I’ve recently become chairman of a small finance committee for a non-profit org., but I hate hate hate parliamentary procedure. Half the time, we end up consulting the rules instead of getting business done, for the sake of keeping the system. I’ve had enough. Is there an alternative system that still keeps business in order without so much fluff?
I googled for a bit but couldn’t find anything of help.
Dude:
I have chaired a number of committees of non-profit status. If you all get along and have a somewhat charismatic chair, you can just run down the agenda and get stuff done. But if you aren’t getting along, there is no substitute for Robert’s Rules.
Just guessing at what your problem is, most people deal with non-profit committees as social occasions and want to get some attention and interrupt with irrelevant stuff, which sets someone else off on another tangent. Real business doesn’t get done. You need to crack down, say we are going to conduct our business and then people can make announcements and socialize after the meeting.
A written agenda is necessary and the chair needs to stick with it. If someone is suddenly off topic, the chair needs to gently say that that is off topic and out of order. You should only allow reports prepared in advance on agenda items, questions on those items, motions and debate on it.
I don’t have at hand the books on alternatives to RR of Order, but I think a lot of it depends how technical you want to get with the RR of Order or what type of work you carry out in the finance committee. I am a member of a non-profit board of directors (self-help housing program)and have taken part in various non-profit and student organizational meetings (when I was in university) and most of the time we use a simplified version of RR of Order. Basically, at least in the way we have worked with the RR of Order is stick to the agenda (previously have an agenda ready and distribute previously to meeting) and then just stick to discussion, motion/amendment, vote. The key here is that, as DPWhite stated, that youse guys get along. If you guys are not willing to get along, the little details about RR of Order can be used to hinder rather than work. I remember in a student organization, we had agreed to use the RR of Order, few of us knew ALL the finer points, except for one guy who did. When we first started with the meetings and started having real debates, he would always find a way to throw us in a loop by bringing up obscure points from the RR of Order. Another thing, agree that you will respect a simplified use of RR of Order and not start debating the finer points of RR of Order. That’s my take.
If you don’t find anything on alternatives to the RR of Order, I suggest highly that you go the local library and look under their section of RR of Order. A good stocked library should have other books near it that give alternatives.
XicanoreX
When I was President of a Residence Hall and we had problems (usually with one person disagreeing) I usually referred to Roberts Rules of Order Simplified. There is a general clause that worked well to restore order. Basically, it states that the President has the sole power to adjourn. If things get very sticky, adjourn. Most people think that it takes a motion to adjourn. But Roberts does allow the President to adjourn without a vote.
We had an occasion where a certain expenditure was approved on a 5 to 1 vote. The opposing Vote would not let the discussion die. I pointed out that RROO allowed any vote to be further discussed at the NEXT meeting. He would not allow any further discussion on other topics. So using my prerogative as President, I adjourned the meeting. Everyone left but the Opposing Vote. We reconvened one week later, and by that time, he had discussed the expenditure with his constituents and realized that they were for it. He apologized and recognized that without RROO, the discussion would have continued ad nauseum and that he really was voicing only his beliefs not that of his constituents.