Fellowship Charter

Add a Comment

Comment by Laura Billings on June 7, 2010 at 15:49

Hi David - thanks for the positive comment. We've been very pleased by the response we've had to this version so far. I will gather and share in due course.

Everyone else - do please have a look at the second draft of the Charter online, and let me know if you have any final comments by 25 June 2010

Comment by David Wilcox on June 7, 2010 at 14:19

Laura - thanks for info in the newsletter pointing to the second draft of the Charter. I think it is a huge improvement, and your notes on how changes were made following responses really makes it feel worth commenting. It looks a great framework for the more detailed howtos.

Comment by Laura Billings on May 25, 2010 at 9:45

Hi David
So - as stated above the Fellowship Charter is certainly intended to restate our common aims and update the initial quote from MT that you copied below. The Fellowship Charter and the 21CE lecture speak to each other and are being developed together, as the Charter aims to set out the ways in which Fellows and the RSA together, as part of the whole, embody and tackle this vision. It is also designed to describe the ethos behind the way we work together, but in line with feedback from Fellows, it is not a code of conduct statement. So for example, it will not be so detailed as to include an online netiquette guide, but it will lay out the ways of working that we value. It is planned that the longer guides that go alongside, will cover case studies and examples, one of which could be a netiquette guide.
No - there is not going to be an interim statement. But the second version of the Fellowship Charter, developed in response to feedback, is due to go live for final comment on 7th June. And I am planning on putting a working draft up here just before that for comment from Fellows who have been particularly engaged in the process.

Comment by David Wilcox on May 25, 2010 at 8:08

A discussion started by Paul Buchanan about Netiquette on the RSA Linkedin forum raises a lot of Charter-type issues on what's OK behaviour generally ... and behind that what's the purpose of Fellowship (altruistic <-> social benefit <->commercial). This prompted me to quote:
Back in September 2007 CEO Matthew Taylor wrote to all Fellows saying: "In essence, our aim is that the RSA becomes a network for civic innovation, empowering both Fellows and staff to develop new initiatives that promote and deliver progress in society."
That was admirably clear, but we've moved on, and need another statement. I'm honestly not trying to be difficult here:-) ... but is that going to come from the Charter discussions, or 21st enlightenment lecture? And is there an interim statement that would help guide other discussions, like the one on netiqette? Otherwise, if we don't know the purpose, anything goes providing it is respectful etc.
In summary - does netiquette have to wait on a Charter, and if not, what's the framework?

Comment by David Wilcox on May 13, 2010 at 14:59

Oops Alastair - wasn't intending to be at all critical - very much applauding the mix you are promoting.

Comment by Alastair Irvine on May 13, 2010 at 14:48

My post in the #socent group wasn't supposed to be quite as nakedly capitalist as David suggests (I'm here to offer free advice to those who might benefit from it) but I firmly support the notion of blending altruism with realistic commerciality.
Altruism never paid anyone's bills. The entire #socent movement is to concentrate on more than profit and for the RSA to insist on purely altruistic motivations is as out-dated as Big'n'Greedy plc with or without the greenwash.

Comment by David Wilcox on May 13, 2010 at 14:10

Thanks Frances, and also Laura for promise of some howtos. In my experience, Constitutions and Charters are documents for drawers: necessary, symbolic, yet not-very-useful ways to direct activity or resolve arguments. What's more important is the "how we do things around here" actions and conversations that reflect values, procedures etc.
Discussion around the howtos should bring some of this to the surface, plus stuff that just comes up.
For example, there's now a forum post in the social entrepreneur group marketing an accountancy service ... which seems to me me fair enough if RSA is happy to have a socent group on site, and doesn't provide any guidelines on acceptable use. Hopefully other people will start promoting their services, and some useful relationships and discussions will follow.
Let's be flexible - unless as I raised earlier:
- we are bound by the original Charter
- we are bound by charity law
- there is a policy decision by Trustees

Comment by Frances C .A Gallager on May 13, 2010 at 12:02

David and Andy make very good points as does your response. I think it is very valuable to consider a creative way to demonstrate desirable outcomes as a result of networkng in RSA -otherwise it is somewhat unrealisitc to really expect conversations to take place among Fellows which will always have only an altruistc outcome. I am all for altruism and volunteering etc and any associated charity work but it would seem somewhat short sighted in this 21st Century to forbid any profitable activity to ensue from networking. The RSA is and has been considerably built on the volunteer work of the Fellows- along side the paid staff- but it would seem to me that innovation and social [and any other kind of ]enterprise is essential and may signifcantly contribute to a recession exit route. The RSA should and could have a major role to play in the shift in society re the key attitude of people being valued above profit while synergisitcally making a major contribution to 21st Century Enlightenment. I agree with David's point re our Title. Frameworks have to be very carefully chosen as they could stifle progress. A flexible structure is much more enterpreneurial. One does not stick a rose in a frame work and say just grow within this shape not unless you want a strictly preconceived shape size and outcome. With people growth one can loosen the structures to gain more order and then growth becomes more fruitful relating to natural talents from human endeavour and not because of strict rules see Sir Ken Robinson Book/Lecture 'In your Element' . Yes we must have guidelines etc for a stable society etc and even boundaries of acceptable behaviour. So lets not make the Charter too fixed in shape and structure or complex in nature.It does of course, in reference to the words of Mark Twain, take much longer to write the short letter than the long one so we must persevere for the short version.

Comment by Laura Billings on May 13, 2010 at 8:06

@andy and @david - agree with both of you about leaving the options for social enterprise and being flexible about the possible means for social benefit. this is designed to build a positive framework rather than clamp down, and the case studies and examples in the guides will make it clearer where we are drawing the line about charitable aims and what's abusing the system so to speak.

@david on the specific point of the 'how to's' we are also brain storming and working out ways to lay it out, that is linked directly to the messages in the Fellowship Charter. It's on a whiteboard in my office since yesterday morning, but I will make sure and add a post to this page within a few days and invite people to add thoughts and help us build it.

Comment by David Wilcox on May 12, 2010 at 17:11

I strongly support Andy's view and suggestion: focus on the outcome ... social benefit ... and the values, then be flexible about the means. Altruistic volunteering isn't a big enough, broad enough engine for the changes we need, and commerce and manufacture is in the title, after all.
In order to get some practical fixes on this, could we start on some "how tos" which should be easier to brainstorm and outline than finely nuanced Charter text.
I started some over here - with help from Bob Porrer - for the Digital Engagement group. Could we pull something together here, based on discussions so far?

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page