X-Message-Number: 30331
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 19:27:08 -0700
From: Stephen Bogner <>
Subject: Governance Issues at Alcor

David Pizer is correct when he observes that any organization that allows
leadership authorities to be exercised in the absence of leadership
accountabilities will ultimately generate pathologies such as a tolerance
for incompetence, and even actual criminality - both of which have been
observed within Alcor with distressing frequency over the past few years.

At issue is whether or not the leadership renewal that may be required to
correct the decline in the business trajectory of Alcor can be achieved when
there is no effective organizational mechanism to hold the
Directors/Managers accountable for the use of their authorities. David is
correct in pointing out that the self-election of directors insulates them
from the discontent of the membership.  Even if there was a majority (or
even universal) consensus among the membership-at-large to remove the
leadership of Alcor in favour of new leadership, no mechanism short of
dissolution and reconstitution allows it. 

I also agree with David Pizer that the early markers of a business in
trouble are emerging from Alcor: business errors that are not caught and
corrected in a timely manner; increasing losses to criminals; declining
business growth, high overheads relative to competitors, falling market
share, all leading to declining financials; an innovation culture that
appears to have become stagnant; increasing stakeholder discontent;
leadership churn and governance issues, etc.. 

However, I think that I also agree with David that these issues are
correctable if the leadership of Alcor can be renewed and can get control of
its business so that it is executed with an appropriate degree of business
acumen and rigor.  But the window for that to happen will not stay open
forever.

Normally, a business that runs into these kinds of troubles gets sorted out
by the shareholders, one way or another.  The management and directors
either regain the confidence of company shareholders or they get replaced.
Unfortunately, if the management and directors of Alcor cannot regain the
confidence of the membership, then the members may begin to feel that they
need to meet their cryonics needs elsewhere.  It could happen that a
significant fraction of the membership may decide that there is a better
chance - and a clearer mechanism - to fix the things that they don't like
about CI and SA, than to struggle to find a mechanism to fix the things that
they don't like about Alcor.

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=30331