Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: Re: Sociocracy

[Sheila Braun (sheila.braun]

> The Top Circle has *way* too much power, and the membership
> has no real way to remove the Top Circle if they feel it is failing them.

This is a misunderstanding of sociocracy. It is the membership that puts the
Top Circle in place. Of course it can dissolve it. All it takes is a
well-written proposal that meets with
no reasoned & paramount objection. In the case of removing a single member
of the Top Circle, this can take place without the member being there if
necessary.

Furthermore, the TC can fire the functional leader (project coordinator, in
our
situation).

> I also want to point out that while every member has the right to *ask* to
> be part of any decision, the circle which is making that decision has the
> right to deny the request.

This is technically true, but way oversimplified. A facilitator can keep
someone out of a decision only with justification (here I'll use Rob
Sandelin's example in a post I read yesterday morning), as in, "We realize
that you would like to participate in the decision about wiring, but
since you're new to the group and have no expertise in the area to offer, we
have chosen to let the group's elected representatives and the experts they
have added to the circle make this decision."  Most people can understand
and respect this, and furthermore, if they can't, then they can bring a
proposal to the next meeting undoing whatever was done that they don't like.

Quite frankly, it is because of this fact and others like it that sociocracy
was my choice when I founded the group. I was more than a little cautious
about making million-dollar group decisions where anyone had veto power over
any decision. After all, I hadn't met the people yet & had no idea what
their competence levels would be. And my life savings was at risk.
Sociocracy made it easy for me to draw a line between *design decisions*
(which were the purview of the general circle as we set it up) and *strategy
decisions* (which were limited to the top circle).

> Worse, the Top Circle has the right to change
> the rules as it sees fit -- whether the rest of the membership likes it or
> not.

Um, no, not at all. I'm not sure where this idea comes from. The whole
membership agrees to the rules (or not), and in fact signs them and
registers them with the State of Vermont. Any changes must be ratified by
the whole group. Day-to-day rules are the purview of the General Circle (in
our case, everybody).

But this is pursuing an entirely legalistic line of thought. If you have to
ask yourself, "What would be my recourse if the group consisted entirely of
cads with no consciences," then no decision-making process will fix such a
deep lack of trust.

Sheila Braun
Champlain Valley Cohousing
Charlotte, Vermont







_______________________________________________
Cohousing-L mailing list
Cohousing-L [at] cohousing.org  Unsubscribe  and other info:
http://www.communityforum.net/mailman/listinfo/cohousing-l