Board Diversity
Diversity on any Board contributes to a culture that embraces diversity. In a Radically Inclusive group like the Australian Burning Man community, how can the constitution ensure there is adequate diversity and representation on the Board?
I have been listening to a lot of webinars at an online conference this weekend and the topics that touched on marginalisation and oppression made me think of this project. One of the speakers said "if it isn't accessible it isn't radical" and this is the context of activities in the social change space. So I started making a list of people I can identify as marginalised who should be actively encouraged and included in not just our events but in leadership:
-Caregivers
-First Nations People
-Under 25s
-Over 60s
-Women
-Transgender/Gender fluid
-People of colour
-Unemployed/underemployed
-LGBTQIA+
-refugees/asylum seekers/new migrants
-rural and regional Australians
While this is not extensive and I would love people to add to this list I think it is so important that there be some indication in the constitution that Board selection should actively encourage and seek members from oppressed backgrounds.
The dry run at a "Board" election in 2018 resulted in 5 men and 2 women (6 from metro Melbourne, 1 from Sydney)(2 Irish, 2 North American, 3 Australian: ALL anglo caucasians).One lesson to be learned is that communication about desirable backgrounds in nomination processes is a key inclusion to spark interest in people who may have internalised oppression and therefore don't feel automatically entitled to apply, and conversely to put those with internalised domination on notice that their feeling of entitlement and confidence around decision making power might not reflect what is best for the community.
This raises the discussion to be had around a nomination committee, who could assist in vetting candidates across an agreed Board matrix. Perhaps the members could elect twice the number allowed in the constitution and the nomination committee confirms their suitability against a Board matrix that has been collaboratively developed with the members? Those that do not make the Board could be guaranteed a placeon key advisory committees so the members' can still benefit from the representation they voted for?
The members should vote for the representation they want. We shouldn't exclude candidates by race (or any other factor that can't be shown to reliably predict competence).
This is such a hard one, I am more for educating our community through programs like the BMORG RIDE program and live with the hope the diversity will emerge. This is an active program right through to ticketing,
https://communitydirectors.com.au/help-sheets/achieving-the-right-mix-towards-a-more-diverse-board
This is a great read from ICDA about the importance and steps to take towards Board diversity.