Growing together – benchmarking success
Most of us, particularly around the New Year, begrudgingly set goals for ourselves: lose weight, quit smoking, eat less meat, clean more often (mine).
Yet, when it comes to meeting those resolutions, well, that’s a different matter. After all who’s looking and who really cares if we fail?
As a political party, the Green party is really into setting goals for others. Baselines, absolute targets, timelines are all too kindly proffered. And they’re tough goals which the party expects to be met or else.
The party is more than willing to tax, fine, or ban to have the targets it sets for society met.
Indeed, nothing is off the table to ensure that the party’s goals are achieved just as long it seems as someone else is doing the achieving.
But for a group that likes to set benchmarks, targets and penalties for everyone else, the party isn’t quite so fond about embracing comparable, relevant goals for itself or local EDAs.
Yes, the party often commits itself to achieving over 10% of the popular vote and winning “seats” (usually the number of which goes mercifully undefined); but what about mundane party-building goals that might actually make other more lofty goals achievable?
At the EDA level, do members set annual goals for volunteer and membership development, develop plans for canvassing and tabling to meet them, inspire other local members to join in and then set out together to achieve them?
How many EDAs develop written annual plans? And, if so, do they fit in with the plans of neighbouring EDAs and an overarching central party strategy? Is someone held to account for their achievement?
Does the central party support EDAs in achieving their goals through artwork or purchasing power and, most importantly, does it set measurable goals for itself that complement the annual plans of EDAs?
It’s easy to blame the central office or federal council for everything that seems to go wrong – and even sometimes to find imaginative ways to blame them for when things go right – but if the Green party is indeed a grassroots party then the grassroots also has a responsibility for some sod maintenance.
In 2004 and 2006, the party set out to run full slates and did, proving that when members are focused on a goal, the talent and drive is there to succeed.
As a political party it’s time to get serious about doing politics or get out of the way of those parties that are. Sorry to say.
Not all of the tasks related to achieving political goals are as fun as debating policy for some members or even in the self-interest of others – the ‘big fish, small pond’ syndrome. But here’s the rub: the Green party is a political party, not a private club.
And at 8,000 members and $1 million in annual fundraising, the party simply doesn’t have sufficient bench strength to win seats. And if the goal is to be more than a chatters club, then the party needs to start winning seats and soon.
Because the party’s political credibility is running on borrowed time.
It’s why tough but achievable goals for the party and EDAs must be set, particularly if the party is calling on the Canadian government to set tough goals on climate change and for those targets to be met. The ‘practice what you preach’ syndrome.
Members can quibble over these admittedly random choices and the meritocracy approach to these ideas, but just to play devil’s advocate let me toss out some EDA and central party goals with a few carrots and sticks thrown in.
Raise the bar to a minimum of 25 members in good standing for EDAs to be eligible for revenue sharing, 100 paid up members to be eligible for a visit by the leader in a non-election period, two annual EDA fundraising events, and to canvass one quarter of the EDA per year.
For the central party set out to achieve 308 registered EDAs in three years, each with a minimum of 25 members; reach 15,000 paid up members by the next writ; increase the donor base by 15 per cent annually and average donations by five per cent; identify 100,000 committed Green Party voters; and work with EDAs to identify the resources that are best provided by the central office to support local annual plans – and then provide them
None of these goals is inappropriate to the growth of a political party. In fact, most political parties already set comparable goals, but with far higher targets.
For instance, nearly one million Canadians voted for the party in 2008, so it’s fair to expect that less than three per cent of these electors might actually fork out $10 to join the party if somebody asked them. It’s well within the average response rates for direct mail.
Each of these goals has secondary and even tertiary benefits. They force EDAs into their communities to talk to voters between elections face-to-face. One hundred thousand identified Green party voters is an average of only 325 per EDA; but a great place to start for finding volunteers when the writ does drop.
Maybe it’s also time for Council members and candidates who are willing to accept strategic assumptions as valid for them to sign on the dotted line with partial loan guarantees as other political parties often ask their candidates and executive to do. There’s nothing like putting your money where your mouth is and it’s a sure fire way not to bank on wishful thinking.
In a matter of weeks nominations for Council elections will close. Before you vote take a serious look at the candidates and ask yourself whether they have the right stuff.
Have they run a community group or small business successfully? Are they running with a personal agenda or a party wide platform? How have they worked with others in the past? Can they put personal loyalties aside to focus on the party’s best interests?
Benchmarking success is not rocket science, whether it’s at the EDA level or a council election. But as the devil also knows, a lot is in the details.
Dermod Travis is former Director of Communications for the Green Party of Canada and organized the Green Party's 2006 National Convention
Comments
Post new comment