32 Comments on Coming clean about membership

M Cooper on Thu, 19th Feb 2009 4:55 pm


(such as activist capture, cumbersome governance and stuffy inward looking cultures),

(finding new ways – particularly on-line – of engaging people)

(a new collectivism)

FFS, try living off disability benefit in a democraticly stifled, over controlled, centralised New Labour elite dominated clique constituency such as Wakefield?
You people are down the rabitt hole with Alice.

M Cooper (Mr)
Wakefield

Robin Simpson on Thu, 19th Feb 2009 5:51 pm


Thanks Matthew – it was a fascinating session which has got me thinking about a host of issues around membership, mandate, accountability, governance, consultation etc. It feels like we should be able to do all this better these days and I look forward to watching the progress of the NCVO/RSA project.

I think there are some clear links to the wider debate about ‘civil society’ at the NCVO Conference yesterday: the nature (and key strength) of civil society is its fragmented, diverse nature – a mass of tiny organisations focussed on particular niches. Yet the potential offered by ‘civil society’ as a collective entity requires us somehow to knit together this multitude of completely different interests by creating some sense of ‘membership’ or ‘belonging’. That seems to me to be the real challenge ahead for the civil society agenda.

Robin Simpson, Voluntary Arts Network.

matthewtaylor on Thu, 19th Feb 2009 8:14 pm


Thanks Robin. I completely agree. This may sound strange, but I think what we may have most in common as civic organisatiosn is that we are organisations. That’s why working on the idea of what kind of organisation can a membership organisation be to succeed today and tomorrow can create poweful synergies and bonds between organisations and people with very different backgrounds and goals.

Libby Davy on Fri, 20th Feb 2009 12:07 am


An absolutely vital issue as I see / experience it and glad to know you are thinking along these lines. My work in social media / stakeholder relations / education with ages 0-100 tells me it’s certainly time for organisations like the RSA to open up and change the way they think about membership, influence, debate etc.

See previous blog post about early courtship with RSA here http://nodestone.com/2008/05/07/rsa/ The photo says a lot to me.

More detailed comments when it’s not midnight!

After many months of pondering whether to join the RSA (including passionate debates with David Wilcox & Tessy Britton and several visits to events), it strikes me as pleasantly ironic that this post should get to me via twitter today. I had already sent the cheque off!

Thanks to one of your researchers for finding me and sending off the letter.

Congratulations on sharing the link to Guido frothing negativity. Viva open debate, warts and all.

Looking forward to stimulating and hopefully productive times ahead with the RSA.

Bestest

Libby

David Wilcox on Fri, 20th Feb 2009 1:22 pm


Hi Libby and thanks for the namecheck. I’m also passionate about changes needed in membership organisations, and indeed with Simon Berry started The Membership Project. You can see earlier content here
I’m delighted that RSA/NCVO have taken up the research strand we developed there, and I and others will now be returning to the practicalities of making change happen … bottom-up, top-down … whatever.
I think you probably picked up the Guido link via an OpenRSA retweet of DaveBriggs … rather than RSA. I’m glad you feel it should be discussed, however repellant some of the comments.
On a more constructive note, you and others may be interested in the RSA-OpenRSA-friends workshop yesterday: reports emerging here.
I know Matthew thinks I’m a troublemaker:-) but I did sign another Fellowship proposals form yesterday!

Tom on Fri, 20th Feb 2009 1:26 pm


Good stuff Matthew,

The ownership of a membership card allows organisations to make critical decisions in key moments. For example, the election of a new leader or a key decision requiring changes to the constitution of a mature charity or a significant change in policy.

No organisation can escape these moments.

Yet new leadership will require much greater agility in capturing insight from communities of interest. Allocation of resources away from classic models of membership ‘servicing’ in favour or collaborative working will help change cultures more quickly.

daniel snell on Sat, 21st Feb 2009 9:51 pm


Matthew,

Good. I think the RSA is the fellowship communtiy, not the building, although I have to admit that could be used in more engaging and productive ways (happy to share if desired).

I was at the Open RSA event this week, after an invitation from Tessy Britton. I sensed an incredible opportinuntiy for substantial change, in fact, I left very excited about what ‘could be’. If there is a genuineness to really shift the ownership, of the RSA, I believe there will be the energy and desire to run with it. However, there does need to be the confidence and ambition to start that vision.

A delemma the RSA faces is that the fellows are subsidizing the lectures, which are free for everyone! What is the RSA’s value proposition? A small cafe and a library? Or to tell people you are a Fellow of the RSA? That is meaningless currently as you can just sign up and join? No?

The younger fellows will be quicker to leave, if real value isn’t delivered (which it isn’t currently) especially if it’s easy to join, which currently it is. There is a lack of tied in loyality! If it’s easy to join, isn’t it easier to leave?

The older fellows, some what intimidated (struggling to relate) by the younger community, are soon to retire or shuffle off this mortal coil (no offense meant), may be alienated by the lurch to the youth, that are struggling to see the connectivity or value.

With the RSA web ambitons not living up to the aspirations at present – the lack of search optimization/tagging holding back the web connectivityof the fellowship – we fall back on a rather unconnected dry ‘after event’ networking experience. Where fellows may or may not connect – and if they were to, around what and how?

A freedom and a genuine desire to allow champions to grow amongst the fellowship is essential. Allow individuals to grow and develop under the RSA’s canopy. This still needs to be championed centrally, but would free the energy and capacity that is currently stiffled if not strangled.

My advice, for what it’s worth, is free up the two rooms upstairs for a internet, cafe and debating/meeting room, where a new, free, raw and engaging community could flower around new thinking, debate and ambitions for change. You’ll make more money selling coffee and cakes than renting the two rooms for sure.

It could be come a focal point of real change, real debate, excitement – where else in London right now, are interesting and vibrant young conversations happening?

I think there could be an argument for levels of membership also, happy to expand if wished. As I sense resentment amongst the fellowship regards value. We need to go out and meet this.

Champion this and also RSA individuals (through a championing scheme/finding?) success will flourish and blossom through the champions and if high levels of social delivery and impact can be demonstrated a new and dynamic community would exist again on Adam street, that could mirror the founders. Otherwise, the alternative may be old retiring fellows and skitish unloyal new fellows, either way, the heart and heritage of the RSA may wither and die on the vine.

Thoughts?

matthewtaylor on Mon, 23rd Feb 2009 9:36 am


Thanks Daniel, for this and for your continuing commitment to the Fellowship renewal project. I should first say that I, and the team here, are just as frustrated as you at the limitations of the network platform. We have been badly let down by our web designers but as commissioners of the project we have to share responsibility. I really do think things are moving now but as we have been saying this for several months I wont ask you to believe it until you see it. On another point, it isn’t the case that any one can join the RSA. We are trying to recruit more Fellows who share our vision of a vibrant Fellowship committed to civic innovation but we still have core criteria for becoming a Fellow. I also hear what you say about the generation gap, although there are some very radical older Fellows around the country, and surely the RSA should be a place where people of different ages should be able to work together. Thanks for your suggestions, we take every idea like this seriously (although opening up more rooms would cost money and wouldn’t help the Fellowship outside London). Ultimately, the objective of transforming the way the Fellowship works involves doing three things at conce; removing barriers, building capacity and developing powerful ideas for Fellowship action. Over the last year we have taken steps in various places and at various times to do one or two of these but haven’t yet managed to do all three together. This year we will continue to strive but in a more systematic way. There is a real shift in thnking in many parts of the country but we all know 2009 has to be a year when change is seen to happen. It’s great to have Fellows like you and Tessy on board.

Best

Matthew

matthewtaylor on Mon, 23rd Feb 2009 9:38 am


I agree Tom. The key think is to for other members – their shared values, their capacities and commitments, the biggest thing you get from membership. This invovles culture change at every level, it means lowering barriers and developing powerful new propositions for membership collaboration. Diffcult but vital stuff.

Thanks for the comment

matthewtaylor on Mon, 23rd Feb 2009 9:40 am


Hi David

Today’s trouble maker is tomorrow’s genius!

Best

Matthew

matthewtaylor on Mon, 23rd Feb 2009 9:41 am


Thanks Libby

It’s great to have you in the Fellowship. You can see from all the comments the scale of the challenge but also our commitment to change

Matthew

David Wilcox on Mon, 23rd Feb 2009 11:35 am


Thanks Matthew, it is hugely encouraging to have this sort of conversation. There’s enormous goodwill behind the frustration some of us have expressed, and it feels like a good time to refresh the spirit of November 2007.
I know there is a lot being done on the platform, Charter, projects, events etc … and I think it would release a lot of energy if we had an interim something on the lines of – here’s what RSA can offer, here’s what we hope Fellows can help with. More blog-style than presentation or report, with an open get-together for enthusiasts.
To extend Cluetrain’s Doc Searls – conversations, relationships, interactions -> civic innovation
Daniels’ idea of freeing up some space – even on a Tuttle Club once a week basis – is important because that would allow the conversations to start face-to-face. It could be part of network-Fellowship development at the outset – rather than free meeting space for London Fellows. Just convene, open up, and we’ll do the rest.

Mike Amos-Simpson on Mon, 23rd Feb 2009 11:45 am


In all honesty so far I’m increasingly impressed at the consideration to try and develop new approaches for RSA Fellows involvement/collaboration – not at the implementation of the online network which currently is awkward and not very imaginative, but at the commitment there appears to be to want to get it right.

Brilliant that there are people like David lobbying for change, and equally good that there were RSA staff present last week getting involved, and very good that (quite unusually) there’s a Chief Exec prepared to engage online too.

Of course it will be much more impressive to move the debate to actions and so I hope that in the OpenRSA discussions there can start to be some movement towards practical solutions & suggestions and that everyone can be kept engaged in the debate (which no doubt will be ongoing).

Justin Kirby on Mon, 23rd Feb 2009 1:36 pm


Matthew … I’ve followed the RSA Network from the sidelines as part of research I’ve been carrying out for NESTA. It always struck me that it wasn’t just the network technology that was the issue here … although your note above suggests that you’ve been let down on this front as well.

I couldn’t help being reminded of the Field of Dreams “build it and they will come” ethos, and wondered whether it’s realistic to try and built up grass roots bottom-up activism from the top down. This is particularly true of the RSA, which I think it’s fair to say has its share of amateur historians/genealogist that like to have FRSA on their stationary.

Perhaps it’s also about ownership and whether the RSA would have been better simply trying to help facilitate something more open and collaborative that would have involved other relevant organisations, groups, partners, etc. Trying to own the territory seems like a mistake and the antithesis of what you are trying to achieve, which I hope was more than just a trojan horse for soliciting membership.

I also wonder how the success of the network initiative was initially going to be evaluated, or even what the funding criteria was. Shouldn’t the initiative be utimately assessed in terms of its Social Impact, because there are far more cost effective ways of facilitating member-to-member networking via LinkedIn, Facebook, NING, etc, or even by simply providing a better cafe/bar type facilities at your HQ.

Unlike some of the others here and some you have highlighted I don’t actually have an axe to grind. I’m not a member and don’t plan to be one for now, although I’m actively involved in supporting social innovation. It’s just that I’m not sure the RSA is relevant enough, and there just seems to be far to much emphasis on it’s conference venue activities. It’s a shame because being based outside of London it could be ideal if for me if the RSA took a leaf out of the likes of Alfred Place et al.

In terms of recommendations, I would suggest that you think about innovating from the outside in rather than trying to create rapid change from the inside out. Certainly, the cultural issues you raised are important barriers to be overcome, but this is likely to take time and the lack of traction may dampen enthusiasm. So you might be better off having the RSA partner with others to incubate a social innovation networking initiative outside of the organisation to start with and then possibly integrating it as part of member services later. I also think this will do more to attract a newer breed of member to the RSA.

Anyway, can’t fault you for trying to make a difference and hope you succeed regardless of whether you take any notice of my feedback.

daniel snell on Mon, 23rd Feb 2009 6:42 pm


The debate is heating up well.

Thanks David for asking the difficult quesitons, there should be nothing that can’t be said, if there were, then already we are dying.

Justin’s point is one I didn’t make (perhaps a little too direct), but is the RSA really where ‘real/new’ debate and change at? Not sure if Alfred Place is my idea of standards and genuine change making. However, it’s a valueable debate to start.

Otherwise, certainly the RSA will slowly lose it’s value and vibrancy.

Sorry Matthew, I didn’t mean young in terms of age, but in terms of youth, for instance i find David’s energy still very vibrant. Old and young working together is important, if they’re not too intimidated by each other. I know I’m sometimes i am by older or more experienced people than I.

I understand handing over the rooms (for instance) to create a focus for the RSA other than the lectures doesn’t impact the counties, but it means that the RSA could exsist and live, with a focus and a place for creating a new momentum that forms and shapes something meaningful and vibrant.

I know you are absolutely the right man for the job, with brave and exciting decisions to make, I can’t think of anyone who could bring so much to the role.

I challenge, nay dare you to be brave and perhaps near ‘radical’, otherwise, justin’s point may stand – what value does the RSA represent? There are interesting conversations starting in other places, that will continue to weaken the value proposition, let’s re-assert the herritage and the excellence of the RSA and make the place real, vibrant and engaging.

It could be so exciting, and we are all honestly desperate for it to happen.

thanks for being wonderfully brave to open up the debate.

Daniel

matthewtaylor on Tue, 24th Feb 2009 10:07 am


Thanks Justin

I agree with a lot of what you say, and – to be honest – if we could go back to the start I think we would have made do (at least in the early stages) with using off the shelf networking software rather than developing our own. On the broader point I think it is important to get the gap between our aspiration for the Fellowship and how it has historically operated. This wasn’t, and isn’t, just a matter to building something new it involves challenging an existing and well embedded culture. Indeed some of the most interesting Fellow collaborations in the past have been hidden from view precisely because they were attempts to avoid a too-often bureaucratic, complacent and inward looking culture. This is why I talk about having simultaneously to remove barriers, enable capacity and develop content. We can’t just create a space and hope something will happen. If we think the RSA has the potential to be socially transformative (and we do) we need to get each bit of this right. It’s hard, we haven’t cracked it yet and we are always open to new insights

Thanks for your comment

Matthew

David Wilcox on Tue, 24th Feb 2009 11:14 am


The RSA networks platform is pretty much unusable, and I wonder whether there’s an argument for going back to the Drupal-based prototype while it’s fixed. That has more functionality!
However, I think the key issue is not technology – it is people. I think general opinion in the online communities world is that you can’t run a centralised system for thousands of people without support and facilitation … any more than you can run a big conference without attention both to logistics and content.
RSA has never – to my knowledge – invested in dedicated professional online staff, and I think it is unfair to expect staff without necessary skills and with much else to do to firefight, respond and help move things forward.
The system is configured around project development, reflecting the original civic innovation vision. It is not a social network where users have their own blogs where they might contribute. The help system says, if you want to start a discussion go to OpenRSA, and indeed people are doing so.
However, all is not lost. Networks staff and Fellows are discussing how to put together connection toolkits that would – particularly in the regions – blend online and offline get-togethers. This will help make Fellow-to-Fellow lateral connections. Where the central system doesn’t offer suitable tools we can bolt on others.
This distributed approach should make it easier to attract the volunteer-Fellow support that will not be easy to get on the current central system. It’s back to the people, and where they can have giood conversations.
At the moment RSA lacks conversation space – online or offline – and so lacks a heart. Fortunately that’s fairly easy to fix, with some more space in JAS even on an occasional basis, more of the regional meetings now being planned, and a joint effort by staff and Fellows to create some friendly online spaces with free technology.
I’ve been a strong critic of the way the RSA networks technology has been developed, but RSA isn’t the only organisation to suffer in this way. I think it is time to be positive, harness some people power, and start talking. This blog conversation is a great start. Thanks Matthew for practising some social artistry.

For he’s a jolly good Fellow? at Interactive Knowhow on Wed, 25th Feb 2009 11:17 am


[...] few days after the workshop, there are signs that a message of some sort may be getting through: a new thread on membership has started up on Matthew Taylor’s blog, one to which comments are invited – and, for the first time, the RSA’s Chief Executive is [...]

Jemima Gibbons on Wed, 25th Feb 2009 11:21 am


Hi Matthew,

I was at the RSANetworks workshop last week and like David, Libby, Daniel and all the others who’ve commented so far (especially Mr.Cooper, who sounds like he has a better grip on reality than any of us), think it’s great to at least have this opportunity for debate, so thank you for starting the thread.

I think the three points in your original post are spot on – this sort of change (turning a centralized organization into a networked one, which is the change the most optimistic among us hope to see) is hugely demanding and challenging – and in many cases may not be possible, but it’s got to be worth a try. As long as we accept from the outset that it’s going to be messy, difficult and possibly unresolved, our expectations will at least be managed.

One point you make in an additional comment is that the RSA needs to “get every bit right”. Really, no, don’t worry about this. I wrote last year about the ad guru Russell Davies who talks engagingly about the power of iteration, and the importance of experimenting: http://www.interactiveknowhow.com/2008/07/whos-afraid-of-the-big-idea/

I know this way of thinking goes against our traditional mindset, but if we worry too much about the fully-blown, absolute solution (the RSA networks platform, for example), that might not always be the right focus.

One key thing coming out of the workshop was summed up by David’s in his last comment: the desire/need for “fellow-to-fellow lateral connections”. Exactly! If Fellows could simply have the means to communicate with each other – a fully-searchable, comprehensive database, for example – then a lot of these networking issues would be resolved.

And a thriving Fellow-to-Fellow network, if not, actually “The RSA” (although, technically, it should be, The RSA staff and HQ are probably too entrenched as a 250 year old legacy management system for this transformation to realistically happen), could even build to become the third party that Justin suggests the RSA collaborate with.

If all that makes sense?

Looking forward to seeing the conversation continuing!
All the best,
Jemima

NB. I wrote up my impressions of the workshop here: http://www.interactiveknowhow.com/2009/02/for-hes-a-jolly-good-fellow/. I hope they don’t sound negative; this was my snapshot of the situation at the time.

Mike Amos-Simpson on Wed, 25th Feb 2009 5:02 pm


love the long thoughtful comments in all of the discussions related to this – makes me feel more comfortable adding one myself

I like very much the discussions towards connecting Fellows, linking people together, finding shared interests, concerns and issues. For my part I see the RSA as something that potentially allows me to connect with others who are likeminded either in skills, experience or ambition so that things we are involved with can be more effective.

Having “RSA Projects” makes sense and I understand the benefits and need to have high profile people connected with driving key projects and issues forward. Likewise having a well connected high profile Chief Exec lobbying for change based on those makes sense too. However…..I doubt very much that I will ever meet with Matthew, or any of the other high profile Fellows that speak at events etc. and nor do I have ambitions to. I don’t mean this dismissively or disrespectfully, but that my interest is not in how high I can raise my personal or organisational profile, but in just getting on and doing the small things that we do – hopefully a bit better, and hopefully with the benefit of the thoughts and experiences of others, and maybe even some shared skills. To me having many effective little things going on has the potential to make a considerable impact on society – rather than the idea of a large membership ‘backing by association’ a few large initiatives. That said I’m personally for example very interested in the debates around education – however I don’t see any role for me in affecting change to the national curriculum, but I do see value in those taking that forward in learning from the ideas and experiences that projects like ours on the ground have – but how does this link up?

My interest in the network is partly a simple practical one. I’m not able to attend many events, its difficult for me to give time to many meetings and so I depend on using the web to be able to make connections, discuss ideas and plan projects – so partly I just want something that works so that I can use the RSA in this way – on the basis that it has a membership of lots of relevant people to me and what I do.

My other interest though is in the potential power of using the web towards that idea of supporting lots of small groups to collaborate – the idea of being able to bring together people who are too busy to spend time real life networking, or too far apart to afford the time and cost of travel, to still come together to form strong ideas and projects. I’m a little weary of the ‘web 2.0 phenomenon’ which does get over evangelised – but there is real potential not only in the tools now available, but in the relationships and structures online collaboration creates to change the way people who want to make a difference, can make those differences.

So partly I agree that there are tools already well designed for online networking and collaboration and theres no reason not to make use of them. On the otherhand however I haven’t found an organisation so far that I wish to belong to that provides the opportunity for networking and collaborating, and that has the influence to lobby on behalf of its membership effectively. There is very good potential here and I hope past mistakes and baggage won’t have to get in the way of continuing to experiment and explore new approaches.

matthewtaylor on Thu, 26th Feb 2009 11:35 am


Thanks David. We have made mistakes but also learnt a lot. Creating spaces and melding the on-line and off-line are vital. I also think we have suffered from a lack of concrete examples of what Fellowship networking can achieve out there in the real world. Once we get some good practice it will be much easier for other Fellows to see what this is all about. I hope we can gte experts like you out into the Fellowship showing them pratically how off the shelf on-line tools can facilitate their initiatives.

matthewtaylor on Thu, 26th Feb 2009 3:15 pm


Thanks for this Mike. 3 responses

1) If you want to have an impact on the education debate can I suggest you engage with the education charter process we are leading here at the RSA http://www.thersa.org/projects/education/rsa-education-news/education-news/excellent-response-to-the-education-charter-so-far. We have assembled a powerful coalition to argue for a progressive approach to educational reform and we are planning to go public very soon

2) The aspiration you express in your final para is exactly my hope for the RSA. It is , as you say, really tough to make happen and we are learning by getting it wrong at present but the vision is spot on. I hope you will keep watching and offering advice

3) As for your expectation that we wont meet, I don’t know if you ever come to events here but if you do come up and say hello (I often chair or introduce them)

David Wilcox on Thu, 26th Feb 2009 6:40 pm


Matthew – thanks for the encouragement. We have a Fellows-staff meeting next week, led by Tessy Britton, to develop ideas for a connections toolkit, and meanwhile you might like to see this simple example of a dashboard bringing RSA and OpenRSA blogs together.
Over the last few weeks I think we’ve really turned a corner in collaborative working. The new city networks should be a good way to recruit Fellows interested in developing some demonstration projects.

matthewtaylor on Fri, 27th Feb 2009 9:19 am


Thanks David. I love the dashboard. It may be basic but it is a great way of seeing the range of stuff the RSA does. Can it be accessed from the RSA site?

Mike Amos-Simpson on Fri, 27th Feb 2009 5:37 pm


thanks Matthew – its not an expectation that we won’t meet, just sadly not likely as I don’t get down to London too often & so far haven’t even managed to get to any local events (hence my strong interest in the online aspects).

I will engage with the charter – I’ve also been following the RSA education blog.

Really hoping the momentum keeps building on this as it sounds very promising

daniel snell on Fri, 27th Feb 2009 6:24 pm


Looks like this is genuinely finding some traction. (i hope)

There is a quiality of ‘go forth and create’ that is both endearing, but also frustrating here.

There needs to be a central vision, and one of the central visions is that there needs to be empowered autonomy from the fellowship network and it needs to be shepherded and supported. I don’t believe it will happen by itself or if it does, it feels as though it’s stiffled currently.

This in my humble opinion now, but there needs to be – money, resources, space and a desire to champion fellows in practical and real ways.

A suggestion could be where 4 fellows per year, who achieve an ‘X’ in four different sectors/catogories become ‘life fellows’ and as such have free membership. This might give a real focus to events and a desire to passionately aim ones focus on. Currently what is the focus and purpose, in practical terms?

If … and I know this is London centric and as a Northerner I can say this… had an environment where we could do a little firestarting, some talking, some shared debates and passions and reflections where the fellowship could own that experience, and not only make friends but also allies in a collective social focus, even better.

I don’t believe their is a short cut for people making human connections around a shared belief or passion.

I find being with people, playing the same game much more compelling than an ‘expert’ talking at me.

That’s fine, but nothing compared to actively engaging in a collective rant or vision or action toward a collective greater good.

David Wilcox on Sun, 1st Mar 2009 8:49 am


Matthew – glad you like the dashboard. It’s a simple example of the sort of free, personalised tools that could be integrated with the main RSAN system to blend central and distributed activities.
This dashboard is public and so could be linked from the main site. I would be glad to collaborate with staff to produce one or more with additional content and functions … although it is really simple for anyone to do: howto here.
You can create your own private dashboard to read blogs,feeds, news, email etc and then add other pages as tabs. Or produce pages like the example, and encourage people to add them to their personal system. Other tools like Netvibes and iGoogle do something similar.
The <a href=”http://is.gd/jZt”.connection toolkits staff/Fellows group will be developing more ideas.
I’m with Daniel in believing passion is the route to engagement, and some sense of ownership of the convening space is necessary for this. It needs to be “our” space. Face-to-face events are the best way to build that. Social media tools can be used to follow through, showing that it is possible to create common spaces, mixing mine, yours, ours. Low risk, no cash outlay, much learning, new relationships. Who is up for it?

matthewtaylor on Mon, 2nd Mar 2009 8:57 am


Thanks Mike. If you don’t mind me asking, where are you based?

matthewtaylor on Mon, 2nd Mar 2009 9:07 am


Thanks Daniel. Thought provoking as usual. In response, one positive point and one less so. We are hoping the Trustees will soon endorse a proposal to reconstitute the RSA Council as a Fellowship Council. The aim is to create a body which shapes and oversees all the aspects of the engagement strategy. In essence this will mean the Fellowship becomes a self governing body. If this happens I hope we can give the Council resources so it can decide which of the many good suggestions for backing Fellows initiatives we should back. The bad news is that the RSA is not immune to the recession so at the moment we only have very limited funds to back new initiatives.

So progress will continue but we have also to be patient. After all, we are trying to address issues the RSA has tended to ignore for decades.

Mike Amos-Simpson on Mon, 2nd Mar 2009 5:55 pm


@Matthew – on the border of Oxfordshire & Warwickshire. The timing to get into London & back midweek is just wrong for me to fit in with school runs – I can get there but can only stay for 15 mins to get back in time

@David & Daniel – I’d agree that you can’t beat face to face. I’d also point out though that to base a strategy that relies on that you exclude people who may live overseas, who may live in the UK but remotely, who are time poor etc. etc. I think there needs to be clear consideration to both an online and offline strategy for networking. Not to say that they can’t complement each other (indeed should), but to me it misses the point to say oh the great thing about online networking is you can use it to organise meetings in real life. Yes you can, but I think we can be a bit more creative than that.

Its maybe also worth considering where face to face is weak too – time constraints, ego’s, costs of travel & refreshments & so on – so maybe theres some merit for looking at those areas where online meetings can have benefits over offline – this could play nicely with the toolkit in terms of helping decide when online can be more appropriate than offline?

Purpose, governance and engagement - why third sector organisations must face the big questions | Matthew Taylor's blog on Mon, 30th Mar 2009 1:29 pm


[...] governed or how they engage (this is Watershed’s issue).         As I said in a recent blog about membership organisations, many new charities are being set up with minimalist governance [...]

Stuart Glendinning Hall on Wed, 5th Aug 2009 4:43 pm


Thanks Matthew, really useful reflections on the subject, which I’ve picked up in a blog post on why member organisations need to adapt to succeed in the online world: http://tinyurl.com/mc986k

Tell me what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!