![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
If any of you have spent any substantive time with me recently, you may notice that my main focus is cons, I have two major projects on my desk currently, The One I'm gonna talk about today, is Restructuring Califur.
If you don't know how cons are Structured, lemme give you a primer, In conventions there are two main models used, One is the CEO Driven Structure of Anthrocon (that however is changing slowly), the Old Confurence, and of course Calfur, the other is the Committee driven model of FC, LosCon, BayCon, PhilCon, and most all Scifi conventions
Main Advantages and Disadvantages of Each Model:
CEO Driven Model:
Example: a very Strong Leader, at the Top (Uncle Kage, Mark Merlino, etc..), with a very fluid and open structure below (loose or ill defined chain of command), in essence, the leader's Charisma and Dedication Drive Those Under him.
Advantages:
1. Easy to Start (hence us being able to plan the bulk of califur in 4 months)
2. Less Structure (this is a major strength, but also a flaw on its own)
3. More Informal (same as above)
4. Better able to React to Problems
5. More Con Stable Policy Over time
Disadvantages:
1. Scales Poorly
2. Leadership Change Can result in Disaster (Confurence being a good example)
3. Single Point of Failure
4. Can be Slow to react to events over time
5. Tends to Burn People out over time (there is very little institution to force people to move around or whatever, and when the happens the con can be left in the lurch)
Committee Driven Model:
Example: a very detailed and well planed Structure with Many departments and a clear chain of command, (meaning you report to you report to your department head not directly to the Con Chair)
Advantages:
1. Self Perpetuating (Meaning the Convention has enough forward momentum to have a con with or without a chair, for a year or more)
2. increased stability
3. Scales Well
4. Problems Self Solve (meaning the structure encourages people to be self reliant, and solve their own problems)
5. Handles Leadership Change very well (this is the one that I'm concerned with)
6. Less Likely to Result in Burnout (due to people playing Musical Chairs within the con)
Disadvantages:
1. Con Policy Can vary widely year to year
2. Bureaucracy will form and get more complex over time
3. Slow to move due to the layers involved
4. Can Require a substantial amount of new blood over time
As you can see, there are major Advantages and Disadvantages of both structures, and not every con fits in to these structures exactly, but most fit in to either one or the other, what I'm trying to do for Califur is Merge them, here are some of the plans that I have so far:
1. A comprehensive policy manual, that is simply a written manual of how things are done now, as well as a substantial forward for the incoming chair, also, this document includes the rules needed to handle editing the document, as well as kicking someone off the Convention Board (the ultimate power to do that lies with the Con Chair, however it is the Corporations boards prerogative to overrule him or her)
2. A Simple yet Sturdy Structure with as few Departments as possible
3. A well defined concept of who is responsible for what.
4. A well defined Chair Succession Policy. (part of the Policy Manual)
5. A Position borrowed from FC called “Exec On Duty” which means 24 hours a day, a person who is available to deal with problems that come up.
What this all boils down to is a con that is stable and deals with leadership change well, it is more the CEO driven structure, with bits a pieces borrowed from the Committee driven structure to add stability, im sure in time I will find and see the flaws in this structure but that is an LJ post to come.
If you don't know how cons are Structured, lemme give you a primer, In conventions there are two main models used, One is the CEO Driven Structure of Anthrocon (that however is changing slowly), the Old Confurence, and of course Calfur, the other is the Committee driven model of FC, LosCon, BayCon, PhilCon, and most all Scifi conventions
Main Advantages and Disadvantages of Each Model:
CEO Driven Model:
Example: a very Strong Leader, at the Top (Uncle Kage, Mark Merlino, etc..), with a very fluid and open structure below (loose or ill defined chain of command), in essence, the leader's Charisma and Dedication Drive Those Under him.
Advantages:
1. Easy to Start (hence us being able to plan the bulk of califur in 4 months)
2. Less Structure (this is a major strength, but also a flaw on its own)
3. More Informal (same as above)
4. Better able to React to Problems
5. More Con Stable Policy Over time
Disadvantages:
1. Scales Poorly
2. Leadership Change Can result in Disaster (Confurence being a good example)
3. Single Point of Failure
4. Can be Slow to react to events over time
5. Tends to Burn People out over time (there is very little institution to force people to move around or whatever, and when the happens the con can be left in the lurch)
Committee Driven Model:
Example: a very detailed and well planed Structure with Many departments and a clear chain of command, (meaning you report to you report to your department head not directly to the Con Chair)
Advantages:
1. Self Perpetuating (Meaning the Convention has enough forward momentum to have a con with or without a chair, for a year or more)
2. increased stability
3. Scales Well
4. Problems Self Solve (meaning the structure encourages people to be self reliant, and solve their own problems)
5. Handles Leadership Change very well (this is the one that I'm concerned with)
6. Less Likely to Result in Burnout (due to people playing Musical Chairs within the con)
Disadvantages:
1. Con Policy Can vary widely year to year
2. Bureaucracy will form and get more complex over time
3. Slow to move due to the layers involved
4. Can Require a substantial amount of new blood over time
As you can see, there are major Advantages and Disadvantages of both structures, and not every con fits in to these structures exactly, but most fit in to either one or the other, what I'm trying to do for Califur is Merge them, here are some of the plans that I have so far:
1. A comprehensive policy manual, that is simply a written manual of how things are done now, as well as a substantial forward for the incoming chair, also, this document includes the rules needed to handle editing the document, as well as kicking someone off the Convention Board (the ultimate power to do that lies with the Con Chair, however it is the Corporations boards prerogative to overrule him or her)
2. A Simple yet Sturdy Structure with as few Departments as possible
3. A well defined concept of who is responsible for what.
4. A well defined Chair Succession Policy. (part of the Policy Manual)
5. A Position borrowed from FC called “Exec On Duty” which means 24 hours a day, a person who is available to deal with problems that come up.
What this all boils down to is a con that is stable and deals with leadership change well, it is more the CEO driven structure, with bits a pieces borrowed from the Committee driven structure to add stability, im sure in time I will find and see the flaws in this structure but that is an LJ post to come.
