An Open Letter to DMS Members

In the grand scale of things I am a new-ish member having joined DMS in early 2018. I love this place and the eclectic gang that belong. I want to see it prosper. I think the rest do to. We don’t agree on what that looks like or how it should operate, and that’s okay … provided we appreciate the differences and work together to move forward.

I’m not a spring chicken; I am a grey headed old man with less hair than I used to have. My DOB explains part of that, but living with and living through plenty of wrong headed decisions and actions played a part as well. I had my youthful mistakes, I had the “young and still stupid” chapter, and I had the benefit of mentors who helped me recover and learn from a lot of that stuff. Along the way I gradually became a student of why individuals (me included) misinterpret information and why groups and crowds behave the way they do. I found it a fascinating world to study and can recommend some outstanding resources should anyone be interested (PM if you want the list). One negative to this is that it feeds a serious character flaw of mine: an overwhelming urge to counter misinformation and the spread thereof.

This is relevant in light of the current turmoil at DMS around governance and how monies are distributed. It starts with realizing few if any of us have ever been a part of so large a group of very unique, creative and passionate souls. The majority of us were not captain of a team, most popular classmate, or outgoing social butterflies. Many of us don’t exactly fit into the “normal” jigsaw puzzle of folk and we willingly pay money to be a part of DMS where we see others a bit more like ourselves. The aggravations we have with things in that “normal” world are not something we want to pay to endure when we get to DMS. So, sometimes that makes us overly prickly when things are not going the way we prefer.

I wonder if the illusion that we are now with kindred souls makes us even more irritated when members see things differently. We may grudgingly accept those differences in real life, but maybe assume the DMS members are just supposed to share a vision. If only it worked that way.

Many of the original members long for the small cohesive group they remember in the beginning … even though some may be only remembering the positives and have long forgotten the uglies that surely happened as well. Newer members, me included, long for a more operationally structured governance that would be more in keeping with such a large organization. Both ends of that spectrum have some merit and some challenges. Still DMS must inevitably deal with evolution as time passes.

Being all volunteer and having leadership of all sorts of things elected … most as often as twice a year … means the leaders will always have diverse goals and opinions about what is important and how things should be done. Nothing really keeps a leader or a group from wandering down a stray path for quite some way before any kind of “wagon circling” can happen to get things more or less realigned. Small group independence and large group cohesiveness is a tough ask.

Okay, I’ll get to the point.

DMS members need to hit some reset buttons. Trust comes from being trustworthy. It also comes for being willing to trust. I’m not sure we have enough of either. Some members feel they can’t trust leadership because it hasn’t worked out well in the past. Leaders don’t feel like they can trust members to give them any benefit of the doubt. This “dog chasing tail” exercise has no resolution. The dog just gets tired, rests for a bit and resumes again. You can see that is the budget/honorarium issue.

The BoD took their first look at the financials and found a problem: the money in the bank was declining independent of the Expansion. When they started trying to figure out why, two things surfaced: honorariums outflow was much greater than expected and membership is not growing. To compound matters, they found the books to be difficult to navigate and didn’t feel they could trust the numbers without some significant review. The available numbers suggested honorarium expenses to the organization had grown significantly and that most of that surge began in late 2018 and continued to accelerate into 2019. With books you are not sure you can trust, very real bank balances that are declining, strong evidence that month by month honorarium expense is far greater than expected, and an expansion to finish, the BoD initiated action to conserve cash as a priority.

When faced with this problem …. and I am speculating here … they realized they needed to immediately plug the unexpectedly large leak in honorariums. Guided by angst that at least some of the members would rail loudly against any published information that wasn’t completely vetted to be as accurate as possible, the leadership publicized a single point of data (May 2019) and a conclusion that honorariums needed to be reduced significantly. Had the leadership felt they could be given some benefit of the doubt, they had and could have released “preliminary, best currently available” data that would have visually shown the number of classes was way, way up, had been going up for half a year and was skyrocketing in 1Q2019.

As it was, leadership could not trust members to give them the benefit of doubt because members didn’t feel DMS leadership was historically trustworthy and required new leaders to earn their trust which would have meant sharing information that might not be perfect which meant the data could be questioned which … see, dog/tail?

The actual data that I understand to be the best available and that has had many, many hours … voluntary hours after the day job … does show classes deemed honorarium approved are way up.

image

The countless electrons that have been irritated by angst over reducing classes would have been different in nature if everyone had started with this data. And to be very clear … it is my opinion it would have been just as different with the approximate numbers the BoD had available to look at a month ago.

The zeal of members to assume leaders are not acting in good faith results in members making all manner of inaccurate accusations and pointing fingers at the wrong things and at the wrong people. It is hard to look at that chart and not feel like something has gone haywire.

Point #2.

Most people have at some point in their lives, heard about the Five W’s: What, When, Where, Why, and Who. You need that information to determine the root cause of an issue and to determine the best solutions, both short & long term. The problem is that humans tend to take a shortcut … they ask W questions until they get a “Who” and then they quit delving into the puzzle. Unfortunately, that also happened in the current DMS drama. With a half dozen prolific teachers, a “Who” was easy to identify even if the person was not actually the issue at hand. When members of leadership pointed to the “Who”, members at large either agreed and pointed fingers or disagreed and pointed the opposite way.

In my opinion, there is very little of a “Who” problem. Every single class was approved by an auditor. The position of DMS as an organization was to “hold classes” and steps were even taken to push Committees to urge classes to be taught. The fact that certain members had the time and willingness to teach filled a specific request being broadcast to DMS members. There is an entirely different issue around what should constitute a class. Individual Committees made choices within the allowable guidelines to address their needs and to hold certain classes. Others outside those Committees can and do come to different conclusions, some with knowledge of the situation and others with only idle opinions and assumptions.

However DMS got to this point, everything was done in accordance with the rules as DMS set and enforced them. Too many classes is not a Who problem, it is a Why problem. Accusations that teachers are teaching instead of getting a real life job are shortsighted. DMS wanted classes. Students wanted classes. Classes need teachers. Potential teachers who also have a day job, are not available for the students. Members who can chose to teach and satisfy their financial needs are doing so in lieu of taking some other job. It’s just a job as an independent contractor that DMS says it wants on board.

DMS leadership just never anticipated that classes would eventually outgrow the pocketbook. Nothing was set up to track it or to avoid it. As a result DMS was up to its neck in trouble months later than it should have been. At least 6 months late.

Wrapping Up
If you’ve gotten this far, thank you for caring enough to read. I wrote this because I want to plead with members and leaders to suck it up and try trusting folks to do the better thing. And give the other person the same freedom to misstep and recover that you would want for yourself. DMS is a group of sometimes crazy, eccentric humans who do lots of things well and some things quite poorly. Supporting the former and lending a hand in the latter is desperately needed now and in the future.

The other reason is that character flaw of mine: overwhelming urge to address things that aren’t right.
Thanks for hearing me out.
Bert

21 Likes

Love the insight Bert. And I’ll be the first to say give me the list of resources on why groups and crowds behave the way they do.
My next question seeing the raw class data, is where is the increase. I am sure it would take many more hours, but I think it would be great information to use in long-term planning to see what classes increased, how many people attended those, how many honorariums did we pay out for less than 3 people showing, etc… The $15,000 limit is a great stop-gap but for long term policy we should be able to further analyze data to see what changes are sustainable.

1 Like

Ryan,
I think the appropriate action is first … put out the fire. The cap does that.
The next step is more data intensive and I know the folk who have been pulling this data are exhausted. They need some time to catch up with real life plus work on other smoking issues having to do with the books. The cap will need to be in place for awhile since expansion is going to take awhile (IMO). By the time Expansion is over, a longer term plan will be needed. What I hope members will do is let the long term solution move to a rear burner, kept on warm, and bring back after folk get a chance to gather their thoughts. We do not have to and should not rush the longer solution if we want it to have a decent chance of being well done.

I’ll PM something to you on resources I found helpful.

4 Likes

Thanks for your post but this tiny thing is inaccurate. The HAs only deny classes, they cannot approve them. Basically if we do not have active HA auditors watching the store, the classes automagically get on the calendar in 3 days. For a long time the HAs were severely overworked and understaffed. They have added more. So yes a lot of classes have gone forward when they should not have. They we have members that want to use that as a president that we have taught “X” before.

Not made by me or the BoD. However there are concerns when someone makes over $18,000 in a 5 month period. Part of the reason we wanted the chairs to help solve the issue. So far they want to go with $50 for teachers OR the committee.

We could continue run DMS with our heads in the sand or we could help make DMS stronger.

8 Likes

Noted. Did not realized no action meant approved, but in any event all the classes got through the system. Overworked HAs should have received attention and is just another place inattention comes to bear on the problem.

That is a lot of hours teaching classes that were approved (or at least not denied) by everyone who was tending the store. I believe this was also the same teacher who was desperately begging others to help because the class load was killing him. Seems he and the Committee agreed something had to be done to stop the constant broken equipment and like it or not, retraining everyone was the Committee decision. It was hotly debated, and an alternative shortcut class was added so that many members only had to take ONE class instead of FOUR to be re-qualified. In all the chatter about increasing classes, this class reduction action seems to have been left out.

DMS has to decide what is to be taught and not worry about who fills that need. It is my hope that will be front and center to the long term plan.

So I have heard and I’m both disappointed and not surprised.
Demand, Drama, Explain, Require Action is not a good formula. Been a rocky road and we can wallow in hurt feelings and distrust or we can choose to suck it up, shake hands, and act like adults. It’s every members decision, but it affects just about everything going forward.

3 Likes

Putting a cap on DMS honorariums is one solution. But, there might not have been such explosion in class numbers if there was no demand for the classes. Now, with a cap, there might be a shortage of available class slots.

As a suggestion; rather than creating an artificial balance by Central Planning (something that doesn’t work in markets) perhaps we can look at a Free Market Approach.

  1. Set a budget for DMS supported honorariums, so the board can balance the books.

  2. Set a budget for members. A paying DMS member will be allotted $X per month/year for incurred class honorariums. If said member wishes to take more classes, they can pay for their overuse.

  3. Some classes are wildly popular with high demand. Those instructors should be free to offer a schedule that fills the demand, with an expectation that their efforts are supported.

1 Like

I like this idea… but only if we provide some kind of exclusion for the first X months of membership. I took A LOT of required classes to get access to tools in my first 3-4 months. Since then, my class volume has diminished dramatically.

2 Likes

Russell, before worrying too much about not enough classes, recognize that we are only returning to the level of classes being held this time last year. It’s not a Draconian cut. That said, the house was/is on fire and putting the fire out is more important than worrying about the furniture getting wet.

Nothing … repeat, nothing says the cap has to stay exactly there if better solutions, member growth, whatever comes along.

But I encourage members to take a breath, get through a month or two, see if/where we have class demand backlogs, and tweak what’s broken. Makers should embrace “try it & fix it if needed” as an approach. Most of us do that in everything else at the space.

6 Likes

We agree that the bleeding has to stop. If the Board decides that DMS can budget $15,000/mo for honorariums, that seems like a reasonable measure.

So $15k / $50 per class is 300 classes/mo. The last class count was 459/mo? 159 classes have to go…who decides which classes; Central Planning or member demand?

Not clear yet. Suspect that could be part of the BoD/Officer gathering OOPS that meeting was last night.
In any event, important work in progress. Guess we wait to see what is to happen.

The comittees I’m invested in have mostly decided to not take honorarium for some of the classes they otherwise would have until the financial health has improved. The answer to your question is…a little bit of both.

We arent overworked- we dont currently have the authority to stop people from teaching 30+ classes a month.

Take it up with @Lampy if it is overstated … Was his point I was responding to and he doesn’t give a time frame, just refers to something in the past.

I was referring to when we only had 3 HAs. And only one was working on it on a regular basis.

1 Like

I’m a relatively new member, and I’m a bit mystified by why DMS doesn’t charge enough for the classes (other than the basic safety courses) to cover the honorarium. A $50 honorarium can’t be that hard to cover by the students.

1 Like

@Russell_Crow says that the last class count was 459/mo. So, that is $22950 in honorariums to teachers - assuming that all of them took the honorarium.

To put that in perspective, DMS has paid up to $10 per member per month for classes. The new $15000 limit will reduce that to $7.50.

No, the $15,000 limit includes matching honorarium to Committees. For the math you are doing, you should use $7500 to compare teacher payouts in the two cases.

1 Like

I know I’m late coming to this thread but that’s what happens when you avoid talk for a few days. I want to dress part of the why did we have so many classes start showing

we have added new committees new committees And new active 6. That is going to mean more classes. Another thing is we keep adding nicer and more expensive tools. Tools that really need mandatory training. I’m we’ve discovered that some of the tools we have put too often when we don’t have training so those classes went up. Those are things we might could have thought about in the past as we were growing but to be honest I feel we were so excited with our growth and with expansion and with the steadily increasing membership that we didn’t worry how about that proble
The other thing is we’ve had a drop-off in gaining members and possibly we’ve lost some members. There are multiple reasons that could have happened. Anything from the price increase for memberships., who maybe us over selling the expansion, people joined expecting it to be finished my first of the year. Internal turmoil has not helped any. It could be the economy in the area. And we were not doing the Outreach that we had done in the past.
I remember when Steve was doing a Sunday afternoon to her and David was doing a Wednesday noon tour. Those it stopped for various reasons I think including the fact that the people doing them just got so tied up with other things they didn’t have time.
Yes we can do something to make sure things don’t get worse. But wrapping a bandage on a wound doesn’t really make it heal you may need to go in and Stitch it up and fix the problem. We cannot Skip and Savor way into Prosperity. It isn’t going to work we are far too large at this time. We have to grow our way out of this. And I’m not saying as much emphasis on growing our way out of it as beating ourselves over the head and beating members over the head bar things that some people didn’t like.

Classes are the heart and soul of DMs. It is not the tools it is the classes and the community that keep people coming back, paying their member dues every day every month and volunteering and helping. Tools to make people customers and we don’t want customers we want members active members that love DMs.

1 Like

Oh - OK. So, are you saying that teacher payout is being reduced from $10 per month to $3.06 per month per member?

1 Like

I think what I am saying is that when we were spending $3-4 per member based on your method of calculating, we were not in the red. At $10, we are. Going back to were we were a year ago is both doable and prudent.