I started this reflection with several perplexities. If you think to our NGO it is difficult to define a team who could fairly lead it. We are talking about a different kind of organisation, an organisation that wants to build a real community, a group of people who is going to live together. How can we imagine a fair leader group if we do not involve the whole community in the common choices and more important how can we take advantage of the small size of this community to create a new decision-making model? We have here a great opportunity to create a harmonised society able to deal quickly with difficult situations.
First, we need to think to what the community needs, to the personalities who are going to operate in some topics to manage the challenged they will face.
The technician: Stone Age is gone and we need someone who can take care of our Wi-Fi, our TV’s, our electric system. It can be a prototype of the technology stewart, but just in the most technical sense.
The Head of facilities: the pool won’t dig itself, we need someone who could manage and create facilities like the bar, the pool, the reception, etc.. Don’t worry, he won’t start to dig the pool, he will call and contact someone who can build it.
The communicator: someone who is able to communicate with administrations, government, city hall, people, etc.. He will think about flyers, participation at events outside the community and he will fix the community’s meetings. He is another kind of technology stewart (it seems I am writing about incarnations of Buddha). He should be extrovert, don’t send to the city hall someone who can’t speak because is too shy, it could be a disaster.
The events organiser: someone who doesn’t suffer from heart attacks, this is the most stressful role. He has to think and to set up events inside the community, the camp, the Easter egg hunt (you thought I’d forgotten it? No, if the White House organises it we will do it too), etc..
The Treasurer: the killjoy, someone who will remember the others that the money is limited. The grey, cold and annoying character, the Angela Merkel of our NGO.
The Judge: diplomatic, handsome, kind and reasonable. This role will help members of the community to solve disputes in the most fair way possible, he will check that everybody is respecting laws.
The Leader: obvious, the frontman, he will manage all the other roles, he will give suggestions in every topic and he decides what is truly needed and what is not.
We have our great team who will manage the community, now second problem: how to make it fair? How to make it democratic? We are talking about people’s lives, houses (even if tiny), we have to create a mechanism with which they can deal if they want to express their opinion.
A DEMOCRATIC SYSTEM
Democratic governments around the world can be a model (as long as the model is not the italian one). Let’s start to think to our team as a government, we have different ministers and we have prime minister. Now let’s create a parliament, the community itself, a perfect, direct and total assembly that will express the needs and the ideas of each member. Here is our decision-making system! The “team” will propose idea to the assembly and the assembly will vote.
Last thing, we need an election system, something that will help us to create a “team”. I propose a simple one. We have candidate teams, we an election day, the assembly votes and we have a new leading team! (I won’t make a drawing of this one, come on!)
APPROVED … DONE!
There is still a small step missing. How can our ministers do what they have to do? I mean, if we want to build this famous pool we need another team that can work on this pool. We can’t suppose that one person can do it all! Well, thinking about the number of people in a team I do agree with Chris Corrigan, smaller teams (2-3 people) are more creative. While our assembly approved something we need a team that can decide how to do it. Do we want a heart-shaped pool? A star-shaped? A normal one? (Yes, build a normal one, it is better). So let’s think to a team of 3 people, one of them is the “minister” and two of them are members of the assembly. It would be a temporary team, created to build the pool and the pool only.
As you can see, with a right set of rules this model can be very fast, perfect to make fair and quick decisions and to represent the community, to protect it and to improve it. With that our NGO will be able to create a great and functioning reality, where people can represent themselves and share beliefs and impressions in an assembly. They will be able to decide and to change the concept of their small society making it suits better to their ideas.
TEAM 1 WORK SYSTEM
Changing topic we can talk about my work group. Well, this will be a lot faster and shorter than the first one, don’t worry. Our team is completely different from the NGO-democratic model, we are just seven people and we created a “hourglass system”. At first, we have several topics, we research about them in group of one. Then, with a meeting we resume and share what we know, the group will be a filter that will translate and change with the others’ individual experiences the informations. After that we can decide what to do, how to proceed, what to check as a group. When we are in the “operative” phase we can split again in small group (1-2 people) to work and technically complete parts of our task (one can make the video, the other one the report, etc..) in the best, precise and fastest way and we will put everything together with the experience of the whole group in it.