[at-l] Re: A Walk in the Woods

[optimyst at gmail.com (Richard C Evans)]

I think the criticism is fair, but a little bit simplistic.  I think
the achilles heel of ATC has been its heirarchical organization and
communications style.  If I would claim to have any influence at all
during my tenure, it is to continually suggest a flatter organization
geographically closer to the grassroots of its members and volunteers.
 Things like our Stewardship Council and Regional Partnership Centers
are designed to be responsive to the local communities, the clubs and
the members.

We envision regional membership drives, regional budgets and a lot
more responsibility for the regional directors.  If things evolve
properly, much that once had to be approved in Harpers Ferry will now
be handled at the regional level.  Likewise, if things go well, the
functions at Harpers Ferry will tend to be support functions, not
command functions.

When you add a board of directors and another level of management that
make the organization appear to be even more heirarchical,  effective
communication becomes the key attribute in determining whether the
organization is becoming more responsive or more centralized and out
of touch.  I believe it is the responsibility of every member to let
Harpers Ferry know how important it is for the organization to gather
its momentum and spirit from its roots and 80 year foundation rather
than from an ivory tower.  Because the plan is still in the process of
being implemented, it is premature to know how this is going to turn
out, but we should all be vigilant.  Ideas and meaningful change must
be implemented.  The spirit to do what is right permeates the
organization, but there is always a fight over bureaucracy and
centralization (and inertia) as these things are tried out.  As they
say, the devil is in the details.  We all need to help ATC write the
next chapters of its saga.

I assure you that the consultants did not have an undue influence over
the process.  They were helpful in crystallizing the issues we were
faced with.  I was surprised at just how complex ATC is when you
factor in relationships with clubs, federal partners, state and local
governments up and down the trail, relationships with other land
trusts and non-profit organizations, etc.  Don't forget that most
board members are also club members who have a very local point of
view.  Our BS meters were working very well as we examined the issues
we faced.  Consultants were asked very tough questions and on several
occasions major revisions were necessary because of board concerns.

A single factor to keep your eye on as we move forward is
communications with the membership.  If a lot of members feel that
they are being talked at and don't have any input into the process at
this very fluid time in the organization's history, then things are
going astray.  You should begin to feel like you are involved in a
dialogue with the ATC.  Time will tell which way it will turn out. 
Have a bit of patience.  Color me an optimist.

Happy trails,

Solar Bear

On 5/28/05, Bror8588@aol.com <Bror8588@aol.com> wrote:
> 
> In a message dated 5/28/2005 12:31:17 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> ellen@clinic.net writes:
> 
> ATC  needs members, dollars and constructive criticism if it is to do the job
> that  only ATC can do.
> 
> 
> 
> Seems to me that the ATC makes decision without regard to members  input.
> The Board makes decisions according to consultants  recommendations.  They
> ignore (and certainly do not respond to) input from  members.  Oh sure, they want
> our dollars, and our silence.
> 
> Skylander
> _______________________________________________
> at-l mailing list
> at-l@backcountry.net
> http://mailman.hack.net/mailman/listinfo/at-l
>