LEADERSHIP and a ROADMAP

[Jared Norris]

Good morning/afternoon/evening Andrew and the rest of the Ubuntu-AU mailing
list.

I have been watching these ongoing topics with interest and I personally
believe that the two viewpoints are both trying to accomplish positive
outcomes for the Ubuntu-AU team. But I also don't think the two different
philosophies are mutually exclusive by any means. I have taken some time to
try and organise my thoughts in a logical pattern and so I will work on
replying to statements Andrew has made to try and show my viewpoint (and
yes, I have read all the links you included in your email). I have put
Andrew's email in italics to try and make it easier to tell what is the
original email and what is my response.

*On 12 April 2010 12:43, AndrewG <gandella at gmail.com> wrote:
> LEADERSHIP and a ROADMAP
>
> Prologue: 25th March, Melissa Draper (our team contact) was sent an
> email outlining some of the following in detail.  I am still awaiting
> a reply (maybe she is on holidays), thus my reason for a public post
> to the Ubuntu-au community. (I wish that she had replied so we could
> have made a joint post)
>
>
> LEADERSHIP: From the correspondence that I have had with Melissa, she
> informs me that
> "The contact is not the dog's body nor is it the mastermind."
> Further, "I'm responsible for allocating privileges as allowed to us
> by Canonical. I'm the team /contact/. I'm the person who interfaces
> between Canonical and the team members."
>
> So my conclusion is that the 'Team Contact' is NOT the team leader
> (contrary to popular belief), but a 'Conduit' between Canonical, the
> Community Council and the Ubuntu-au community. (and also that the Team
> leader should convey the sentiment of the ubuntu-au community)
>
> Thus, Ubuntu-au is a collection of people with no leadership, a group
> of individuals trying to further the goals set down in the wiki page
> 'The Australian team focuses on distributing, advertising and
> demonstrating Ubuntu within Australia'
>*

To my knowledge all this is correct, Melissa is the team contact. I
personally do not know of anyone active in the Ubuntu-AU that could come
close to knowing enough about how Canonical works to replace what Melissa
contributes to us all. I'm not against other people learning about these
sorts of things but I am pretty sure it would require a fair bit of effort
for a person to become familiar with all that is required and wouldn't be
learnt overnight. Melissa, I tip my hat to you, thank you for your efforts
and I hope other people are willing to put their hand up to help you out.

*>
> I also asked Melissa the following
> "What is your vision ?"
> Her reply
> "My vision is for a team that is constructive and contains people who
> think up initiatives or support others rather than waiting for
> orders."
> My reply
> "How do we encourage & support constructive people?
> Some people need to be given guidance, in my experience there are
> three types of people.
> 1.  Leaders:  Those that inspire others to do great things
> 2.  Followers: Those that need inspiration to do great things.
> 3.  Others:  They just don't give a damn about doing great things."
>

*

I would have to agree with you both on this one. I agree with Melissa's
statement as you have quoted it and I also agree that with your statement
about leadership. I do think you are trying to suggest that the leaders need
to have a specific title though and I don't I agree with that.

 As per your link to https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LoCoTeamLeader “There are two
meanings of the term *leader*. One is *tell others what to do*, the other is
*others follow you because you set a good example*. The first concept does
not work well in any volunteer organization, and Ubuntu Local Teams are no
exception. “

 Therefore I don't believe you are both necessarily at odds with one another
on this point.

*
>
> On March 8,9 & 11, there was some very robust threads on this mailing
> list about Ubuntu-au Governance, Re-approval and the Website.
> Now I'm not sure that these discussions achieved much as it has been
> over one month and it seams that these issues remain unresolved.
>
> I think I can see why this is the case.
>
> 1.  There seams to be a reluctance to change the status-quo.
> 2.  There is a fear about 'loss of control'.
> 3.  There is no clear process to bring about change to the Ubuntu-au
> community.
> 4.  There is no 'leadership' to enable change to be achieved.
>
> In summary: 'Nobody is responsible for everything' or 'Everybody is
> responsible for Everything' or 'Nobody is responsible for Nothing'
>
> "Change is the law of life and those who look only to the past or
> present are certain to miss the future."
> —John F. Kennedy
>

*

I believe that this particular topic was discussed in the meeting that was
held after the aforementioned email thread. My memory of the meeting is that
it would not be constructive to approach the leadership/contact issue until
after the re approval to provide stability for the re approval process.
Therefore it would be normal to be unresolved until the re approval process
was completed. Not to say it can't and won't be revisited after this
process.

 As for point 1, as a member of Ubuntu-AU for 2 – 3 years I personally am
very reluctant to change how things are as I see the current relaxed format
perfect for our community (that's not to say that I don't agree with more
localised participation and more people willing to pitch in and help out).

 With regards to point 2 I have no fear about loss of control because as a
member with the current setup as long as I am not harming the Ubuntu-AU and
I follow the Ubuntu Code of Conduct I don't think there is currently
anything controlling what I can/can't/should/shouldn't do.

 I want to discuss point 3 and 4 together as a single idea because I believe
that these two are very related and are the biggest source of confusion for
the two points of view. In my opinion there is a very clear way to bring
about change. *Be* the change. Don't wait around for others to tell you what
to do and how. If you see a need, fill it. If you aren't quite sure about
something, put it out there for other members to help you out with. Why do
we need a person with a title to say “ok you can do that, I will let you”.
To me this is far more counter productive to the whole process than the
current format.

*
>
> BIG PICTURE:
> Currently there is a discussion with the Community Council
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-community/+bug/392986
> It talks about 'LoCo's are not "Lo" Enough' (Mark Shuttleworth has
> even made comment)
> and the concept of:
> ReCo = Regional Community (for States and Provinces)
> CoCo = Country Community (for Countries)
> LoCo = Local Community (for Towns and Cities)
>
> The Ubuntu-au community is clearly a 'CoCo' not a 'LoCo' as we are
> seperated by large distances, in cities and regions.
>
> If we accept the premise that the ubuntu-au community is made up of
> smaller 'LoCo' around the country.
> I.E.  Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide, Perth, Hobart

*

I think this point is moot. You don't need to *name* a group just for it to
exist. As an example has anyone come out and told you to stop promoting the
Ubuntu-AU meetings in Brisbane? Has anyone told you to take down the
information on the Ubuntu-AU website about the Brisbane group? I have not
seen anything like that on this mailing list along those lines that is for
sure. So essentially you already *have* your city based group that comes
under the umbrella of the Ubuntu-AU team. If others around the country are
wanting to do this for their city or town under the current format what is
to stop them from doing this?

*>

>
***********************************************************************************************************
> PROPOSAL:  I would propose that an "Australian Community Council"(ACC)
> be created. (A Trial for 18 months)
> Its members would be 1. Team-Contact 2. Web-master 3. 'LoCo'
> representative(s) (7+-2 people total)
>
***********************************************************************************************************
> (See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ubuntu-au/council/structure for a summary
> of models)
> (See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ubuntu-au/council/structure-detailed for
> a detailed model of the ACC)
> (These models have been created in collaboration, and are open to
> further modification)
>
> The role of the ACC, is really one of "Advisory, Support &
> Consultation", as the "Team contact" will still retain the role &
> privileges.
>
> ADVANTAGES
> 1.  It gives the community some ownership in the process of running
> the Ubuntu-au.
> 2.  It will bring forward 'leaders', which could be potential
> successors for the 'Team contact'
> 3.  Spreading the load of leadership. (with 9 potential persons)
> 4.  An open transparent process.
> 5.  Authority to drive discussion and implementation.
> 6.  The decision making process, on a national level is simplified, it
> is easier to make decisions with 9 (potentially) than it is with 40 in
> an IRC meeting.
> 7.  An identifiable 'Contact' person for each City/Region.
> There are many Teams in the wider Ubuntu community, that utilise a
> council to share the leadership role eg. Georgia & Ohio
>
> DISADVANTAGES
> 1.  Elections.
> 2.  Structured.
> 3.  A Committee.
> (These are not really disadvantages, but necessary evils to achieve
> the outcomes of the ADVANTAGES)
>

*

I don't see having people with titles as being useful to the group. I have
already explained there is nothing stopping anyone from organising more
local groups if desired. As far as I can tell there is already plenty of
opportunity for people who want to help out to come forward either on the
mailing list or in the IRC channels. I personally know this for a fact as I
have recently put my hand up to assist with a couple of projects myself and
have done my best to be useful. As stated by other people on the mailing
list I am interested to see where all these people are going to come from.
As for an identifiable contact for each group don't you already have
yourself on the Brisbane group page as a contact? So if other people are
wanting to organise local groups why can't they do this as well?

 As to comments about the disadvantages not really being disadvantages I
would have to strongly protest that. I see these disadvantages are quite
large as I feel they would politicise the group a whole lot more and as
stated would become a popularity contest which does not always lead to the
best representation in my experience.

 As to your mentioning other state based groups in the United States so I
think we need to put this into perspective as well. If you look at the
population of Georgia is 9.8 million, the population of Ohio is 11 million
and compare that to the whole of Australia at 21.3 million people I don't
think this is really comparing apples with apples and oranges with oranges.

 Georgia population link:
http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=uspopulation&met=population&idim=state:13000&dl=en&hl=en&q=population+of+georgia

Ohio population link:
http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=uspopulation&met=population&idim=state:39000&dl=en&hl=en&q=population+of+ohio

Australia population link
http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=wb-wdi&met=sp_pop_totl&idim=country:AUS&dl=en&hl=en&q=population+of+australia

*>

>
> ROADMAP:  Where do we go from here?
>
****************************************************************************************************************
> I guess that I am asking YOU the community to see if YOU are in favour
> of an 'Australian Community Council'?
>
****************************************************************************************************************
> If this thread gets a favourable response, then the next thing to do
> would be to call a poll and have the 'PROPOSAL' passed.
> Then we could call for each City/Region to elect a representative to
> the ACC.
>
> One response to this post could be:  'This is all great in theory, but
> we don't have enough people to create an ACC.'
> My response would be: 'Let's ask for interested persons to come
> forward and nominate' (I know of three people that would be
> interested)
>
> Finally, unless we have a 'Structure & Process' in place to create a
> leadership team nobody will come forward.
> The status-quo cannot continue and to move forward a leadership team
> is required to motivate the community to do great things.
>

*

I personally don't believe we need an “Australian Community Council” to
achieve most of the things you appear to have as objectives. I believe that
of all of your objectives other than giving people titles (which I don't
like in such a small volunteer group myself) can be achieved with how the
group is currently functioning. As for people willing to come forward,
haven't you yourself come forward as wanting to lead a Brisbane local group,
haven't others come forward to update the website, others still to
administrate the mailing list? Being a leader does not have to have a title
it just takes some time and effort.

*
> RE-APPROVAL:
> As our re-approval approaches, obviously my 'PROPOSAL' for the
> creation of the ACC cannot be implemented. (if the community agrees)
> We can say to the Ubuntu Community Council, "We are in the process of
> creating an Australian Community Council, from our Regions/Cities" our
> chances of re-approval will be greatly improved.
>

*

I would very much like to know where you get the idea that creating an
Australian Community Council would alter our chance of re approval in either
a positive or negative way. The links you posted yourself in fact say the
opposite. They links you have provided state that every team is different
and whatever works for them is the best option.

*
>
> ***********************************************************
> Are YOU in favour of an 'Australian Community Council'?
> ***********************************************************
> Those of you who want change, now is the time to speak-up.
>
>
> Regards,
>
>         Andrew G.
>
>
> PS. Please read the detailed model at the wiki before replying to this
> post.
> Ref: wiki.ubuntu.com/LoCoTeamLeader and wiki.ubuntu.com/LoCoTeamHowto
>
> --
> ubuntu-au mailing list
> ubuntu-au at lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-au
>*

  So all in all I don't see that your main objectives other than giving
people titles are incongruous with the current way the Ubuntu-AU team is
run. I hope you can come to see that for yourself. I apologise if I seem to
be coming across negatively but I cannot see any benefit in giving people
titles. However I can see a benefit in arranging more local groups, I can
see a benefit in people coming forward with ideas to share and I can see a
benefit in more people wanting to help with the running of the team.

In conclusion I believe if everyone stopped trying to be the boss and just
got in and worked on projects associated with Ubuntu-AU that they had
interests in then it would be a much more constructive approach.


Regards,

Jared Norris
(on Freenode as head_victim)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-au/attachments/20100413/119ecc44/attachment-0001.htm