Talk:Draft report on sub-committees: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(comment) |
(cmt) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
We have been thinking about this for a while. The person originally doing this has been a bit overwhelmed by other things so I put this together with the help of staff and Doug as a way forward. Thoughts please[[User:Jon Davies (WMUK)|Jon Davies (WMUK)]] ([[User talk:Jon Davies (WMUK)|talk]]) 15:07, 1 February 2013 (UTC) | We have been thinking about this for a while. The person originally doing this has been a bit overwhelmed by other things so I put this together with the help of staff and Doug as a way forward. Thoughts please[[User:Jon Davies (WMUK)|Jon Davies (WMUK)]] ([[User talk:Jon Davies (WMUK)|talk]]) 15:07, 1 February 2013 (UTC) | ||
:I've made one change (while logged out I see). The basic starter kit is: Executive, Finance (inc. Audit), Governance, & maybe Operations & Membership. With (currently) a very small board, the need for them lessens, but they are a way of engaging non-trustees, & those staff members not at every board meeting. [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 17:20, 1 February 2013 (UTC) | :I've made one change (while logged out I see). The basic starter kit is: Executive, Finance (inc. Audit), Governance, & maybe Operations & Membership. With (currently) a very small board, the need for them lessens, but they are a way of engaging non-trustees, & those staff members not at every board meeting. [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 17:20, 1 February 2013 (UTC) | ||
:See also the draft at [[General Committee Charter]]. Generally a board "sub-committee" would have its voting membership restricted to board members, often with staff as "observers" - as in councils etc. Plain "committee" is probably a better term for the mixed-member bodies we envisage. [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 17:33, 1 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 18:33, 1 February 2013
We have been thinking about this for a while. The person originally doing this has been a bit overwhelmed by other things so I put this together with the help of staff and Doug as a way forward. Thoughts pleaseJon Davies (WMUK) (talk) 15:07, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
- I've made one change (while logged out I see). The basic starter kit is: Executive, Finance (inc. Audit), Governance, & maybe Operations & Membership. With (currently) a very small board, the need for them lessens, but they are a way of engaging non-trustees, & those staff members not at every board meeting. Johnbod (talk) 17:20, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
- See also the draft at General Committee Charter. Generally a board "sub-committee" would have its voting membership restricted to board members, often with staff as "observers" - as in councils etc. Plain "committee" is probably a better term for the mixed-member bodies we envisage. Johnbod (talk) 17:33, 1 February 2013 (UTC)