I love the "ghatak" metaphor. In fact, at the launch of a merged housing company about 15 years ago, the "marriage" metaphor was used quite explicitly as the event theme. That particular "wedding reception" featured a summary of the dating process, including the necessary initial steps before your "ghatak" stage. For the housing company, the Board's first step was recognising they needed a spouse: "on our own, we're not big enough to give our clients/tenants the service they deserve". The next step: who's eligible, and are we attracted to any of them? Third step: let's ask their Chair to meet ours for a private first date. Yes, there's mutual attraction, so let the romance begin! It's at that point that your seven questions (actually, 8 are listed!) would be addressed, followed hopefully by an exchange of love letters (the MoU).
In the non-profit sector where passion for purpose is abundant, marriage is the perfect metaphor for a merger.
Interesting. The non-profit where I am Executive Director recently "took over" another non-profit via a merger. It was a difficult decision, but at the end it made sense for both groups to come together. I get the feeling we are going to see more consolidation in this space.
And…. In your work, when should you welcome the co-existence of opposites?
heres another question, using the co-existence of opposites, yes or no, with specific criterion, uncovers nuanced responses, when shared gives a fuller picture of perspectives. How could you use the co-existence of opposites with critical decisions?
Love your 7 pre merger questions for non profits. Bound to lead to intelligent thoughtful questions. And your walk away images, deciding ’no’ or ‘not this one’ is not a fight or competition with the background conversations you propose. Good stuff.
Thanks Andrew. But questioning your conclusion that TimTams in soft plastics are sustainable, because they safeguard human health. Sustainability is about little or no damage to the environment (of which we humans are a part). Plastics are very harmful to the health of many lifeforms and biological systems, including humans. Spinning sustainability to justify corporate profits by prioritising short term human convenience is a sad centrepeice of capitalism and consumerism. We need to be lot more creative, honest and courageous than spouting corporate double-speak masquerading as the middle way.
I must admit in the 2nd article, 1st bolded concept — I do not understand what you are saying. It’s Friday evening here. Maybe my mind clicked out at 5😂
I love the "ghatak" metaphor. In fact, at the launch of a merged housing company about 15 years ago, the "marriage" metaphor was used quite explicitly as the event theme. That particular "wedding reception" featured a summary of the dating process, including the necessary initial steps before your "ghatak" stage. For the housing company, the Board's first step was recognising they needed a spouse: "on our own, we're not big enough to give our clients/tenants the service they deserve". The next step: who's eligible, and are we attracted to any of them? Third step: let's ask their Chair to meet ours for a private first date. Yes, there's mutual attraction, so let the romance begin! It's at that point that your seven questions (actually, 8 are listed!) would be addressed, followed hopefully by an exchange of love letters (the MoU).
In the non-profit sector where passion for purpose is abundant, marriage is the perfect metaphor for a merger.
Interesting. The non-profit where I am Executive Director recently "took over" another non-profit via a merger. It was a difficult decision, but at the end it made sense for both groups to come together. I get the feeling we are going to see more consolidation in this space.
And…. In your work, when should you welcome the co-existence of opposites?
heres another question, using the co-existence of opposites, yes or no, with specific criterion, uncovers nuanced responses, when shared gives a fuller picture of perspectives. How could you use the co-existence of opposites with critical decisions?
Love your 7 pre merger questions for non profits. Bound to lead to intelligent thoughtful questions. And your walk away images, deciding ’no’ or ‘not this one’ is not a fight or competition with the background conversations you propose. Good stuff.
Thanks Andrew. But questioning your conclusion that TimTams in soft plastics are sustainable, because they safeguard human health. Sustainability is about little or no damage to the environment (of which we humans are a part). Plastics are very harmful to the health of many lifeforms and biological systems, including humans. Spinning sustainability to justify corporate profits by prioritising short term human convenience is a sad centrepeice of capitalism and consumerism. We need to be lot more creative, honest and courageous than spouting corporate double-speak masquerading as the middle way.
I must admit in the 2nd article, 1st bolded concept — I do not understand what you are saying. It’s Friday evening here. Maybe my mind clicked out at 5😂