One of the key features of sociocracy is that we delegate power to teams and the people in them. Because these are decisions that affect and the team, if done by the book every time there is a change to the membership of the team this should be subject to consent.
At team level, if done by the book, the Coordinator should add a new membership application as a point on the agenda. @reef-coordination, you do you, but just so you know.
At group level there’s not really guidelines, because in sociocracy pure there is no such thing like a plenary meeting. In The Reef, because of the high stakes in our project, team membership is also a level 3 decision, meaning we consent to it at the plenary meeting.
Back in the early days of The Reef we used to be very rigourous about this (possibly because we didn’t have more important decisions to make). Now, with the relaunch of the Coordination Group, one of the resolutions we made when we started is to bring this back to the plenary every once and a while.
The document in which we keep track of who does what is saved in Team Reef > Teams set-up. The mighty @LuciaM is the person in the Coordination Group who is taking responsibility for helping newlings to find a team, and for keeping the file up-to-date.
Hi @Lee. I am still up for doing this, but it is not clear for me what the procedure is, as you read your text as “we should do this this way/we agreed on this but we don’t do it”. The last months, when somebody wanted to integrate a team, I just put them in contact with the coordinator of said team.
Can you spell it out for me in laymen terms of I need to do something more than that (eg it is up to each team/coordinator to make sure they go through the procedure ?) and when does this come to the plenary - if in practice this has worked so far, maybe it if not necessary. Again governance is not my best suit, We can also do it one on one if easier.
I would propose we continue doing things in the informal way we are doing them, with the exception of now bringing the teams set-up to the plenary two times per year.
Here’s how I understand this works:
All changes to the teams set-up are recorded in the Excel sheet, highlighted in yellow. I personally preferred to make these updates myself, but doer decides. Maybe you could just ask everybody to put all updates in this post? Teams set-up: small updates
Whether teams want to go through a consent process yes or no (recommended in the Full Membership stage only) is up to them I’d say. If people want to do sociocracy, then I’d recommend it .
An important point though is the terms of the Team Coordinator. Would you be willing to insist that all Coordinators make theirs specific? (we are currently missing two)
When somebody is selected in a Team to be the Team Coordinator, sociocracy asks that it is specified until when the mandate runs. If you look in the Excel, you will see that all Coordinators have a specification next to their name saying “until dd/mm/yy”.
So the request is to the two people who haven’t done this yet, to make this specific. This matters, because then a team can do a performance review half way, and it is also clear to everybody when the new selection process will take place.
We can also do it one on one if easier.
.