Here's a pretty solid template for the charter of a steering committee
One thing I agree with about the charter is the role of the SC should be
limited to "a project" type scope or length of effort- it shouldn't be
necessary for it to remain in place forever, but its work should be
documented in the event there is a need to form one again.
And I thought this was a very good definition of the structure and
components of an SC
I think the critical component here that was was missing from John's initial
list is KEY STAKEHOLDERS... and depending on the role of the RM program and
who information is provided to, this could potentially include members of
the public. If you don't take into consideration the USERS of the
information being managed and how they view services provided and what their
needs are for access to the information, then you miss the mark on why the
program exists in the first place.
In past organizations, we had SC made up of voting and non-voting members.
Generally, participants directly impacted by the decisions (in this case,
RM) would be non-voting members. They should be involved to explain
requirements for why some things are done in certain ways, or aspects of
practices than may not be able to change to meet the SC's suggestions
(regulations, laws, physical limitations, time constraints that require more
staff than funds available, etc.) and to offer opinions during
deliberations, but because they are directly impacted, not allowed to vote
to determine the outcome.
[log in to unmask]
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]