If I ask the relevant board subcommittees to review the idea, some will give it serious scrutiny, others will sit on it for months, and one may strangle it. It is too important an idea to give any single committee a veto.
If I don't staff the idea extensively, then its downsides may be missed and I'll be suspected of ramming it through the process without proper vetting.
If I take it directly to the full board, the committees may feel neglected (and they'll be correct).
Other possible approaches?
- Assign it to an ad hoc committee with a strict deadline and let that committee report to me and then to the full board. Advantage: Speed. Disadvantage: The subject may consume too much time for a board meeting. Committees may be upset.
- Break the idea into components. Start with the easiest components, send them to the committees with a deadline and then take them to the full board. Get a feel for the territory and make appropriate adjustments before surfacing the more difficult components. Advantage: Easy and early progress plus the elephant is eaten one bite at a time. Disadvantage: Slower.
I'm leaning toward the last one.
3 comments:
Marcus Aurelius nods sympathetically.
I would lean to the last one as well, but only because it's similar to how I work with agile software development practices.
As an agile software developer, I prefer the continual release of working software that the customer requires.
The software I produce is released as often as I can and I welcome changes to the requirements of the software I produce.
Putting an idea to a committee might not be the same as writing software but there are some similarities in how you describe the process to work.
Also, the last method sounds like it might be the best way to fine tune the idea during the process.
Dan,
I hope so!
Matthew,
I completely agree. The fine tuning aspect is a real benefit.
Thanks!
Michael
Post a Comment