Re: Rose's Question on SCA-West

[callistotoni]

roswtr, our current Kingdom Seneschal, asked over on the West Kingdom Yahoo group what people thought motivated them to take service jobs in the SCA. I've been thinking about this, but decided that I'd rather post a response here, where, A) roswtr will see it anyway and B) I won't risk the unwanted responses on SCA-West. :-/ .


It is far easier for me to think of why I don't volunteer very much. The key for me is that I have, apparently, a lower tolerence for stress and conflict than your typical service-type.

The biggest reason for this is that I think The Most Stressful Thing In The World is to be held responsible for things that you have no control over. Of course, no one has complete control of anything in any situation, whether at work or the SCA or at home. But in a work situation, in my experiance, projects/tasks get defined, time frames established, budgets identified, there's an agreed upon plan. When unforseen things crop up they are dealt with and that's always been OK. So, yeah, at work if I'm given a task to manage I can do it and I'm comfortable.

In the SCA there's not this level of reliablity. You've got to rely on other people and outside venue managers who may or may not do what they said they would do (formal contracts included -- see the foo the EQ community has had with the Tres Pinos site trying to renig (sp?) on stuff *we paid for*.) If you are the one in charge (e.g. the autocrat, of the officer who can't get the sub-officers to submit thier reports), you are the one held responsible, no matter what the external circumstances were. Frankly, that's too much stress for me and I just don't want to go there.

OK, I have autocratted the occasional event. But it's always been when I thought it was under control. EQ events are small and managable, and EQ autocrate at a major event is even easier because you don't have to get the site. When I autocratted a Principality investiture last year it was only OK because: a) Duncan held my hand every step of the way, and B) Duncan got the site.

Actually getting sites is a *big* reason I don't autocrate. I hate having to find sites, and when I've tried in the past I've been unsuccessful and bad at it. I'd be willing to autocrat a lot more if someone else got the site. And I am willing to step up to the plate if A) Something really needed to be done, B) There is no one else to do it (cue Zulu and the line "Because we're here lad, just us, and nobody else".) and C) It was something I honestly believed I could do.

What little I have done in the SCA that could possibly count as service has involved small managable groups. I think I'm good at correspondance, which was what I mostly did when I autocratted that Mists Investiture. The job I really-o truelly-o enjoyed was being Mari's Laurel Councilor to her Queen's Artisans. That was cool because I got to be in on the design phase, as it were, and got to pursue a cause I really believed in. Then it was a lot of correspondence with a small-ish group (about 15 people). Super fun times reading people's research and providing a teeny bit of feedback. :-) Of course, this begs the question of whether that was service, or me just doing my Laurel-job.

And then there's the de-motivator of time. Right now I feel like I'm just barely holding things together. I could do a lot better with my personal time-mangement skills, but at heart I'm pretty lazy. In my heart of hearts I just want to lounge on a divan and eat bon-bons, with occasional trips to play with the Paint Princess (with J/S at my side, of course. ;-) )

In keeping with this 'just barely keeping it together' theme, 2009 is going to be a year of restructuring and retrenching for me. I've *got* to get my finances in better shape, especially if I want to get to the point where J/S and I can live together. And I still don't know how long my job will last, although I currently have some billable work because my erstwhile PM has been finding me work to help me not get laid off. :-0 Add to that essential trips north to be with J/S and my West-kingdom attendence is going to decrease for the forseeable future.

I don't know how much this applies to other people, but I suspect it does to some extent. It takes a special has-way-more-energy-than-me type of person to come home from a professional job to deal with their at-home 'job' and then take on what amounts to a third job in service to the SCA.

Comments

*activate hive mind*

[lifeofglamour.livejournal.com]

Exactly what you said goes for me, as well.

I almost autocratted an event once, about 12 years ago, but I failed at finding a site, so we didn't have the event. :-( I was so scarred by the attempts, and the extremely hostile way I was treated by most of the site owners, that I have never wanted to try again. It did, however, make me wonder just what the hell had gone on at SCA events in the past to make these people hate us so much...

[trystbat.livejournal.com]

This was one thread I've actually found interesting on that e-list. See, I'm one of those 'stop me before I volunteer again!' types, but I've been holding the SCA at arm's length. I know if I jump in, it'll suck up all my time. And I still have other commitments (like a convention I'm on staff for next June). I do love planning & organizing events, large & small, & I have a ton of experience so I could lend a hand in various places.

My hubbi has become my gatekeeper -- he gives me this look & asks "are you *really* going to do that?" Bec. I don't like to admit my own limits :-)

I don't take jobs to volunteer

[learnteach.livejournal.com]

(and yes, I don't want to post on the land of repeated voices, so I'll join this thread) I fix things that I MUST FIX, and hold events the WAY I THINK THEY SHOULD BE HELD. And I still trigger event ideas, that sometimes come to light.

But yes, the #1 limit is getting a site. It's the worst pain of everything.
#2 for me, was accommodating the Royalty, who have a different view of the event. (That's why the Crosston Dance ball was held against Cynagua Coronet, initially; no royalty means no court means more dancing.)

As for offices, I like to make things happen. But the lack of understanding the organization has, the lack of passing knowledge, the little domains that get built up, the infighting...oy.

At this point, we don't get officers because the officers are so overwhelmed, they never look like they're having fun! And doing things is one of the big funs of the SCA, done right...

[ula1066.livejournal.com]

I have autocrated a couple of events and agree that securing a site is one of the hardest/worst parts of the process.

I disagree with your view of the project management aspect of autocrating though. I treat the task the same way I do PM in "real life" but choosing reliable people (and having a back-up plan) for all the major tasks. I set time-lines/goals for them and me and have never really had a problem. Maybe it's different up here?

There are however many opportunities to volunteer without be the autocrat or person in charge. Worker bee and sub-autocrat/lead people are always needed also. Not only on event running but retinues, branch officers, etc. If there are more reliable people to do this part maybe we could get more people to autocrat?

[(Anonymous)]

I'll jump in here too. I don't autocrat SCA events, because I burnt myself to a crisp in a different organization by running events. Been there, done that, have no desire to do it again. What I can't figure out, and what Ysabella touched briefly on, is why don't we have an events handbook? We run the same events year after year. People have told me, that having a handbook will keep the events the same way they always are, and they'll be stale. WTF? You can always put something new in, but if you have the blueprint, it's easier to figure out where and when. Making people re-invent the wheel everytime is pointless and stressful. Organization is not stale. I've also found both here and in other organizations is that becoming an officer makes you a target for every wacko in the organization. Given the high wacky factor here, (but I love the SCA and it's wackiness)and my current life (full time employee trying to keep my job, full time parent of a high maintenance teen, health issues of my own), I just don't feel like I can take on something official.
That said, I help and volunteer where I can. Usually in the kitchens. ;-)

shoot, wasn't logged in

[joycebre.livejournal.com]

that was me.

[thread-walker.livejournal.com]

there was a handbook years ago. There was even a binder with lists of sites. It was lost.

Which doesn't mean it shouldn't be done, but it shows that it can be done. And someone with time could take it on. (someone who's not me.)

Handbooks: I couldn't agree more

[helblonde.livejournal.com]

I wrote one for being Greencloak Herald. I don't know whether it has been passed along to successors.

Politics and Iky Foo

[thelbk.livejournal.com]

pure and simple for me.
I love to have a job. I love to be a part of things and help and make wonderful fun.
But I don't do confrontations. I really don't. And it seems like there is always someone who wants to "make their mark" through confrontational whatever with what I'm supposed to be doing. And I have to choose between fighting back or giving in.
And I just didn't have the energy for that anymore.
I'm taking over the wee little Mists Gold Key in the spring; how can THAT ever get political???
(damn... shouldn't have dared the fates!)

[channel6.livejournal.com]

I love volunteering--however--I got soooo burnt volunteering on behalf of the fencing community (because of the politics) that I've been sticking to my little areas every since (the little old Gardening and Courtesan stuff)--or doing little things for fencing that don't involve dealing with those "outside" that community. I used to be a volunteer coordinator for state parks--so I was pretty incensed by the shabby treatment I got at the hands of certain people while working my way up the Rapier Marshallette---so I just stopped.

Also--time is a HUGE factor. I now have a non-SCA boyfriend who has interests as well--so balancing the two has become a task in and of itself.

I prefer now to float around my ideas for things until I can find one or two others that like it--and then run with my head down until I can make it work. I am really giving up on putting things out there in the broader community for comment due to the "whack-o" factor.

you set the tone when you quote 'Zulu'

[ermine-rat.livejournal.com]

I admire people who love an organization so much that they want to help be a part of making this volunteer organization function. I believe that many people would like to take part in making things work, but the more intelligent way to look at this is to identify the specific things that discourage people from taking jobs, or prevent them from ever taking a second one. Eliminating some of these alligators could ignite the volunteerism that used to thrive here. I’ve held a lot of offices over the years, and while I haven’t been an autocrat recently, I think I can speak with some authority about this topic.

There are roughly three types: Officer jobs, Autocrats, court/personal service.

Officer jobs are necessary, but some of them require more attention than many of us can afford to contribute to this hobby. Many of these jobs require a seasoned staff to perform adequately, and that can take a lot of people out of the running instantly. Some require specialized knowledge, many of the Kingdom and Principality ones require an excessive amount of spare time and spare cash for travel to do well. Some require that your SCA event time will be focused on a specific task for the tenure of office. A single poorly-performing officer really increases this burden on those associated officers who have to take up the slack. Some require you to deal with royalty who want you to drop everything to redesign that office to suit their expectations for the next 4-6 months. Some of these jobs may require you to show up for many events that you would not normally attend, and to do tasks that prevent you from participating in the actual event. A two year commitment is something that some people can’t do, and these offices aren’t sprints…they’re marathons. Officers are usually invisible unless there is a problem.

Autocrats are more suited to project-management types. The lead-up time can be intimidating from getting a calendar slot in a crowded calendar and the added joy of locking down a site. There have been numerous manuals compiled to aid people in securing known sites and they always seem to vanish. There are 15 weekends used by the kingdom and principalities, and after you add the litany of annual local group events to the calendar, you end up with a very limited opportunity for something new. This institutional mechanism actually discourages innovation and new types of events. John is correct in his comment about trying to accommodate unscripted royal desires, that sort of meddling can kill someone’s desire to ever autocrat again. With a little luck, a good autocrat should be invisible.

Courts and personal service are now part of the jobs we recognize as service to the Kingdom and these revolve around cooperating with the royalty. Royalty pick them and reward them as they see fit. If they didn’t reward them, few would ever take that burden. Retainers can work their asses off, but they’re volunteers, usually personally recruited, and they are regularly recognized (definitely more than many officers are). Since there’s no shortage of retainers, so I won’t linger on them here.

--------and now for some editorial comments--------------

I personally liked the small parties that people hold at their camps during larger events. They can provide food and entertainment and decorations and a theme, without all the logistics of running your own event. I think these kind of household parties and activities that act as sub-plots of an event are the fertile fields that

Autocrats and Officers need to be able to deal with confrontation. If you can’t defend your decisions to the people who want to change something, keep it the same, or explain your decision, then you have no business keeping a job that requires you to do exactly that regularly. A passive-aggressive officer is a bad officer and they leave a bad political wake that discourages others from being involved.

Re: you set the tone when you quote 'Zulu'

[thelbk.livejournal.com]

"If you can’t defend your decisions to the people who want to change something, keep it the same, or explain your decision, then you have no business keeping a job that requires you to do exactly that regularly. "

So what about those who blow off your explanations and reasons and no DUH LOGIC and just do their thing anyway, 'cause they’ve got the pointy hat and therefore can?
Even when it’s something that could potentially cause harm and they go ordering it anyway?
I can and have dealt with that (in my own way), but I hated it and I don't want to do it again.
Lot's of people pick SCA "fights" based on their concept of what the “idealistic meaning” of something is. I just picked mine based on legal exposure and Corp rules.
Silly, silly me.
THAT's why I’m not over eager to do any of that again.
okay, rant over. Thanks for listening.

Re: you set the tone when you quote 'Zulu'

[callistotoni.livejournal.com]

I think you should post your last few comments (made today, Dec. 9) in your own LJ because people need to see them and they won't if you just leave them here on this old post. Esp. the thing about the Chataline job!

Re: you set the tone when you quote 'Zulu'

[thelbk.livejournal.com]

Really?
well, okay...if you think it will do some good.

[joycebre.livejournal.com]

it's always open season on that list.

[ermine-rat.livejournal.com]

I haven't looked at sca-waste in years...I don't miss it.

[helblonde.livejournal.com]

I have a tiny dream of having a moderated SCA list, where courtesy is enforced.

Had I the programming ability, I'd build it.

[helblonde.livejournal.com]

Hmmm.

I am very decisive and quite willing to enforce rules. Do people want this play place?

[channel6.livejournal.com]

I have to agree on the rudeness of SCAWest--I've posted about my frustrations with voicing opinion there--or even trying to stick up for segments of the population by calling someone to task on overt or covert slams. Bleah. Let them have it--I am done with that lot.