Debate directly related to English Chess Federation matters.
-
John Foley
- Posts: 369
- Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 9:58 am
- Location: Kingston-upon-Thames
Post
by John Foley » Wed Sep 22, 2021 3:26 pm
Chris Goodall wrote: ↑Wed Sep 22, 2021 3:18 pm
That whole piece is talking about appointed directors. Did you read it?
I suggest you read it before asking me to read it as:
(a) the article is about succession planning for directors
(b) it is not about appointed directors
-
Roger de Coverly
- Posts: 21350
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Post
by Roger de Coverly » Wed Sep 22, 2021 3:33 pm
John Foley wrote: ↑Wed Sep 22, 2021 3:26 pm
(a) the article is about succession planning for directors
In the early days of the ECF (founded 2005), they were quite keen on alternate directors. They then dropped the appointments because of an eventually dropped intent to pursue charitable status for the ECF as a whole and it was stated that the Charity Commission didn't approve. So Chris Fegan was only reviving a previously established practice.
-
J T Melsom
- Posts: 1295
- Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 11:12 pm
Post
by J T Melsom » Wed Sep 22, 2021 3:35 pm
ECF Directors are elected. Shadowing prior to announcing a candidacy effectively gives an advantage of incumbency which has been criticised elsewhere. Perhaps what would be better would be to have the election prior to an incumbent reaching the end of their term, and then an extended handover with the successful candidate. Not perfect, but more respectful of the democratic process.
-
Chris Goodall
- Posts: 1058
- Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 6:40 pm
Post
by Chris Goodall » Wed Sep 22, 2021 3:37 pm
John Foley wrote: ↑Wed Sep 22, 2021 3:26 pm
Chris Goodall wrote: ↑Wed Sep 22, 2021 3:18 pm
That whole piece is talking about appointed directors. Did you read it?
I suggest you read it before asking me to read it as:
(a) the article is about succession planning for directors
(b) it is not about appointed directors
I suggest you read it before suggesting I read it before asking you to read it.
They must prepare for all eventualities from unexpected departures, such as illness or not being up to the task in hand following an annual review of their performance, through to the dates they can plan for, such as reaching retirement age.
No mention of being voted out at an AGM. Indeed, if whoever is doing the annual reviews can get rid of a director, they can just override such a vote. So it's obviously talking about appointed directors rather than elected ones.
Donate to Sabrina's fundraiser at
https://gofund.me/aeae42c7 to support victims of sexual abuse in the chess world.
Northumberland webmaster, Jesmond CC something-or-other. Views mine. Definitely below the Goodall Line.
-
John Foley
- Posts: 369
- Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 9:58 am
- Location: Kingston-upon-Thames
Post
by John Foley » Wed Sep 22, 2021 3:45 pm
Roger de Coverly wrote: ↑Wed Sep 22, 2021 3:33 pm
They then dropped the appointments because of an eventually dropped intent to pursue charitable status for the ECF as a whole and it was stated that the Charity Commission didn't approve. So Chris Fegan was only reviving a previously established practice.
The previously established practice has therefore been successfully revived. Thanks to the ECF Board for this thoughtful arrangement.
-
John Foley
- Posts: 369
- Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 9:58 am
- Location: Kingston-upon-Thames
Post
by John Foley » Wed Sep 22, 2021 4:10 pm
Chris Goodall wrote: ↑Wed Sep 22, 2021 3:37 pm
I suggest you read it before suggesting I read it before asking you to read it.
When I suggested you read the article I was rather hoping you would be able to struggle past the first paragraph. The second paragraph begins:
But what about the other members of the board – the directors? They play vital roles on the board, add value to the decision-making process, and have a major impact on the overall success of the organisation. To source directors that will provide value, whilst also delivering business continuity, a succession plan must be in place for all board members, particularly the chair and committee chairs.
I rest my case.
-
Ian Thompson
- Posts: 3575
- Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:31 pm
- Location: Awbridge, Hampshire
Post
by Ian Thompson » Wed Sep 22, 2021 4:26 pm
Chris Goodall wrote: ↑Wed Sep 22, 2021 3:37 pm
No mention of being voted out at an AGM. Indeed, if whoever is doing the annual reviews can get rid of a director, they can just override such a vote. So it's obviously talking about appointed directors rather than elected ones.
I doubt it. The ECF Articles of Association include a procedure for dismissing an elected Director without involving Council.
-
Michael Farthing
- Posts: 2069
- Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2014 1:28 pm
- Location: Morecambe, Europe
Post
by Michael Farthing » Wed Sep 22, 2021 4:32 pm
Ian Thompson wrote: ↑Wed Sep 22, 2021 4:26 pm
Chris Goodall wrote: ↑Wed Sep 22, 2021 3:37 pm
No mention of being voted out at an AGM. Indeed, if whoever is doing the annual reviews can get rid of a director, they can just override such a vote. So it's obviously talking about appointed directors rather than elected ones.
I doubt it. The ECF Articles of Association include a procedure for dismissing an elected Director without involving Council.
It's very stringent however.
-
Kevin Thurlow
- Posts: 5849
- Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm
Post
by Kevin Thurlow » Wed Sep 22, 2021 5:47 pm
"They play vital roles on the board, add value to the decision-making process, and have a major impact on the overall success of the organisation. To source directors that will provide value, whilst also delivering business continuity, a succession plan must be in place for all board members, particularly the chair and committee chairs."
Bingo!
(I assume that there are fans of BS BIngo on here?)
-
John Foley
- Posts: 369
- Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 9:58 am
- Location: Kingston-upon-Thames
Post
by John Foley » Wed Sep 22, 2021 6:25 pm
Kevin Thurlow wrote: ↑Wed Sep 22, 2021 5:47 pm
Bingo!
(I assume that there are fans of BS BIngo on here?)
Not when it comes to serious matters such as the running of the Federation because chess is an important part of many people's lives. I would hope that those on this forum would treat these matters with due respect. The Federation needs to be well organised and should comply with best practice in governance. There is no need to deride the recommendations of the Institute of Directors which encapsulates decades of experience by people who know what they are talking about.
-
Roger de Coverly
- Posts: 21350
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Post
by Roger de Coverly » Wed Sep 22, 2021 6:30 pm
John Foley wrote: ↑Wed Sep 22, 2021 6:25 pm
There is no need to deride the recommendations of the Institute of Directors which encapsulates decades of experience by people who know what they are talking about.
Their recommendations should be written in English.
-
Joseph Conlon
- Posts: 339
- Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2019 4:18 pm
Post
by Joseph Conlon » Wed Sep 22, 2021 6:46 pm
John Foley wrote: ↑Wed Sep 22, 2021 6:25 pm
Kevin Thurlow wrote: ↑Wed Sep 22, 2021 5:47 pm
Bingo!
(I assume that there are fans of BS BIngo on here?)
Not when it comes to serious matters such as the running of the Federation because chess is an important part of many people's lives. I would hope that those on this forum would treat these matters with due respect. The Federation needs to be well organised and should comply with best practice in governance. There is no need to deride the recommendations of the Institute of Directors which encapsulates decades of experience by people who know what they are talking about.
I know little of the corporate world, but have plenty of experience of governance in large educational charities which hold elections for posts (and IMO the ECF is morally much closer to the latter than the former). One can equally well say that good governance practice is that people do not appoint their own successors. I think shadowing makes sense once someone is the appointed (or elected) successor. As said above, it is more complicated if the post is in principle subject to a competitive election. There is a lot of sense in elections being held several months prior to the actual transition (of power, or responsibility or both).
-
J T Melsom
- Posts: 1295
- Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 11:12 pm
Post
by J T Melsom » Wed Sep 22, 2021 6:52 pm
'Not when it comes to serious matters such as the running of the Federation because chess is an important part of many people's lives. I would hope that those on this forum would treat these matters with due respect'.
Lighten up John - after all its not as if Kevin has been associated in recent years with efforts to destabilise the ECF. It was obviously a criticism of the language rather than the advice. It remains unclear to me however how organisations with elections can routinely follow this governance advice without giving the shadow an advantage in the election. Any thoughts on this substantive point.
-
Christopher Kreuzer
- Posts: 8843
- Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:34 am
- Location: London
Post
by Christopher Kreuzer » Wed Sep 22, 2021 7:04 pm
The concept of shadowing taking place after an election presumes the incumbent is willing to do so and either wasn't campaigning against their successor or is willing to rise above a political loss.
On shadowing in general, you can get various forms of this, ranging from all-Board shadowing (helping to decide which post to stand for) to multi-person shadowing of one post. Pros and cons. Depends on organisation.
-
Angus French
- Posts: 2154
- Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 1:37 am
Post
by Angus French » Wed Sep 22, 2021 7:07 pm
Just also to say that the IOD is for business bods. If the ECF is interested in outside advice (beyond that provided by the Governance Committee) then probably the first place for it to go, as a sports body and membership organisation, is the Sports and Recreation Alliance (the ECF has membership of the S&RA).