What makes a good chairperson?

[lizw]

This was sent to me by a friend in Australia.
The Reviver is an Australian magazine (as I understand) like Grapevine.

A GOOD CHAIRPERSON MAKES A GOOD MEETING,
But what makes a good chairperson?

Ever been to a meeting chaired by some Roy Slaven type who likes to relate his own experience at length after each speaker? Or the Jerry Springer type who likes to follow up each share with a smart little aphorism? How about that closed-shop meeting run by a group that takes turns to chair and call each other, week after week?

And while we’re on that, can you remember the last time you went to that Thursday lunchtime slumber party and didn’t hear from Chopping Block Charlie (63 years) and Beryl from Berrigan (51 years)? Week after week you turn up and sit there wondering if you’re invisible as you listen to the same stuff from the same people, over and over.

Working up a good head of resentment there? The Reviver undertook a small survey of members, old and new, male and female. We asked what annoys them and what impresses them in the way meetings are chaired. They were invited to bitch, grumble and enthuse to their hearts content and to come up with suggestions. We also told them we needed their response back in a couple of days.

It must be a pretty contentious issue, this. Thirty per cent of email respondents replied in a few minutes!

Based on their responses, we’ve managed to come up with a few suggestions about how not to fall into such traps when you’re next in the chair.

THE PROBLEMS:

Some pretty amazing stories came in. But you won’t be finding those out here – principles not personalities and all that. Sorry.

What did emerge was a series of common sources of annoyance. Here are the things that most irritated respondents about the way meetings are chaired, in no particular order of priority.

•Starting and/or finishing late.
•Kicking off the meeting by generously calling oneself to share.
•Passing comment after each speaker. Not just negative comment – any comment.
•Calling the same faces – particularly old mates and group members – every week.
•Obvious skewing on the basis of gender, age, length of sobriety, length of skirt, etc.
•Calling people whose primary identification is known to be other than alcohol (incidental mention is one thing; lengthy drugalogues, etc are quite another)
•Disrespecting speakers by rolling eyes, feigning sleep, grimacing, sneering, etc.

Two issues stood out as particular bones of contention. Respondents were unanimous in their irritation at chair people who kick off the meeting with their own story, and those in the habit of passing comment after each speaker.

Subtle body language can be useful in encouraging speakers to close. If they’re talking into resentment time, don’t be afraid to ask them politely to wind up. It’s all a matter of discretion and commonsense on the day.

Sometimes meetings just don’t gel. If you’ve chaired such a meeting, it’s not the end of the world. Remember, others may not share your own perceptions, and may well have derived considerable benefit from what to you was a tedious share. Furthermore, if you’ve done your best (and kept your own role to the minimum necessary) then there’s no more you can do.

Oh, and as one respondent pointed out, if they do drink and come to the meeting, remember that the First Tradition has precedence over the Third Tradition. A rowdy drunk who is interrupting the meeting has to go. Not, however, by being shamed from the chair – although the chair should politely ask the persistent rowdy interrupter to either listen to the speakers or leave the meeting. Generally a moment’s eye contact with an experienced member is all it takes to see them ushered out the back for a private chat or a ride home,

And here’s one final one. If you’ve ever been in the chair and found yourself looking out at someone you’ve been contemplating hunting down and killing, call them up to speak. You’ll feel a whole lot better about them – and yourself – in an instant.

THE SOLUTIONS:
Here’s what our respondents suggested.


•Start on time, and finish on time.
•Start the meeting with a strong speaker – other than yourself.
•Finish the meeting with a strong speaker – other than yourself.
•Listen to each speaker and show it by looking interested
•Don’t try to attract attention away from the speaker.
•Lose the inter-speaker commentary
•Try to remember people’s names (but don’t only call the names you remember…)
•Look over last week’s speaker list to see who’s been called recently and who hasn’t.
•Take a risk – scan the room for new or seldom seen members and call them up.
•Try to strike a balance of OSM and newcomer, group member and visitor, male and female (it’s easier than it sounds)
•Ask people to share their time – but resist the temptation to do so after a longwinded speaker (a subtle way of shaming people)
•At topic meetings, give occasional reminders of the topic.
•When inviting members with less than 90 days to identify, do so in a manner that offers them encouragement and comfort.
•As you open the Big Book to read How it Works, don’t encourage people out the door with quips about smoke breaks, loo breaks and tea breaks.
•Finish up with an upbeat reading – eg. The Promises on pages 83/84 of the Big Book.
•When reading How it Works, read it from the Big Book – it’s an important pointer to newcomers looking for the source of all this new information.

From the NSW Reviver. July 2003.

[nandm]

Thank you Liz. Excellent article with lots of good information.

[Tazman53]

Thanks Liz, I concur with it all, this jumped out at me and I will suggest this at all the meetings I go to and see if it flies:

•When reading How it Works, read it from the Big Book – it’s an important pointer to newcomers looking for the source of all this new information

Many of the meetings I attend seem to have a sever shortage of BBs (In members hands), perhaps having folks read from the BB where ever possible would as stated get more newcomers into the BB.

[debs4321]

The reason I love my home group meeting is because, the Chairperson (no matter who it is) always reads from the Big Book and shares their experience on what was read. It helps me and I am sure in some way helps the Newcomer to understand the Big Book.

In sponsoring, my sponsee and I always read the Big Book together while working the steps. It is the only way I know how to do it.

Clear cut directions.

[sugErspun]

Originally Posted by debs4321

In sponsoring, my sponsee and I always read the Big Book together while working the steps. It is the only way I know how to do it.

Clear cut directions.

Who would've thought!



Thank God for that book and those groups who use it to gauge their purpose.

[jimhere]

A good chairperson comes armed with a topic.
He or she has a "hit list," a list of people that they know can be counted on to bring the meeting back around to topic if it strays.
A good chairperson knows who they are going to call on first and call on last.

Here is how it works at my home group:

A prospective chairperson is asked a week in advance by the secretary to chair. That way he or she has a week to pick a short passage from the Big Book (title page thru page 164) to use as the meeting topic.

Chairperson gets to meeting early and reviews topic with secretary to see if it has been used recently. We actually keep track. After that, chairperson starts to make a list. We have greeters at the door and you sign in as you come in. About ten minutes before the meeting starts, greeters bring full sign-in sheets to chairperson to use. Chairperson is instructed to actually use the sign in sheets. That way old-timers and visitors will be called on. During the meeting, the secretary can point out visiting members that have a strong message as well. We do not acknowledge AA sobriety anniversaries until the last Tuesday of the month. No "burning desires" are allowed.

We have an actual group conscience in hard copy about how to chair our meeting. First off, only home group members who have been a group member for at least one year and have taken the steps with a sponsor from the group can chair the meeting. The group conscience instructs the chairperson to call on a strong group member to start the meeting and then to call on a group member at least every third person. Chair people do not share. They simply read a short passage from the book and start calling on people.

We have a roster person who keeps track of which group members get called on from week to week and which group members are present from week to week. At the beginning of the meeting, he hands the chairperson a list of group members. The ones who have not shared recently are highlited and it is strongly recommended that the chairperson call on these people. The way it works is that it keeps the personalities out of it, because the same people are not called on every week, and if you are a group member you know you will be called on at least once every three weeks.

As a result, our meeting is always focused and on topic.
Jim

[FightingIrish]

Whatever works for you, I guess

Originally Posted by jimhere

As a result, our meeting is always focused and on topic.
Jim

[jimhere]

Irish,
Are you saying focused and on topic doesn't work?

Maybe a jumbled up hodge podge of treatment center lingo and group therapy mixed in with a smattering of NA lingo and terms is better? A meeting where the only way I can tell I am at an AA meeting is because a portion of Chapter 5 is read at the beginning? A meeting where the alcoholic who came looking for an answer comes away more confused than when he walked in the door? A meeting where everyone is confused, the topic is something other than alcoholism and the recovery from alcoholism and the recovery rate is abysmal?

Why are alcoholics so uncomfortable with structure?

As a result of our meeting being focused, I can guarentee that if you come there, not only will you be made welcome, you will see and hear an AA group doing what an AA group is supposed to do.

[FightingIrish]

Not at all. It's great that we have the Group Conscience and that the people in your meetings are finding just what they need. In fact, I just reread your post to make sure I was fairly reading it.

I have chaired a couple of meetings around my area, and it turns out I/we do many of the things you mention anyway without codifying them, so I am not disagreeing that focused meetings are good.

Myself, I tend to lose something when there are so many rules or guidelines.

Mind you, I have been in and chaired numerous meetings where the meeting almost went off the deep end because of one or two people who went off-topic, off-problem, etc., but in every case the meeting was brought around to a wonderful spiritual climax by the "living group conscience" in the room. I have only seen someone sharing need to be interrupted once in my twelve months of coming around.

Now, I suppose I do live in the country at the moment and not the crazy city, so I allow that there are probably areas of the country where the rules need to spelled out in excrutiating detail.

There is a group, however, around here that seems to come out with at least 3-4 new rules after every busines meeting, and some friends of mine have started to refer to that meeting as "kubuki theatre".

M

Originally Posted by jimhere

Irish,
Are you saying focused and on topic doesn't work?

Maybe a jumbled up hodge podge of treatment center lingo and group therapy mixed in with a smattering of NA lingo and terms is better? A meeting where the only way I can tell I am at an AA meeting is because a portion of Chapter 5 is read at the beginning? A meeting where the alcoholic who came looking for an answer comes away more confused than when he walked in the door? A meeting where everyone is confused, the topic is something other than alcoholism and the recovery from alcoholism and the recovery rate is abysmal?

Why are alcoholics so uncomfortable with structure?

As a result of our meeting being focused, I can guarentee that if you come there, not only will you be made welcome, you will see and hear an AA group doing what an AA group is supposed to do.

[navysteve]

There is a group, however, around here that seems to come out with at least 3-4 new rules after every busines meeting, and some friends of mine have started to refer to that meeting as "kubuki theatre".

I think that is a phase most groups go through at some point. It is nothing to be concerned about. A good balance of order and anarchy does exist in many AA meetings. I have moved around quite a bit and seen the rigid, by the book, letter of the law meeting come and go, carry a message, alienate newcomers, exalt the quoters of the book and black ball the non-conformists. I have also seen the anything goes/inner child/ anti-religious meeting come and go, carry a message, alienate newcomers, insult the AA purists and insult those who do not agree with their format. The fourth tradition allows a group the right to be wrong and recover as a group when it is ready. Long end to a short story, if we believe that God is truly in charge, then both types of meetings serve a purpose and make sense. IF they don't, they fold.

[lostmdboy]

Thanks for the sugestions. I chair meetings atleast once a week, and all are good rules of thumb. I do sometimes let the meeting run long though if there is a lot of sharing going on. I think of it this way. If someone says something in that last minute that keeps me or someone else sober that day then what is the ham. If you have never chaired a meeting I highly recomend it. Very good way to stay in the solution.

[ananda]

I have attended meetings in several different towns, at different times over the last 20 years...and within those towns different groups.

Often I have complained and have heard others complain that "If that is the AA I got when I came...i would never have gotten sober".

The last 2 years after looking around I have concluded that there don't seem to be more or less people sober in our area....just different people are getting staying sober.

We have a visitor in town this week. He comes from a place where AA is very different from here. It seems to drive him crazy and he seems to drive some of our members crazy.....

It made me think of when I struggled with "My AA" after moving. Today I believe that alchoholics respond diferently to the message and I try very hard to accept that those who practice this program differently than me are simply carrying the message of aa to different people than I am and that we all have a message to carry that someone needs to hear.

But I do sometimes leave the meeting and fume for a while....

[jimhere]

It appears that I misunderstood you, Irish. If so, I apologize.

Looking at it from the viewpoint of someone who is not familiar with my group, I could see where it would appear that we have too many rules. However, by following these guidelines, the meeting flows. It does depend on the chairperson though. I have seen a few chairpeople who tried to stick to the letter of the law and not rely on intuition. Although the message got carried, the meetings were rigid and there wasn't any spirit to them.

If any of you ever are ever in the Seattle area on a Tuesday evening, come and see us. You'll be welcome.
Jim

[lizw]

I've a friend who moved from NZ to England and she told me the meetings are really diff there.

She said generally one person shares their story then the meeting is 'open' to whoever wants to share. The chairperson doesn't actually chose people to share. She reckons the same people dominate the meetings.

Personally, I'd just shop around till I found one I liked or start my own.

I've been told all you need to start your own AA group/meeting is a resentment and a coffee pot.

[CarolD]

hmm...
A chair person is the voice of a group
during the duration of the meeting.

By following the guidelines decided on in GC
any chair person is doing thier job.

[Peter]

A good chairperson is also in my opinion someone who has formally worked Steps and understands The Traditions.