Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: How Would You Convince Someone To Give Up an Old System?
First time accepted submitter Vanderhoth writes "I'm currently serving as a new member of a board for a not for profit organization. The board currently has a few other members, and a couple of vacant positions. One of the issues I've noticed since joining the board is the method in which they conduct business is very out of date. The member that maintains our web presences (Bob) has developed a system over the last ten years to allow us to store documents, such as agendas and minutes on a website server.
Some of the big issues are:
1.) The system is very disorganized, there are documents from the late 90's that aren't relevant, but have to be sifted through to find more current stuff.
2.) Often documents are not where they should be and are difficult to find.
3.) No one except Bob really knows how the system works.
4.) No one really wants to use the system because of the monster it's become.
My concern is if Bob decided to leave the organization no one would be able to maintain the existing system and we would be scrambling to put something new in place. I feel, for what we want to do, Google Docs would be an excellent platform for collaborating and sharing documents. The other board members, except Bob, have agreed with me, but are worried that bringing the issues with the existing system may cause offense and ultimately cause Bob to leave. Other than being overly vested in a system he developed, Bob is an important part of our board and a very valuable member.
We're already having a difficult time finding members to serve on the board so it's very important that we don't lose any existing board members. I'm hoping that I can convince the Bob to start supporting some Google docs objects on the site and try to wean him off his existing system to something a bit more manageable and collaborative that can be passed on to new members and maintained easily.
I don't want this to turn into old dogs and new tricks. I'm not that far behind Bob in years and can appreciate the difficulty of being told it's time to give in to something more modern. I'm wondering how the situation could be approached tactfully so maybe Bob will see how much easier a new system could be for everyone, including him."
Some of the big issues are:
1.) The system is very disorganized, there are documents from the late 90's that aren't relevant, but have to be sifted through to find more current stuff.
2.) Often documents are not where they should be and are difficult to find.
3.) No one except Bob really knows how the system works.
4.) No one really wants to use the system because of the monster it's become.
My concern is if Bob decided to leave the organization no one would be able to maintain the existing system and we would be scrambling to put something new in place. I feel, for what we want to do, Google Docs would be an excellent platform for collaborating and sharing documents. The other board members, except Bob, have agreed with me, but are worried that bringing the issues with the existing system may cause offense and ultimately cause Bob to leave. Other than being overly vested in a system he developed, Bob is an important part of our board and a very valuable member.
We're already having a difficult time finding members to serve on the board so it's very important that we don't lose any existing board members. I'm hoping that I can convince the Bob to start supporting some Google docs objects on the site and try to wean him off his existing system to something a bit more manageable and collaborative that can be passed on to new members and maintained easily.
I don't want this to turn into old dogs and new tricks. I'm not that far behind Bob in years and can appreciate the difficulty of being told it's time to give in to something more modern. I'm wondering how the situation could be approached tactfully so maybe Bob will see how much easier a new system could be for everyone, including him."
Why don't you just tell him what you explained above
From your description, Bob may have a vested interest in the old system. Security, self worth, whatever. Bob may feel that his value is tied with the old system. So going after the old system is going to feel like going after Bob, to him.
So don't fight that battle. Turn it around and make it so that Bob has an interest in the new system. Ok, that's obviously easier said than done. But there are several ways it can be done. Here are two approaches:
1) Let Bob be the hero. Talk to him privately about how he's managed miracles with what he's been given. Then ask him what he would do different if he could start over. Ask him what it would take. Offer to back him in his proposals. In short, put him in charge in a way that makes him indispensable and proud to do a good job.
2) Let him be the mentor. Similar to letting him be the hero, but with the twist of having someone else do the grunt work under Bob's wise and benevolent guidance.
3) Black box it. Ask Bob to come up with a new system, but don't get into the details. That requires a lot of trust, which may be what Bob is after anyways.
You get the idea. Play to what Bob wants and make it work for you.
The world is made by those who show up for the job.
This is a political problem, not a systems problem.
After over a decade in systems administration, I just a job where for six years I was an IT manager. There, I learned that the skills involved in managing projects and people are a vastly underrated skill among systems specialists. The belief is often that the right system - new hardware; new software - will somehow solve an organization problem that's inherently political in nature. By that I mean, a people problem. And I think you've got a people problem here. Which doesn't mean your documentation system isn't out of date, doesn't need a refresh, etc. It means that a core member of your team is out of step with the needs of the organization, as defined by a majority board vote.
You have three choices:
A) attempt to persuade this board member that his system needs a revamp, set a series of goals to achieve that he'll buy into, and give him the project to manage. Specify benchmarks and a timeline to achieve these goals and have the board review the project on a regular basis. Then the board must fulfill its obligation to the organization by grading project success on an honest but fair basis. If he honestly works toward these goals, then the issue will resolve itself in time. Otherwise, the board must consider the possibility of transitioning him off a leadership role in that project.
B) Fire him. Do it now. Accept the fallout and hire someone else to clean up the mess.
C) Do nothing.
---
Option A: keeps someone in place who has shown himself to be an important team member who has strayed from the needs of the organization, but who recognizes this and shifts course as a result. This is the preferred course.
Option B: cuts your losses now and takes the hit quickly, while the problem is fresh. This is a harsh course, but at least is a response to the problem at hand.
Option C: 'do nothing' is a total loser. A problem recognized and yet not pursued to resolution festers until systems collapse, often at the worst time while leaving the organization unprepared for the consequences.
But the first thing you've got to realize is that Google Docs is not your solution. Google Docs may be a fine system, and a worthy systems choice. But your problem is not 'the system'. Your problem is that one person in a leadership role in the organization has strayed from board consensus, and as a result has assumed command responsibilities he does not legitimately hold. That's what you and the board must address.
Learn how to be a proper board member.
In short: submit an agenda item to discuss resolving issues to the document management system. Either ask Bob if he'd like to present a plan of his own to resolve the problems along with your own, or let the board discuss the problems and request plans of action from you, Bob, and anyone else. At the next meeting, the plans are presented and one is selected by the board.
Everything is above board, he's given a completely legitimate/fair shot at fixing the problems, and if the board fairly discusses and votes against him, he at least should feel he was treated fairly, and it won't impact his desire to help the organization.
IF and ONLY IF he's treated fairly and he goes off in a huff about the whole thing, then so be it. He's toxic.
If you go sneaking around trying to build support for switching to google docs (which you've kind of already done - you need to buy a copy of Robert's Rules of Order and read up about polling, and why you don't do it), then ambush Bob at a meeting and throw up a motion to switch to Google Docs - he's rightfully going to be angry and defensive, and it will definitely impact his contributions or cause him to leave.
Please help metamoderate.
I support Bob's opposition to Google docs.
I'm coming at this after twenty+ years on non-profits, including time as a consultant, and time working with technology.
Your'e new. Too new to be suggesting anything dramatic unless you have been explicitly drafted to do so. If you're not 100% sure that is the case, then it's not. All that you'll do is piss people off.
You're new. It will take you at least 18 to 24 months to really understand how the organization works. And that much longer until you know the history behind the way things work. Now's the time to sit tight, keep your mouth shut, and listen and watch.
Ignore Bob's stuff. Almost certainly 95% of anything really important exists on paper - primarily minutes and budget docs. The rest is historical stuff that's nice to have, but not mission critical. I once stepped into a non-profit which, after twenty years, had exactly one banker's box of records. Someone had purged everything else in the place. We survived.
Start from scratch. Seriously, just start creating records in a new organised format. Leave the old stuff on the (virtual) shelf. If you really need it, there will be a back-up somewhere, or someone will have printed a copy.
Finally, You're brand new. Two seats are open. Records are in a mess. I'll wager that there a lot more pressing problems than just record-keeping.
Finally again, the stuff that really, really matters - minutes, budgets, grant and funding documents - should exist on paper, in a file cabinet. As much as a I love e-docs, some things are just better in a permanent, uneditable form.
Three Squirrels
My girlfriend had a job at a charity whose President made $500k+ per year. Working for a 503(c) can be very, very lucrative.
Sounds like Bob has found a way to ensure his continued employment and everyone around is too spineless to play that game of chicken with him.
Hi,
My name is Bob. I am on the board of a small non-profit, and in my own time I built a document management system for our organization before you could buy such things off the shelf. We use it for records of board meetings and the like. Some idiot named Vanderhoth just joined the board. He is rubbishing my system which I've spent years maintaining. He complains about older documents being in the way of newer ones, but can't be bothered volunteering to help tidy the documents. He wants to throw away the whole system and go with something completely unproven. What's worse is he wants to put our documents on the cloud - at the mercy of a mega-corp that could pull their service at any time, or suffer a security breach. If this little punk had any clue he'd realize first step of moving our documents would have to be tidying them up. But he just moans to others behind my back instead. Now I hear he's posted to a large blog site called slashdot. Next time I see Vanderhoth I'm going to kick him in the nuts! If he thinks he's staying on the board for long he's got another thing coming.
Sincerely,
Bob
No, boards and employees of non-profits are often paid, and some are paid quite well (e.g. museum boards, well known fund-raising organizations). All a non-profit means is that they can't return a profit to investors, as their goal is social rather than financial.
That being said, most non-profits are small organizations run entirely with unpaid volunteers. And that's great, of course. But pretty much any non-profit that is big enough that you can name them has full-time paid staff running them, even if most of the workers are unpaid volunteers, because it's worth it to have a degree of continuity and professionalism that you can't usually get from volunteers.
For example, this report (yay Google) has survey data of non-profits: http://www.asaecenter.org/Resources/whitepaperdetail.cfm?ItemNumber=22981 /
Enable 3D printed prosthetics!