On Aug 29, 11:57=A0am, Joe Seidler <j...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> I have a general reply to your question. The UPA Board has the job of
> mostly looking at the long term issues facing the s****t and making
> strategic decisions. The day-to-day decisions are made the UPA staff.
> So being a dedicated player is not necessarily the best qualification
> for a good Board member. IMO the UPA needs people who bring expertise
> in strategic thinking to the Board, and some life experiences wouldn't
> hurt.
>
> So for me, older players (Masters Division for example) and players
> even older who understand what the s****t was like 15+ years ago (and
> therefore can see where it's going) are good candidates.
>
> Personally I wish a few more Board candidates had strong marketing and
> strategic expertise even if they never played the s****t. With an
> annual budget now well over $1M, the UPA is ready for a strong,
> professional Board.
Good points, Joe. One of the things I always look for in BOD
candidates is trying to see how their professional background would
fit in to guiding an organization toward growth and legitimacy.
Lots of cor****ations have people sitting on their boards who don't
have direct experience with the company's actual product, but are
valued for their ability to make good business decisions.
|
