Some leaders perceive they can, by force of will, ensure the intended consequences of their actions – even in the face of mounting evidence that the outside forces (e.g. competitors, regulators, economic conditions, customers, or community) are not reacting to their expectations “correctly.” Greek tragedians referred to this failing as “hubris” – the overwhelming pride that blinds the tragic hero to the consequences of his/her actions. The audience can clearly foresee the inevitable fall from a great height, but the tragic hero is blind to all but his own intentions.
If you have not yet had the opportunity, I suggest you read Paul Orwig's latest communication in the Joomla Leadership Google Group.
What we have here is a failure to communicate. Actually, I am communicating just fine. You, on the other hand, apparently have nothing to say. So what is it? Have my posts lately been too serious? Depressing? Boring? I just don't know how to please you people. I don't want to make you feel bad, but my stress is directly related to you never making changes even when it is pointed out to you. It's all your fault.
I'm afraid I'm going to have to take some time off from this blogging thing and let you decide if you miss me and want me back. I'm outta here unless I hear from at least 50 25 10 5 1 of you, begging me to stay just commenting.
Most boards are driven by mission and the will to serve, but there are boards that have gone very awry, who act with impunity, and ignore accountability standards and best practices. These are often controlled by a small group supported by an apathetic majority.
Let's once again examine how the board members of OSM fail to ensure that decisions made are decisions of the board and not decisions of individuals on the board. For instance, the goals supposedly set by the board for the 2011 fiscal year were never discussed by the board in a board meeting and no motion was ever made to approve those goals. So what was the outcome - zero, zip, nada. As far as we can tell by the board minutes, the goals were not accomplished. No surprise there.
I find it a little more then curious that the President of OSM has not taken part in any of the discussions surrounding the proposed restructuring of the Joomla! Leadership with the Board of OSM being over all Joomla! teams. In fact, as I pointed out in the blog Where's Waldo (err.. Ryan Ozimek)?, Mr. Ozimek has only really been visible in his world-wide travels. The President of the Board has certain responsibilities including:
- Execute the will of the board
- Provide leadership to the board
- Develop a vision for the board
- Be the communicator or spokesperson for the board
- Manage the effective use of meetings (regular and committee meetings)
On October 18, 2011, Paul Orwig who had originally started a discussion group on September 29, 2011 about Proposed leadership structure changes & request for community feedback posted in the Google Joomla Leadership public group that he was thinking of closing discussion on the proposal even though he committed originally to leave discussion open until October 27, 2011. Immediately, more discussion ensued. At the time he was proposing to shut down discussion there were 157 posts. As of today, Friday, October 21, 2011 at 1:17 pm CDT, there are 186 posts. Interestingly enough those 186 posts were placed by only 23 individuals. And, of those 23 individuals, only 16 are not members of the OSM Board, the Community Leadership Team, or the Production Leadership Team. Besides the obvious observation that very few of the community have weighed in with their opinions, very few of the various leadership team members have weighed in with theirs either.
If you haven't read this blog by Paul Orwig written on September 29, 2011, you should. But what you should do next is read the input at JPeople and perhaps you will realize that it appears that a very few - mostly Joomla leadership is proposing major changes in how the Joomla project will be organized in the future. You will also note thet very, very few of the Joomla Community are participating in the discussion possibly again because there continues to be veiled and not so veiled implications that certain people have said enough. Doesn't encourage participation.
Currently the role of OSM is to support the developers who code Joomla. If the few who think defining a business structure and bringing the developers under the authority of the OSM Board of Directors (no matter what they might rename OSM to) will encourage the developers to code, they really haven't been living in the Open Source world. Right now there are limits to what the board can do. The developers in the Community Oversight Team can remove board members or add them at will. Kind of makes sure that OSM remains responsive to developers don't you think? Under discussion is a much simpler structure with OSM at the top operating without any oversight.