|
I guess that I would say to keep it at nine and my reason for saying this is that it is always easier to manage and coordinate fewer groups than more groups b/c as the number of groups grows, the organization must take into account more opinions, more philosophies, etc. and it can make it that much harder to really get anything done on the local level.
This phenomenon is seen in everday life. Consider the last time any of us tried to plan a group vacation - as the number of folk involved grows, the more difficult it gets since everyone will have a different opinion on type of hotel, location of hotel, location of trip, cost, activities available, etc.
Also, I really don't see a need for making the org a big conglomeration of people from tons of orgs. We already have that in the NAACP, Urban League, professional organizations, etc. It seems that we would just be re-inventing the wheel.
SC
|
Threaded Mode