Hi Todd,
I'll carve up your message in reply.

Todd Robinson wrote:
> Gareth,
>
> Thanks for your email. After reading it, and
> re-reading my initial post, I realized that I
> mis-stated what my goal is for a cooperative.
>
> I wrote: "I want the business to be set up the way I
> want it set up, from the beginning."
>
> What I meant to say is something like this: "I want
> to be involved in a business from the start, and I
> want the business to be set up and run in a thorough,
> organized, and reasonably process-oriented way. I
> want important issues to be addressed up front that
> _can_ be put off in the short-term, but that are
> valuable long-term. I want to help create and sustain
> a culture of excellent communication, proper
> expectation-setting, and explicitly valuing of
> differences of ideas or people."

This is a reasonable sounding starting point for discussion with other
cooperators.

>
> My initial statement was a little extreme-sounding.
> That comes from trying to transmit information
> concisely but quickly -- Mark Twain once wrote to a
> friend at the end of a very long letter [I'm
> paraphrasing], "I apologize for the extreme length of
> this letter, but I did not have time to write a
> shorter one."

I am glad you mention Mark Twain. It brings a sense of proportion into
another wise sensible discussion. How about that?
Or perhaps <I made some extreme remarks just to make sure you don't
listen.> not so good.

In addition, I have been with a company
> for 5 1/2 years where I started above my boss's
> garage, but we are now at 12 employees and growing at
> 50% a year, and I never felt like things were handled
> in a way that really works for me (although I like a
> respect my co-workers).

That is more like it!

>
> Does that explain my situation better? Personally, I
> do think it is reasonable and appropriate to
> articulate what kind of an organization one is willing
> to be involved in, and it is important to address
> these issues up front with others who one might work
> with.
>
> In my opinion, my ideal type of organization is very
> cooperative, and I think most people would eventually
> thrive in such an organization, but it has fairly high
> expectations of people and their willingness and
> ability to work together in a positive and open way.
> I guess if I entered into lengthy discussions with
> someone, they might end up feeling that certain
> elements of cooperation are insufficient in the type
> of organization I propose.

May I forward this to Total Coverage of Southampton,England or are you
familiar with their work already? They may be interested in what you
have to say? They also run coopnet a mail group, many of whose members
are very knowledgeable about Coop formation and ethics, not just in UK.
you may get some replies from others , most of whom know a good deal
more about these aspects below than I do.
Great to hear your enthusiasm.

I can't find the exact subscribe address for the moment but it will get
to you I expect. I think it is Co-opnet-on@...

Best wishes Gar

>
> Here are some notes I just made today about the
> communication, process, and expectation-setting
> aspects of a cooperative business (or other
> non-hierarchical organization, such as a
> consensus-based non-profit that is not technically a
> cooperative corporation). I'd love to hear any
> feedback that anyone has:
>
>
> > Human resources and organizational-process issues
> are extremely important to a successful organization
> that is a pleasure to work for
>
> > Expectations should be set up front to every member
> about what the organization's mission and practices
> are
>
> > There should be ongoing communication and evaluation
> in a non-threatening, constructive manner
>
> > There should be a clear message that everyone is
> learning and growing all the time
>
> > Differences in employee motivations, values,
> preferences, styles of work, etc. should be discussed,
> established, and appreciated -- the goal is synthesis,
> but everyone should acknowledge when synthesis of
> certain differences doesn't work
>
> > A limited version of all this should take place with
> customers, as is possible given the relationship with
> the customers
>
> > There should be a position at the organization
> called "Director, Communication and Processes" (or
> "Administrator, Communication and Processes" or
> something else that is more appropriate for the
> coop/consensus setup); this person is responsible for
> championing the communication/process goals of the
> organization, and for working with all members to
> ensure that the goals permeate the day-to-day workings
> of the organization
>
> > It is important to acknowledge that there will never
> be enough time to do everything the absolute right
> way, but it should be an ideal that all employees keep
> in mind and strive for
>
> > As part of the above, processes and communication
> issues should be prioritized; it is critical to find
> time for the core components, whereas non-core but
> important components can be explicitly postponed but
> then worked into the organization when the time is
> right
>
> > All processes should be documented and referred to
> in a thorough fashion; everyone needs to appreciate
> the value that this brings to the organization
>
>
> Regards,
> Todd
>
>
>
> --- gar <gar@...> wrote:
> > Hi Todd,
> > I can't work out what name I have got on
> > <<programmercoops>> so
> > I just go on reading 'em!
> >
> > Possibly in answer to your thoughts below,
> > there are a good
> > many sole trader coops about, and I did think of the
> > same with my
> > livestock bees until I realised that it is much
> > better to join an
> > already existing coop where there are real people
> > already working
> > together.
> >
> > I am an area coop elected representative in the UK,
> > and on the CDA ...
> > ( coop development association) and I come across a
> > number of sole
> > traders who remain just that as coop organisation. I
> > suppose that it is
> > the desire to <<start something, make one's mark>>
> > or something like that.
> >
> > Your style of language below, if you will allow me
> > to say so,
> > suggests that you only want to do it your own way
> > anyway.... so there
> > would not be much point in cooperating?
> >
> > Cooperative business is where the sum of the whole
> > is greater than the
> > sum of the parts through cooperation; what you seem
> > to want
> > is one of the parts to dominate all the others right
> > from the beginning.
> > I don't think that is really cooperation.
> >
> > Perhaps you are only talking tongue in cheek, and
> > teasing out a dialogue
> > with me. Good luck with your coop campaigns... join
> > in with some others
> > to do so!!
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Gareth
> >
> >
> > Todd Robinson wrote:
> > > I have been a developer for 5-6 years, working
> > with
> > > mostly Microsoft technologies to produce software
> > that
> > > helps manage clinical research. I recently
> > decided it
> > > was time to make a change and start a new
> > business,
> > > and I will begin that on 11/1. I want the
> > business to
> > > be set up the way I want it set up, from the
> > > beginning. I will begin by myself, seeking
> > clients in
> > > clinnical research for custom programming and
> > database
> > > projects. However, I would like to expand beyond
> > > clinical research and into other IT and business
> > > services besides programming. And, most
> > importantly,
> > > I would like to find other like-minded individuals
> > to
> > > form a cooperative programming, IT, and business
> > > services company. Long-term, I'd like my clients
> > to
> > > be primarily nonprofits and alternative
> > businesses;
> > > short-term, in order to generate sufficient
> > revenue
> > > and replace my income, I'm starting with more
> > > mainstream clients.
> > >
> > > Todd Robinson
> > > Portland, OR
> > > toddsrobinson@...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>