DMW SC Organisational Structure - Draft 1

[OldBloke]

Chaps,

I had a long think over the course of my break taking in the various points made in the forum regarding the best way forward for our SC Organisation.

I think we all agree that a Corporate structure is a good fit for us and, as such, I'd like to propose the following template as a first cut at getting something in place to show the troops.

With such a massive game I don't think the traditional GL + appointed admins will adequately cover the needs. We need to have more granularity. So  I propose that we have a board of 4 directors under a CEO. These 5 are the policy/decision makers and have equal weight with the CEO pulling rank only in cases of discipline and/or complaints against the board. Five works well as it gives the CEO a casting vote should there be a need for one. Irrespective of job title, the Directors will work together as one to ensure that DMW's best interests are always at the forefront of board-level decisions.

There will be a second level of management known as 'Heads' who will report directly to the appropriate Director.

The Directors will be assigned the following job titles:

Alliance Director

Responsible for the identification of alliance opportunities that best-fit the DMW ethos and presenting them to the board as a recommendation. They will also, as in the case of the STAR alliance initiative or similar, occupy DMW's seat on the alliance board. As this would almost certainly be an involved and time-consuming position this directorship carries no other roles nor does it have any direct reports.

Resource Director (CFO)

Responsible for our Organisation's credit and resource banks. They will determine and implement the most appropriate 'tax' system to employ for DMW. They will prioritise the allocation of funds/resources to ensure they are being best used to grow the Organisation. They will work with the Alliance Director where matters of funding/reward for joint operations arise. This position has no direct reports.

Communications Director

Responsible for documenting our Organisation's structure, processes, job descriptions, charter and manifesto. They will devise and document a process on how our members progress through any ranks the board feel it appropriate to employ. They will devise, develop and maintain a recruitment template that will be used by all DMW members when either approaching or being approached by other players. They will have at least one direct report - Head of Recruitment. The Head's job description will be determined by the board and be documented by the Communications Director.

Director of Operations

Responsible for ensuring that our Organisation's official operations are well managed and that their direct reports are working together to ensure that our missions are balanced across the various game scenarios our member are keen to explore. They will work with both the Alliance Director and the Resource Director where operations are an official joint venture. They will have a number of 'Heads' reporting directly to them. The actual number and their title will be dynamic and be determined by the Director. For example, initially we probably will not need a 'Head of Racing' but one could be appointed if racing interest reaches critical mass. We will, however, need a 'Head of Security', 'Head of Trade & Industry' etc. straight off the bat. The Heads will be the main workhorses of this structure as it would be too much work for the Director alone. Their job descriptions will be determined by the board and be documented by the Communications Director.

Let's debate this draft to see what can be improved upon. If you think it needs scrapping I won't be offended. You guys have much more experience in 'big number' gaming so I'll be happy to be steered appropriately.

With the question of bums on seats ...

TL has already agreed to be the Alliance Director - thanks, Paul.

Smilo - anything take your fancy? I reckon the Resource Director would be perfect for you

I love a volunteer so if any other council member fancies one of these posts please speak up now .

[smilodon]

Sounds like a decent start point. I'll do the resource thing, although I am a complete duffer at accountancy.

(Also hopefully the forum has been tweaked to allow new posts to appear in search and the rest of the Council to see the forum.)

[TeaLeaf]

Have you both now seen this?

http://www.deadmen.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?40973-DMW-SC-Organisational-Structure-Draft-1

Yep, seen it.  The bit I didn't get around to was this bit:

Let's debate this draft to see what can be improved upon. If you think it needs scrapping I won't be offended. You guys have much more experience in 'big number' gaming so I'll be happy to be steered appropriately.

...but that's what happens in my world this close to the end of the tax year!

I'm quite comfortable with the corporate structure, but we might need to shrink the number of roles more.  As an example, STAR (and many others) have something like this:

STAR Forces - Navy, Army, Recon Service, Exploration

STAR Industries - Production, Mining

STAR Logistics - Transport, Special Transport, Secure Transport

STAR Finance - Trade, Bank, Marketplace, Lottery

STAR Sports - Racing, Arena Commander

STAR Diplomacy - Diplomatic Corps, Human Resources

I don't necessarily agree with some of their descriptions or breakdowns, but it gives us an idea of the breadth of things available.  As an example of where I diverge, I think 6 Divisions is too many and they have Lottery (wth?) and have not got Engineering (which fits neatly with Industries and *will* be a big part of the game).  But I also think that some of the roles outlined send most of the work to one person:

Contrary to OB's view, I don't really see an 'Alliance Director' as anything that would take much time, so I don't see it as a role (if that makes sense).  Main board oversight would probably handle it, albeit with a 'lead' person. (I could be totally wrong of course!)

'Communications' I also see as a main board oversight role and most of its work will be in the beginning, it should 'tick over' under main board oversight once set up.

Finally 'Resource' I see as something we set as strategy at main board level.   The rest is operational, which brings us to:

'Director of Operations' which is the role that I see as carrying 90% of the day to day work.

Broadly speaking I see fewer divisions suiting us a little better due to our smaller size. Something like this:

Logistics & Security - Transport, Escort, Bounty Hunting, Data Transit, Materials/HR transit, Boarding, Search & Rescue

Asset Management - Exploration, Resource Gathering (Mining, Fuel etc), Engineering/Science, Manufacturing, Trading  

Main Board - Strategy, Org Bank, Fleet Hangar, Loans, HR, Diplomacy (alliance relationships etc)

Racing can be set up as a 'club' within DMW and I do not expect it will need much input once established, just an ongoing oversight.

Perhaps this is more in line with the Director + Head structure than I realise at the moment.

[TeaLeaf]

Too much?

[smilodon]

I'm still not seeing this forum appear in the new posts list which is confusing. I'll have to look into that?

I think it's always easier to add stuff (roles) in rather than over do it and cut stuff out. So I think the three main areas is a good idea. As the game gets fleshed out we can add in roles or divisions as we see fit.

Shoot stuff, do stuff and organise stuff  

It might also be an idea to give managerial roles out for the divisions that do get picked up. So we could have someone on the Board of Directors that deals with 'shoot stuff' but also have a General Manager of 'Shoot Stuff' as well. It would allow us to have more people in the Organisation have a specific title and role which would be more inclusive.

In fact it might be nice if everyone could have some sort of name/role/identity in game. Rather than have some members just be 'player' or 'member'  even a token title would be nice.

[Whitey]

In fact it might be nice if everyone could have some sort of name/role/identity in game. Rather than have some members just be 'player' or 'member'  even a token title would be nice.

I hate pigeonholes, they are so small and restrictive in something that should be huge and full of possibility's.  
I want to do bounty hunting and escort (security) and I'm really interested in exploration and doing trade to earn my way in the galaxy... Damn I might even want to settle down on Kallis IV and become a farmer  I'm looking forward to the teamplay element but I don't want a defined "role". I'd like to be able to swap around as needed (both the needs of DMW and my own).  

Back on topic......

I just hope that whatever structure we end up with has the flexability to allow people to experience all the aspects of the game they are interested in.

I think the corporate structure is good at the higher level and the fewer Management roles the better (from a "trying to get things organised" point of view).

[smilodon]

I agree and think the name would be something that wasn't fixed or that defined a specific role. Just something that a player could own. I really don't like the idea of 80% of the Org being called just 'member', 'operative' or suchlike. Roll was probably the wrong term to use.

[OldBloke]

Apologies for my lack of input. Really busy at the moment but I am reading everything.

[TeaLeaf]

Apologies for my lack of input. Really busy at the moment but I am reading everything.

That'll teach you to go back to work! :narnar:

No problems OB, we can catch up on TS when you're ready, it's quicker that way!

[OldBloke]

Things we need to do asap.

1. Smilo to knock up a post saying that he is now the GL for SC and that we will be posting up a draft structure in due course.
2. TL to contact Star with the intention of taking up their offer of membership.
3. Smilo to invite Obsydian onto the SC board.

Looking at the list of attendees at TL's BBQ I think we could have a quick meeting to thrash out a draft structure.

[smilodon]

I endorse this message

[OldBloke]

Post-BBQ points.

SC will initially have a board of 4 members - Smilodon (lead), Obsydian, Oldbloke & Tealeaf. Other roles will be filled over time as the game mechanics are realised and people 'float to the top' to become natural leaders of a section.

We need to push a bit harder on getting the game back on the agenda of our fleet members. We will post our intention to hold weekly 'flight schools' on Friday evenings. The intent is to hopefully end up with 8 pilots to play the 4 v 4 matches but to start we'll try to get 4 pilots to work co-op against the Vanduul swarm. We, as the leaders, need to understand the current issues surrounding controllers so that we can bring people up to speed as swiftly as possible using the knowledge we've gleaned from both these sessions and the SC forum.

Recruitment - it would help if we could keep our Org's forum post on the first page by regularly posting into it. Simple 'bumps' will not cut it so we need to make a concerted effort to post stuff that will make prospective recruits take notice. For example, Obs and I have recently posted about the BBQ.

Stuff to do ...

Smilo to give Obsydian the rights to see this forum section.
Tealeaf to contact Star about joining their alliance.
OldBloke to post details of the Friday Flight School in our SC section.
All - to try and get into the TS SC channel on Fridays to raise the visibility of SC.

[TeaLeaf]

Almost seems a duplicate of the post I made earlier! :blush:

[BrotherTobious]

Tl ask me to post it up I thought it best in  here to start.

I know the flight is causal but it still means that people that want to do both wont be able to.   But it might draw people away from GTA.  Its the same if it were on a Sunday.  It splits the base of players.

Not saying it shouldn't be just saying it should be thought about

Really glad we are pushing on this guys great work.

Toby

[TeaLeaf]

Can we decide on which admin forum to use please?  I'm getting dizzy with all this post-BBQ hangover going on....... :crazy: