05/20

== Title == Hackspace structure and management

== Proposer == Marion Catlin @mario

== Date proposed == 19 October 2020

Date for Decision

Tuesday 27 October via Zoom meeting after clarification

Cost

no cost involved

What is being asked for

That, following a Zoom meeting on Tuesday 27 October, 8.30pm we trial this structure (details laid out in pdf document) which is essentially a formalisation and clarification of the way we have successfully built and run the Hackspace over the last 6 years but with modifications and adjustments to address issues that were raised during the review, as a result of the Hackspace membership increasing, more space and activities and the strains of Covid, which means we can't see each other face to face so easily. Also, over time, our processes lapsed and need re-stating.

Through this proposal, we are addressing decision-making, transparency, an AGM and clear lines of communication - that is an Admin Team to take care of day-to-day management and decisions, a team of Lead Maintainers to look after equipment tools and areas and a strategic Core Team to sort out issues, make bigger decisions that affect the whole Hackspace and membership, sort out grievances and be a final arbiter.

The model generally is one where the members run the space for the members (legal status - an Unincorporated Association) which operates in an open-source way with all members having the choice to be involved (or not) in the running of the space by being proactive, making suggestions, offering opinions and taking on roles. Other hackspace such as London Hackspace operate a Do-Ocracy where if members want to do or buy something, they make a reasoned request and if there is not significant objection, it is considered approved and they are able to take forward an action. This is a more agile way of running the space than waiting for committee meetings and approval for changes and purchases.

This is a valid and tested alternative to a more traditional elected committee system, which would take more work to set up and operate and is not preferred by many members, although some members are in favour.

I have also made suggestions about who should make up each team based on what people have offered to do. We will need to bring together volunteers for Lead Maintainer roles as there are a number of areas not yet covered but this can be fluid and develop over time.

It should be noted that whilst the review uncovered some clear lapses and failings, the majority of members are happy with the way the Hackspace is currently run. Some necessary improvements have been put in place already and will be reviewed and modified as we see how they work - eg this proposal form, the Wiki, better communications etc

Please find the presentation posted here as a pdf https://norwichhackspaceadmin.weebly.com/proposal-for-hackspace-20.html

Why/how this will be good to have

It will be good to have a comprehensive document which lays out the basic structure of the space, who to talk to and how to make things happen within Norwich Hackspace. It offers a starting-point against which to assess how we work as a group.

Who is for it

I (Marion) have put the proposal together after speaking with a number of members over the last few weeks. I have tried to be as fair as I can in taking on board other people's views whilst remaining true to my own.

I have a lot of experience with setting up and running non-profit organisations of all kinds and feel qualified to offer this option as a realistic and manageable way forward that builds on what we have already achieved, will address our issues and will not cause disruption. I have read, studied observed and researched community-led initiatives over many years. I am on several governance Boards and professionally, I advise creative businesses and organisations on the pros and cons of various structures and ways of operating. I ran Norwich Fringe Festival for 9 years on a similar model, which included managing a wide range of activities, 100s of artists and occupying a massive shoe factory as a base for artists, with no significant issues and great achievements.

I have reality-checked the proposal with a small team of members who offered to be my working party and who have agreed to out their names to the proposal ie Ben Norcutt, Alan Scrase, Barny Relph and James Mason. Toby Catlin has also said that he is for it.

As it is a major proposal, I would like to present it at a meeting so that it can be discussed and adopted. This meeting will be open to all members and take place via Zoom on Tuesday 27 October 8.30pm. This gives members just over a week to read the proposal which can be downloaded here https://norwichhackspaceadmin.weebly.com/proposal-for-hackspace-20.html

Comments

The presentation was available for approx 10 days for members to read and absorb beforehand. Several members (co-proposers) were in agreement and said so.

There were a couple of people who asked questions in Slack decision-making channel. Brian asked about the Constitution ie Can I ask - 1. Does the constitution still hold as our constitution? - if not then a new constitution needs to be written and taken to an AGM to be ratified. 2. If we are sticking with the constitution as written - then is the core team (Management committee), as in the constitution, the the core team as in your new document?

My answer was: Yes the constitution stands and the core team is the core team as stated in the constitution with the role description as specified in my document. That is they are brought together for specific decision making situations and are a strategic and problem solving resource rather than a day to day management mechanism. A bit more like a Board might relate to a charity's exec team

I posted this: For the record, I have tried to take on board what people have fed back over the last few weeks, without tipping the whole hackspace management over as by and large, it has grown and run successfully for 6 years now, and 3 and half of those in the current premises. Also we don’t want it to be over-bureaucratic as it is a lot of work as it is, but I think we all agreed that some things needed to change and be tightened up. The proposition includes enacting the constitution inc a named core team, admin team, leads and regular meetings, better transparency and clarity of decision-making, a proposal recording system, better documentation and access (wiki), more evident access to Metalspace for members, grievance and who to talk to.

There is a lot of leeway to fine tune as we go forward, and add detail - this proposal is a basis to work from. If anyone has any other suggestions then please feed them in with some detail about how they would work.

I have done my best to be even-handed - it isn’t easy keeping everyone happy and probably we won’t achieve that but hopefully we can work together to improve.

At the meeting, James T focussed on slide 21 as a sticking point for him - ie how a core team is selected and accountability to the membership in the long term ie how the club would get rid of a core team member. This was the aspect that we agreed to postpone subject to further thinking and discussion, whilst we also trial the whole system as it is, as no-one had any objections to the proposed names put forward (who had all agreed to occupy the role)

Outcome

This proposal was discussed at a Zoom meeting on Tuesday 27 October 2020 based on a structure presentation which also covered addressing issues raised.

Attendees were Marion Catlin, Alan Scrase, Ben Norcutt, Brian Norman, Alan (Percy) Childs, James Taylor, Peter Hibbit, Karl Ablitt with apologies from Toby Catlin, Tim Parnell, James Mason, Andy Saunders, Dan Robertson

The proposal was generally accepted and some of the suggestions have already been put into practice on a trial basis. There was general agreement that the proposed structure should be adopted although there was one major sticking point which formed the majority of the discussion, which was the means of appointing the Core Team. After a lengthy but constructive discussion it was agreed to start with the Core Team as proposed for this year and to resolve the means of appointment/election before an AGM in September 2021. There was an agreement to the proposed Admin Team of Marion, Alan and James who are responsible for the day-to-day running of the Hackspace and general decisions, and first point of contact for members and external communications.

A Core Team was proposed and accepted: the Admin Team - Marion, Alan and James M - Ben, Toby, Brian, Tim, Percy, Dan R.

We have a draft list of Lead roles and people to take them on. This is a renamed version of the Tsars = people who step forward to look after aspects of the space - either areas, equipment or activities. One of the first actions is to confirm and communicate this list so we will be looking for volunteers.

The overall proposal was accepted with some of the solutions to issues as trials such as the proposal system, the Wiki and decision-making which can all be reviewed and adjusted over the forthcoming year. There will be regular member meetings via Zoom as well as a minimum of two Core Team meetings and an AGM.

There is more detail which is available and will be adapted and added to as we go along based on feedback when we use the systems such as communications, proposals and decision-making.

As immediate actions, we have a Core Team Slack channel and I am amending the New Member Guidelines to reflect the changes

-->