Restructuring

Things have been pretty hectic since I got back from retirement. Lots of changes and adjustments that needed to be made. One of the key areas that needed work (and that we’re still working on getting right) is communications.

For some time, we’ve had a board of directors who also doubled as administrators for one or more (and sometimes many) necessary areas. It was hard to figure out who to talk to, and quite often it was necessary to talk to several people (oftentimes more than once) across multiple time-zones to get a good picture about where something was at, or to get something done.

So, instead of a board of directors of a rather unwieldy size, those responsibilities and functions are now broken down into individual teams.

One team handles Finance and Advertising, one team handles Sites, Staff and Land, one team handles Events and Education, and one team handles Information Technology.

To make things simpler, each team has one person whom you can contact, who’ll make sure that the right people are notified, or to direct you to the right person. So, that’s basically four people plus the owner (me).

Right now it’s actually just four people, since I’m handling one of those jobs, until it can be filled. That’s the new secretariat, and it’s all about communication, and easing the communications burden on the folks who are doing the heavy-lifting. Those secretaries will help us all get things done.

You can see that short list right here.

Want to appeal a ban? Talk to the Sites, Staff and Land contact.

Got a problem, suggestion or idea for a class or an event? Talk to the Events/Education contact.

Those team secretaries will work to ensure that nothing gets lost or forgotten, and that information gets to the right people. They also help coordinate the flow of information and tasks between teams.

Hopefully, as we go, we can do more, do it better and do it with less unnecessary effort than ever.

5 thoughts on “Restructuring”

  1. I’m sorry Tateru but I have an issue with your claim to be the owner of NCI. The folk who own NCI are the teir doners and those who have worked hard to make NCI what it is now, they are the owners, the membership. LL may want a single point of contact (who they refer to as the ‘owner’), and there is no issue about that, but for you to claim that you now own NCI is, in my view, wrong. The most you can claim is trustee.

    When Gramma stepped down due to health and the vindictiveness of a greifer, it was a shock to all of us, had we known the situation, action would have been taken.

    I believe NCI will survive because folk believe in NCI.

    I’ll say no more now as I’m not in a postion to do anything.

    Afon

  2. I prefer trustee myself. Owner is the technical SL term. In time, of course, I hope to be neither.

  3. Claiming ownership means claiming absolute power over anything that NCI dose without any form of oversight from the membership. Owner is not the ‘technical’ name, it has conitations that are not helpful. LL may want a single point of contact (and use the term ‘owner’ to refer to it), but that dose not mean the holder of that postion is the actual owner.

    One of the issues LL have with in-world training organisations as regards certification, etc, is the single, all powerful, owner. If the owner loses interest, or makes a bad desicion, the organistion gose to the wall. We have seen this happen. By having a proper managment system, NCI can stand out from the rest and almost guarantee its continuance no matter who is ‘in charge’. NCI can also demonstrate that decisions are taken with proper consideration of the consquences.

    It should not have been Carl’s NCI, it was never Gramma’s NCI, and it should not be Tateru’s NCI, it should just be NCI

  4. Well, as far as I’m concerned the only thought that I had when Tateru mentioned herself as owner was “okay, that’s who LL will come down on when something hits the fan.”
    I honestly find it just a touch wearying that people are still getting bent out of shape because Linden Lab in their infinite wisdom decided that groups require an “Owner”. Perhaps they should have called the role “first duck in the row”, or perhaps “nail sticking out of the deck.”
    Can we please simply accept that it’s a function that could have had a better name but doesn’t.

    Read my 1st life tab. I’m with NCI, and I’m talking to YOU.

Comments are closed.