James Bradley <<jb183>>
writes:

The strategic planning committee at USHPA, which I chair, has been
looking at ways to restructure the organization that might help it serve its
mission and its members better.

The current 26 member board of mostly regionally-elected directors made sense at
the time the organization was formed, and perhaps it makes less sense now. At
the board’s request last fall, my committee created a proposal for a much
smaller board and a transition plan. At last month’s meeting in Golden,
Colorado, the board asked us to make our proposal available to all of USHPA’s
members for comments and feedback.

It’s up. The deadline for comments is June 15. USHPA invites all its members to
download the proposal at the link below. We welcome their feedback and thoughts
using the link at the bottom of the download page.

Https://www.ushpa.org/member/governance-proposal-2018

While it was convenient to have the committees, which have been composed mostly
of board members, meet immediately before the board meetings, this format
contributed to the perception that USHPA’s management acted without regard for
what USHPA’s members think.

Now things are different. As USHPA moves to communicate better and to be
transparent in its operations, committee proposals must be posted to the
membership for comment at least 30 days before they are voted on. Anyone can
point out a flaw in reasoning or suggest a better idea. The board, too, can
weigh in. After the comment period, the committee has a chance to incorporate
the feedback into its proposal before presenting it to the board.

At the recent spring board meeting in Golden, Colorado, the room was newly quiet
much of the day, because the committee work had been more fully considered in
advance. As the membership becomes more aware of the opportunity to comment and
be heard, even less review will be needed before the board signs off on most
committee proposals. The wide audience is still happening, just in a different
and better way. It has become a waste of money and especially of volunteer time
to fly so many people to a room twice a year, simply to rubber stamp
well-prepared committee work.

Another problem with the current structure became apparent during the insurance
crisis. There was no way for the 26-member board to manage the fast-moving
situation. It fell to the four-member Executive Committee to do it, along with
the Executive Director and a small band of volunteers. It was understandably
frustrating for the board members to be told after the fact about what was
happening and then be expected to sign off on it. It was necessary, and it made
sense; the EC could get together often on conference calls, and the 26-member
board couldn’t possibly, not to mention the challenges of the large group making
decisions. Some board members found this irritating enough that they began
communicating negatively about USHPA’s management, in person and on social
media, at a time when a unified presentation of the challenges, decisions and
reasons might really have helped. (What was actually going on was a group of
volunteers were working hard to solve our insurance problem. Nothing uglier than
that.) In this way our current structure contributed directly to the rift we are
now needing to heal, between USHPA’s management and some of its members. Perhaps
you are one of them.

With these challenges in mind, last fall the board asked my committee, the
Strategic Planning Committee, to develop a proposal for a 7-member board of
directors, with a transition plan for how to make the change. Included had to be
good answers for how we would do what the regional directors have been doing in
their home regions, how we would maintain regional representation on the
committees that need it (for instance, Towing and Safety & Training), and how
might we keep some of what has always been good about the big board meetings,
which is the in-person time that happens, the conversations over breakfast, the
chance to corner the president in the hall with a question, and so on.

This is the kind of project that can never please everyone. You may not like it.
The idea is to try to step back from whether you like it or I like it, and
instead try to think about what would most help USHPA serve its mission, which
is to ensure the future of free flight. This includes being able to function
well in our next crisis, and to make the best possible use of our volunteers’
time and energy, all of the time.

Volunteer energy is precious; we need to be making the most of it. Our board
members, committee chairs and committee members are all volunteers. For USHPA to
be the best that it can be, we need to provide them with a more effective
framework to work in.

The proposed new structure has a much smaller board that is elected nationally
rather than regionally. It strengthens the committees, with committee members
selected from the entire pilot community rather than from the board. It has a
revised meetings plan, including an annual in-person board meeting that is
webcast to all of USHPA’s members. It has a separate annual committee meeting
that all committees are invited to attend, with travel reimbursement, to get a
large group together again. It includes first drafts of two new ideas, one a
program to help our chapters and the other an ambassador program to appeal to
young people. We think both of these are things to get started on and then
adjust as we see how they go, rather than overthink at the beginning. It has a
sketch of a new communications plan, built around a new staff person with the
title of Communications Director.

At the recent spring meeting, the board discussed our most recent draft and
voted to incorporate a couple more ideas that had come up in discussion, and
then put it out to the membership for comments and feedback. As with the many
drafts of the proposal that we have been through, this one is not final. We want
to know what you think. Please send your concerns and ideas. I will personally
read every comment and we will consider all suggestions.