Volunteering
Succession Planning and Continual Recruitment
Finding volunteers to become office holders can too easily be left to reach a crisis at the AGM. Thinking more regularly about succession and ways to encourage it may help to avoid the crisis.
Succession could be a topic best avoided. History has bequeathed us a remarkable back-catalogue of succession conflicts and intrigues based on struggles to control power.
One advantage of democracy is that it takes away the need to worry about
succession, replacing faction with the voice of the people.
For Ramblers Areas and Groups with our democratic structure and annual
AGM elections, why worry about succession? Hopeful candidates will
present themselves and the most appropriate voted in.
If only this dream scenario were the case. Despite our efforts to make volunteer roles manageable and rewarding, we know that the clamour for election to an office position remains a distant vision.
So while our Areas and Groups are democratic in theory, in practice they are hybrid entities somewhere between democracy and oligarchy. Good or bad, this phenomenon is widespread across thousands of similar organisations and it can help us to focus on the importance of succession planning for volunteers.
The framework of democracy can lead us into a trap of assuming that the time to recruit office holders is once a year at the AGM. This approach is rarely fruitful and transforms the AGM into a volunteer pressure point instead, keeping those wary of the hard sell and the pregnant pause at bay.
We can expect the recruitment of office holders to be a more lengthy
process and one to be regularly on the radar of each Group and Area
committee.
Identifying suitable people is key to this process, but there are two
further twin elements: Offering a way in, and letting go.
A good way to discover if something is right for you is to give it a go and get a taste. For potential office holders, it’s important to consider how they can get some early involvement. Becoming a deputy is one option – certainly the office of vice chair is common. Splitting up a role and delegating some bits is another. More tricky to arrange, but possibly more powerful is a system to shadow or to work in tandem.
Trying a role for size doesn’t need to stop once voted in. An outgoing officer who is available to give support can be useful for the transition and also give reassurance to a prospective volunteer considering taking on a role.
Allowing people to get involved does, of course, rely on making room for them. For our own enjoyment of a role we need to be able to make a mark, not forced to copy our predecessor.
Enforce resignations for committee members by imposing limited periods in office can be a powerful way to make room. Three years has been a norm adopted by some Groups.
Taking this bold step can has the potential to encourage fresh ideas and diversity, and to ensure that ways of working do not become entrenched. It also demonstrates that joining the committee need not be a life sentence. This is all good for encouraging volunteers.
Time limits, too, can be an effective way to force the issue of succession onto the agenda. The whole committee is forced to remain alert to the need to recruit replacements. Opportunities arise each year to share responsibilities and office holders know that they will pass on the baton after a certain time.
Whatever arrangement work for each Group, is it worth placing succession planning is a regular feature on the committee agenda?