Separation

Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Author Message (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Wednesday, September 15, 2010 - 01:43 pm:    100915 SEPARATION by Ralph Liebing, RA, CSI, CDT Cincinnati, OH Is separation good? Is it good in some instances, but bad and unfortunate in others? Can anything be gained by separation? Can anything be prevented by separation? Are there “no-brainer” times when separation is so necessary it becomes a foregone conclusion; an accepted condition? Well, of course, we can cite a litany of “separations” from aurous conditions we’ve experienced. Rest rooms, and similar situations related to strict propriety are no brainier separations. Clothing for petite or small sized people are separated from the “big and tall” areas. Toddlers’ clothing is distinctly different and seated from Boys and Girls; Men’s and Women are too. Northbound traffic is best separated from southbound. Separation of high [secondary] school from middle [junior high] schools is advisable due to the age differences, and the social climate. Usually the band room is separated from the study halls [whether the band room produces noise or soft melody! Closer to our bailiwick, we separate aluminum from steel with an asphalitc coating. We sincerely try to separate water from leaking into areas, coverings, coatings, etc. We don’t though advocate separation in concrete! Within our firms and organizations we do have separation—administration from production. The Board of Directors from the staffers. The policy makers [“shakers and movers” from the production force. Discipline departments are often separated, but in some cases are “task forced” and moved into project team scenarios [‘course, you do move staff around a lot in this] In some organization climates other instances occur. A congregation usually will vote on a new minister, but only after interviews are conducted by a search committee. It is to the best interest of the church for the entire population to “buy in” to the new spiritual leader. So a collective separation to reduce confusion but overall combined approval at the end The PTA elects members to lead its activities, but usually they don’t hire or fire the school principal—she or he has another boss. Organizations establish some form of elected officers to really represent the mass of the members, where the whole of the membership cannot be gathered to decide issues. Unions have a system of elected officers who negotiate contracts, but the contract only becomes binding when approved by vote of the members. Unsatisfactory performance produces recalls, or changes via the voting box. But in most situations, with a large, widely spread and diverse membership [like in-house and consultant spec writers], the elected officers are beholden to the members they represent. They need to maintain a tuned ear to those members, and need to have the pulse of the members-- on-going. There is no room for individual or second agendas that promote individual prestige or betterment. So trust must be limited and oversight in place. Elected office is a responsibility not a directive! In this, open communication is so very vital. First, it eliminates undercutting, sniping, and rumor-mongering. When everything is open and above board, then there will be smooth sailing-- not that every single member agrees, but that every single member knows what is going on! But all need to know for their own assessment-- and adjustment if they so choose. Where does confidentiality play in this? What should be held, or needs to be held close to the vest of the elected officers, to the exclusion of the whole membership? Here things can get very dicey, very quickly. We all know the “leaks” purposefully issued in greater Washington, DC by various government people, often for their own interest. And we have the tabloids, the investigative reporters, the pundits, the snoops, the PIs, and the columnists who thrive on and making the unholy livings on any morsel of information. How organizations can stand for long under such conditions. They are ruinous! But members really don’t need to know how every penny of their dues is spent IF they are confident in their elected officers. Where that confidence is compromised, problems develop for everyone—and the organization as a whole. Obviously this involves a lot of pure trust! Trust of those, known only remotely, who are elected to national office. Trust that the organization is not merely perpetuating, but is making progress. Truly informative newsletters, not filler; easily accessed blogs, twitters, etc. but not so convoluted as to inhibit truly open access, contribution and communication! Sharing information and responding to suggestions is vital to the success, especially where separation is necessary or another reality! ‘Course, there are those times for separation-- quiet; apart; alone; time to think, meditate and sort things out!