SEAHO Report - Spring 2011 - (Page 24)

Fighting Committee Frustration seaHo feature By Aaron W. Voyles, Appalachian State University Imagine this scenario: some issue comes up at work about which you care deeply. You have decided that you can make a big change at your institution. The problem is that this concern about which you care has no manual, no given solution. You simply do not know where Point B is in terms of solving the issue. Maybe it has to do with a big, overarching goal like social justice, ecological justice, or enhancing critical thinking. What is worse is that not only do you not know where Point B is - you do not even know where Point A is. You have no idea how to begin. Because you have no idea how to begin, you decide to give the issue to a committee. We often use committees as our refuge in situations such as these because committees are familiar, they seem simple, and conventional wisdom says that they are the structure in which we work. But no matter what we believe about how effective committees are, the fact remains that many of them exist to eliminate personal responsibility and personal accountability. Given how much time most of us spend in committee meetings, this idea can be quite a shock. Committees, however, are a convenient blame-sharing device for change leaders. Committees can promote a culture of tangential discussion rather than getting things done, as well as act as a scapegoat when plans go awry or when goals are not achieved. While sometimes committees can serve an effective purpose, it is important to realize these dangers are also ever-present. If this issue is something you care about so greatly and you don’t know how to begin, is a committee the best option for its growth? Take a moment to think about some of the committees of which you have been a member. Certainly you remember at least one where you spent more time discussing the meeting time and format than any actual issues. You may also remember one where fewer than fifty-percent of its members showed up on a regular basis. For whatever reason in my experience, the most effective committees always seem to be the ones that are the smallest. Similarly, when big committees are split up into smaller sub-sections, we often notice they operate more efficiently. The reasoning is not just that sprawling committees designed to include “every voice on campus” have trouble with focused dialogue; it is also that there are fewer people with whom to share blame. Smaller committees can be constructed of a group of dedicated individuals who actually want to create change. Bigger committees tend to have personnel who are assigned to them or who cannot be removed from the committee because of inner-office politics. It is these types of large committees where initiatives go contents reports news awards features regions

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of SEAHO Report - Spring 2011

SEAHO Report - Spring 2011
Table of Contents
SEAHO President
One-on-Ones: Where Are They Headed?
The Five Housing Love Languages
Boys-To-Men Mentoring Program
2011 SEAHO Awards
Commuter Assistant Program
RoomBug at JMU
Residence Life Experience Transferred into Business Acumen
Fighting Committee Frustration
Virginia Tech: Ut Prosim
Seeing the Light: The Case for Fluorescent Bulbs in Residence Halls
Alabama Updates
Florida Updates
Kentucky Updates
Louisiana Updates
Mississippi Updates
North Carolina Updates
South Carolina Updates
Virginia Updates

SEAHO Report - Spring 2011