[governance] Muti-stakeholder Group structure (some ideas)

[Norbert Bollow]

Jeremy Malcolm <Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au> wrote:
> Bertrand de La Chapelle wrote:
> > 1) On the composition :
> > 
> >     * it should be a single body : separating the constituencies would
> >       be detrimental to fruitful interaction and lead to silo approaches
> >       preventing consensus; a step backwards in the process;
> 
> My view is that practicality requires some degree of separation between 
> them, because each of the stakeholder groups is accustomed to making 
> decisions in quite different ways and it is going to take some time (and 
> trust) before these will begin to converge.

I strongly disagree with Jeremy's conclusion:  Precisely because
the ways of thinking and decision-making traditions differ between
the categories of stakeholders, genuine cooperation and trust can
develop only in the "single body" model.

Of course such multistakeholder bodies should not be given tight
deadlines to produce decisions or other deliverables shortly after
formation - learning to effectively work together takes time.  But
taking this time is greatly preferable to having a separate-bureaus
structure where you can wait forever before decision-making practices
"will begin to converge."

Greetings,
Norbert.


-- 
Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch>                    http://Norbert.ch
President of the Swiss Internet User Group SIUG  http://SIUG.ch
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance