Re: [Harp-L] SPAH Elections etc

[Michelle LeFree <mlefree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Winslow Yerxa wrote

> Thanks, Michelle, for your thoughtful observations on the SPAH convention. And I certainly sympathize with the difficulties you've experienced in being able to attend the SPAH convention. I had some tough years where I had to stay away, and I really missed it and the many good friends whom I get to see only at that gathering.
Everyone has their own physical/financial/practical constraints. I'm not 
appealing for sympathy here, just trying to make a case for some fresh 
thinking in SPAH leadership about ways to make its goodness more accessible.

> One thing I'd like to clarify, at least as far as it concerns me and my candidacy: I'm all for new ideas, and am not "clinging to the tradition that SPAH has worked long and hard to cultivate." But new ideas have to be carefully evaluated. To be workable, they must: 
>
> -- Be acceptable to existing SPAH members
> -- Offer us a benefit we don't already have 
> -- Be achievable on a practical level given our financial resources and 
>      available hands and heads to do the work
> -- Not expose SPAH to financial peril.
All valid points, Winslow, as are the concerns you've stated about other 
ideas. Only thing is this. I'd like to hear those aspiring to SPAH 
leadership list the reasons why it should do a good thing ~before~ 
listing all the impediments to achieving it. I believe that if one who 
wants to achieve a goal of most any kind starts out focused primarily of 
the obstacles to achieving it, that goal becomes that much more 
difficult to achieve. That kind of thinking frequently stops people from 
ever trying to achieve any particular goal in the first place. I'm not 
saying that those obstacles should be ignored by any means; only that 
they should be put in perspective in a cost/benefit analysis. I believe 
that the potential benefits of SPAH stepping out of its time-tested mind 
set far outweigh the potential downside of sticking to its historical 
way of thinking. (BTW, Winslow, I am not suggesting you necessarily 
represent the old school of thinking at SPAH. It's just that I think 
those proposing to step into a leadership role of an organization that 
clearly needs to make change should demonstrate their ideas for solving 
old problems in new ways.)

I read Iceman's post as suggesting that SPAH leadership should adopt an 
attitude where it sets a goal that is clearly of great benefit and then 
knocks down any obstacles as they present themselves. I read that as 
adopting a "can-do" attitude rather than a timid, "make sure that all 
the i's are dotted before we get out of the gate" posture. I believe 
that it is the leader who steps out and states a goal, and then takes 
whatever steps are necessary to achieve it, who deserves popular support.

When I think of people who have achieved great things, they always seem 
to be the ones that think a bit differently than those who sit back and 
watch or simply follow the masses. They seem to be able to "think out of 
the box." I believe that the new SPAH leadership needs to "think out of 
the box" if they propose to move the organization forward.
> The model of renting out campus dorm space for a teaching event has been mentioned to me before, and I think it's worth looking at.
Even though it's my idea, I think it is a great one. So what Winslow, in 
specific terms, do you mean by "looking into it" when there is a good 
idea out there. Would you form a committee or a task group ~or~ would 
you either make it happen yourself or assign the task to someone who 
will dive in head-first and refuse to take no for an answer?

I have a lot of confidence in musicians. I'm convinced that anyone who 
can succeed at learning to play a musical instrument well is capable of 
achieving great things in other areas of their life. The dedication, 
discipline, tenacity and positive attitude that it takes to learn to 
play music all serve a person well in most other areas of life. I'm 
therefore confident that any of the brave folks who've stepped up to 
take on the role of SPAH leadership is capable of doing great things for 
the organization. The question I ask myself is, which is capable of 
conceiving and then effecting the kind change I believe is necessary?
> I've had a few different alternative models brought to my attention, all different from each other and from SPAH's current event model, and I'd like to investigate them in greater depth, and evaluate them for SPAH, both for adaptation to its current needs and for new possibilities they might offer. As always, it's down to available resources.
Fair enough. But... it's that last statement that is the kicker. I admit 
to thinking like an entrepreneur. Entrepreneurs must ~believe~ that they 
can accomplish their objective. Once they have that belief, they are 
mentally equipped to do whatever is necessary to make that objective 
happen. If it's a big problem they are faced with, they parse it out and 
attack each piece voraciously until  everything needed to solve it is in 
place. When an entrepreneur manages a company, they don't say, "well we 
don't have enough __________" (fill in the blank) so we can't do that. 
They say OK, I see the problem(s), now what do we have to do to get 
enough __________ to overcome it? And then they do whatever is required 
themselves or delegate it. I believe that SPAH leadership should think 
of and treat it like a business. Successful businesses aren't run by 
leaders who are good only at listing problems -- they also need to be 
able to list -- and then effect -- solutions.
> Let the discussion continue. This is exactly the sort of sharing of ideas an experiences that I've been hoping for.
>
> Winslow
Me, too!   8^)

Thanks, Winslow (and Bob & Warren) for dedicating yourself to leading 
SPAH into the future. Whomever accedes to the role of President & Vice 
President, I'm sure SPAH will be in good hands.

BTW, Winslow, I may have missed it, but have you selected a running mate?

Michelle