SOG-UK-L Archives

Archiver > SOG-UK > 2002-06 > 1023353354


From: "Chris Gray" <>
Subject: RE: [SoG] AGM
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 09:49:14 +0100
In-Reply-To: <E17FiWd-0008Sh-00.2002-06-05-22-41-03@mail13.svr.pol.co.uk>


Hi,

I rarely contribute to this list but read it most days with great interest.

I strongly believe that criticism is required in all areas - be it that
given to athletes, actors, directors, trustees, governments or (even)
QineptiQ (sic). How else do you improve? It is the means chosen to
communicate that criticism that is often very difficult. We don't all have
the skills necessary to make points in ways which do not cause personal
distress. That is not to say that the rest of us are banned from
criticising - it is just that we ought to try and take care. However (and
that is a BIG "however") - some people do not seem to take heed of the
criticism. It is all too easy to say "that criticism is not valid because
he SHOUTED at me, and was rude". The recipient needs to be very honest,
listen to the core criticism, ask him/herself whether it is valid and, if
appropriate, what can be done about it.

I also believe that criticising volunteers is very, very difficult - since
it is all too easy to distress them to such an extent that they stop. I
have seen very little criticism of the day-to-day volunteers (e.g. those
that help catalogue, staff the library, etc) - quite the contrary. It is
"the management" that seems to be the target. Anyone volunteering to run a
charity and/or company, needs to have a strength of character such as to
enable him/her to withstand criticism. If they can't, then how do they
expect to handle employees, AGMs, auditors, QCs, tax investigators,
charities commissioners, etc, etc. I would have thought handling criticism
from this list would be "child's play".

One or two members of the executive have been excellent in being able to
respond to criticism. Sometimes I've felt they have not effectively
answered the criticism - but not all "management" are skilled at doing so.
Those that have deigned not to reply - I've little support, or time, for.
I'm sure that "management", who are not members of this list, are informed
of the criticism and they have plenty of opportunity to respond to the list
(BT-D was able to find a way of communicating).

So - criticism is healthy and will lead to a thriving society where all
members, where ever they live, really feel they belong and are listened to.

regards

Chris


-----Original Message-----
From: Trevor Rix [mailto:]
Sent: 05 June 2002 22:42
To:
Subject: Re: [SoG] AGM


I am becoming more and more concerned about the disruptive unfair
criticism from a tiny minority of members on this list aimed at the
hard working volunteers that keep the Society running. There is only
so much criticism that any volunteer (or employee) can take. The fun
and satisfaction of a job well done simply disappear.

These volunteers are doing their best in difficult circumstances!

The members of this list should be encouraging volunteers, not
discouraging them. We surely all want the Society to prosper, not
collapse.

There are not enough volunteers and hours in their days to share the
workload as it is. I am concerned that the Society may lose so much
voluntary experience and expertise that things could become even more
difficult than they are now.

The purpose of this list is not to provide a means of public sniping
at volunteers and employees. Let's move on and leave the running of
the Society to the people in office.

Trevor Rix


This thread: