation, as the Board tends to be removed from these matters and it’s hard to account for this in plans without any representation from the executive side of the organisation. Hypothetically inviting all committees just to have them there would be nice for representation, but at the current cost for those retreats, I would try to only invite people that are actively most relevant for the discussion.

Last year the board’s in person meeting cost $18,355.21, 17% amount of the OTW’s total expenses. Do you have any ideas how to do this meeting a more cost effective way going forward?

To find a more cost-effective way, I would like us to investigate other options than in-person meetings again. We are an all-online org: online meetings via Skype or some other teleconferencing software should not be beyond us.

Even my professional organisations manage to hold all but their legally-required AGM via the internet, and those are not tech-minded people in the least. Even if we someday have, say, a retreat where they’re having a debate or presentation about an issue relevant to the whole OTW, why not stream it to everyone instead of limiting it just to attendees? That would mean we would need to fly fewer people and could include far more.