Guest guest Posted July 20, 2000 Report Share Posted July 20, 2000 At 19:59 +0000 7/17/2000, Jayapataka Swami (GBC) wrote: > >In an organization where every center is totally autonomous financially, >managerially and geographically who is at the helm? Maybe a part of the problem with understanding who is accountable is that we are all taught that the GBC is the ultimate managing authority. So with authority comes responsibility. If the GBC does not in fact have that authority (e.g. no practical power to enforce its laws), then that label is misleading. > Is the watchdog GBC at >the helm or the local management? It doesn't seem practical that every single GBC member has to know what is happening in every single yatra. However, the local GBC ought to know the problems in his/her zone (and if those are major, should bring them to the rest of the GBC body). If they are unaware of the issues facing the devotees in their zone, we have some serious communications problems between them and the local managers. Or have I completely misunderstood the role of the local GBCs? >Can someone give a corporate example of >ISKCON's unique structure where practically we have no legal control to tie >in our managers or compell them to do anything. I know I can't. In fact whenever I have tried to describe ISKCON's structure and functioning to organizational psychologists, they scratched their heads, rolled their eyes, and were not at all surprised that we have some serious problems. Sefton Davies (Saunaka Rsi's father in law) wrote an interesting article on ISKCON management in the ISKCON Communications Journal a few years ago that raised several important issues. Was his input discussed by the GBC? >So as ISKCON grows we need to see how to organize ourselves effectively. We >can see we have not been effective enough even when we were less expansive. >Now the load is more. So how much control is to be excercised and how much >autonomy each temple or level should have? How to actually make things work >properly? If first the structural enhancements are worked out then the >details could be worked on next. It is a pressing issue and any >constructive ideas on it would be very welcome. I'm very happy to hear that the GBC is open to input on these crucial issues. However, unless we have devotees who have studied organizational and management issues, I think the GBC needs to go outside of ISKCON for advise. There are people who have researched and worked on these issues in different ypes of organizations for decades, and who could provide a useful perspective and fresh vision. In addition to Sefton Davies, I know that e.g. Drutakarma prabhu has cultivated an industrial/organizational psychologist, whom he met at a scientific meeting, and who would probably be happy to help. It might also be interesting to survey ISKCON leaders to see what contacts they have, and invite a group of them to a brainstorm session. Ys, Madhusudani dasi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 20, 2000 Report Share Posted July 20, 2000 As it stands, the GBC is "the ultimate managing authority," providing everybody in ISKCON voluntarily agrees to follow -- a precondition we all know will never happen. This creates an ambiguity which some may feel is useful, but in fact, it has crippled our society's ability to manage its problems for decades. A good example is the defection of New Vrindaban in the 1980's. The GBC found itself virtually powerless to influence, much less control, the situation. There are many models we could follow, and some have been looked into in detail. One plan drawn up by an outside expert was shown to Srila Prabhupada who quickly rejected it. It is also possible to codify ISKCON's current style of management and even that would be a significant improvement over the present. In choosing an organizational structure, the essential issue is control: Who's going to make which decisions and how will they be enforced. As you can imagine, this can be quite a stumbling block to reaching a consensus. There are also legal issues and government requirements and limitations in various countries. There's not going to be a formula that even comes close to satisfying everyone. However, considering that we now have an undefined management system, a governing body which has little enforcement power, that is vastly over-extended and meets only once per year, the issue deserves immediate attention. I believe the time has come for the GBC to set itself an absolute time limit to reach a decision and to implement a permanent management structure. Your servant, Sri Rama das [srirama (AT) pamho (DOT) net], or [srirama (AT) jps (DOT) net] Madhusudani.Radha.JPS (AT) pamho (DOT) net [Madhusudani.Radha.JPS (AT) pamho (DOT) net] Thursday, July 20, 2000 12:55 AM Basu Ghosh (das) ACBSP (Baroda - IN); Bhadra Balaram (das) JPS (Mayapur - IN); Granddisciples (of Srila Prabhupada); India (Continental Committee) Open (Forum); Varnasrama development GBC authority and responsibility At 19:59 +0000 7/17/2000, Jayapataka Swami (GBC) wrote: > >In an organization where every center is totally autonomous financially, >managerially and geographically who is at the helm? Maybe a part of the problem with understanding who is accountable is that we are all taught that the GBC is the ultimate managing authority. So with authority comes responsibility. If the GBC does not in fact have that authority (e.g. no practical power to enforce its laws), then that label is misleading. > Is the watchdog GBC at >the helm or the local management? It doesn't seem practical that every single GBC member has to know what is happening in every single yatra. However, the local GBC ought to know the problems in his/her zone (and if those are major, should bring them to the rest of the GBC body). If they are unaware of the issues facing the devotees in their zone, we have some serious communications problems between them and the local managers. Or have I completely misunderstood the role of the local GBCs? >Can someone give a corporate example of >ISKCON's unique structure where practically we have no legal control to tie >in our managers or compell them to do anything. I know I can't. In fact whenever I have tried to describe ISKCON's structure and functioning to organizational psychologists, they scratched their heads, rolled their eyes, and were not at all surprised that we have some serious problems. Sefton Davies (Saunaka Rsi's father in law) wrote an interesting article on ISKCON management in the ISKCON Communications Journal a few years ago that raised several important issues. Was his input discussed by the GBC? >So as ISKCON grows we need to see how to organize ourselves effectively. We >can see we have not been effective enough even when we were less expansive. >Now the load is more. So how much control is to be excercised and how much >autonomy each temple or level should have? How to actually make things work >properly? If first the structural enhancements are worked out then the >details could be worked on next. It is a pressing issue and any >constructive ideas on it would be very welcome. I'm very happy to hear that the GBC is open to input on these crucial issues. However, unless we have devotees who have studied organizational and management issues, I think the GBC needs to go outside of ISKCON for advise. There are people who have researched and worked on these issues in different ypes of organizations for decades, and who could provide a useful perspective and fresh vision. In addition to Sefton Davies, I know that e.g. Drutakarma prabhu has cultivated an industrial/organizational psychologist, whom he met at a scientific meeting, and who would probably be happy to help. It might also be interesting to survey ISKCON leaders to see what contacts they have, and invite a group of them to a brainstorm session. Ys, Madhusudani dasi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.