Teams set-up process: moving it to the end of the Associate Membership stage?

Hello @reef-governance,

I am following up to one of the issues of lower importance that I mentioned at the 2024 review (link to Edgeryders post).

So we have process to consent to Team membership when people become Associate Members. This is based on the sociocratic principle that if you delegate power to a Team, it is important that there is consent to who is a member of these Teams, just as it is important that the current Team members consent to a new member.

What doesn’t work for me however is that we are doing this at a moment that we know almost nothing about these new Reeflings, and the new Reeflings know almost nothing about the Teams.
One example in this context is that of a former Reefling who joined Team Conflict Prevention and Management, and then turned out to be more of a conflict creator than a conflict preventer. In this context consenting to membership at such an early stage does not seem very meaningful to me.

In addition I also think it takes up way too much time at plenary meetings, because it often happens that a good month later these people have left The Reef already.

Therefore my proposal would be that we move the consent process to the moment people (are about to) become Full Members. At that moment we will know them better, and we also won’t lose time at each and every plenary meeting.

Defined membership is nevertheless important, so what we could do is that it is just the Coordinators who match people with Teams and vice versa, and then keep note of it in the Teams set-up overview table (colour coded for the non-consented Team members).

I’d be happy to get your thoughts on this, and in case these would be mostly positive, whether you would agree that this could be a level 2-3 proposal that we could just present for online consent.

1 Like

Question: are you proposing that Associates no longer join teams? Or that they do as a sort of apprenticeship, but that this becomes something between them and the team in question, away from plenary meetings?

1 Like

Being a Team member is an important way to get to know each other, so I wouldn’t want to scrap that. So it’s the latter: they would be team members with almost equal levels of responsibility, but we would do the consent round only when they reach the end of the Associate Membership stage.

Then I don’t think much is changing. People we do not know well will still be joining teams. And I agree that it is the lesser evil.

1 Like