I want my SSA

Why do we need a corporate headquarters at all? Why not conduct all
business over the Internet and let the (few) employees needed to run
the business work from home? Most of the business functions of the
organization can be subcontracted out at far less cost than we are
incurring now. Everything from a receptionist to payroll to order
fullfillment. Conference rooms are readily available at all hotels at a
reasonable cost. Meet in the city for the people attending. Or better
yet, have a Net meeting and avoid all of the travel costs. Plus the
sale of the building could go a long way toward getting the SSA out of
debt.

Tom Seim
Richland, WA

Tom, you make a eloquent argument against the "edifice complex" that has
plagued so many organizations. The organization is not the building nor is
the building the organization. Broadband internet makes communication and
collaborative tasks vastly better and cheaper that anything possible when
the Hobbs site was selected. I use internet based VoIP and
videoconferencing and prefer it to physical travel.
However, allow me to become the "devils advocate" for a moment. There are
many outsiders who will first ask, "who are you guys and what do you do?" A
headquarters in a real building on a soaring site where one could point out
the window to answer that question would be a real asset. Many of these
visitors might be people who could help us if the headquarters were located
near places they pass through anyway.

I don't know exactly where that magical building site is but I note that the
AOPA is in Frederick, MD on an GA airport near Washington, DC and the EAA is
located on their "Aviation Center" campus in Oshkosh, WI. Putting the SSA
on a year-'round world class soaring site near some international crossroads
might have some advantages.

Bill Daniels



wrote in message
oups.com...
Why do we need a corporate headquarters at all? Why not conduct all
business over the Internet and let the (few) employees needed to run
the business work from home? Most of the business functions of the
organization can be subcontracted out at far less cost than we are
incurring now. Everything from a receptionist to payroll to order
fullfillment. Conference rooms are readily available at all hotels at a
reasonable cost. Meet in the city for the people attending. Or better
yet, have a Net meeting and avoid all of the travel costs. Plus the
sale of the building could go a long way toward getting the SSA out of
debt.

Tom Seim
Richland, WA

You're headquarters could easily be a rent-an-office in Washington DC that
shares a conference room and receptionist with 20 other associations.

Mike Schumann

"Bill Daniels" bildan@comcast-dot-net wrote in message
. ..
Tom, you make a eloquent argument against the "edifice complex" that has
plagued so many organizations. The organization is not the building nor
is the building the organization. Broadband internet makes communication
and collaborative tasks vastly better and cheaper that anything possible
when the Hobbs site was selected. I use internet based VoIP and
videoconferencing and prefer it to physical travel.
However, allow me to become the "devils advocate" for a moment. There are
many outsiders who will first ask, "who are you guys and what do you do?"
A headquarters in a real building on a soaring site where one could point
out the window to answer that question would be a real asset. Many of
these visitors might be people who could help us if the headquarters were
located near places they pass through anyway.

I don't know exactly where that magical building site is but I note that
the AOPA is in Frederick, MD on an GA airport near Washington, DC and the
EAA is located on their "Aviation Center" campus in Oshkosh, WI. Putting
the SSA on a year-'round world class soaring site near some international
crossroads might have some advantages.

Bill Daniels



wrote in message
oups.com...
Why do we need a corporate headquarters at all? Why not conduct all
business over the Internet and let the (few) employees needed to run
the business work from home? Most of the business functions of the
organization can be subcontracted out at far less cost than we are
incurring now. Everything from a receptionist to payroll to order
fullfillment. Conference rooms are readily available at all hotels at a
reasonable cost. Meet in the city for the people attending. Or better
yet, have a Net meeting and avoid all of the travel costs. Plus the
sale of the building could go a long way toward getting the SSA out of
debt.

Tom Seim
Richland, WA

Bill Daniels wrote:
Tom, you make a eloquent argument against the "edifice complex" that has
plagued so many organizations. The organization is not the building nor is
the building the organization. Broadband internet makes communication and
collaborative tasks vastly better and cheaper that anything possible when
the Hobbs site was selected. I use internet based VoIP and
videoconferencing and prefer it to physical travel.
However, allow me to become the "devils advocate" for a moment. There are
many outsiders who will first ask, "who are you guys and what do you do?" A
headquarters in a real building on a soaring site where one could point out
the window to answer that question would be a real asset. Many of these
visitors might be people who could help us if the headquarters were located
near places they pass through anyway.

I don't know exactly where that magical building site is but I note that the
AOPA is in Frederick, MD on an GA airport near Washington, DC and the EAA is
located on their "Aviation Center" campus in Oshkosh, WI. Putting the SSA
on a year-'round world class soaring site near some international crossroads
might have some advantages.

Bill Daniels

Yeah, that old "nesting instinct" rears its ugly head, pushing us into
making irrational decisions. In reality, our public persona is really
our web site. Have you ever been to the SSA headquarters? I haven't and
don't intend to in the foreseeable future.

The SSA is in dire circumstances requiring an equally dire response. I
admit that I am thinking "outside of the box" here, but it is
definitely worthy of consideration.

Tom

Without wishing to throw out the fresh thought, it
might be well-advised to be very cautious before abandoning
the physical headquarters concept. A main contributor
to the present debacle would appear to be that nobody
on the Board, and very few ordinary members, was ever
in the office to see what happened day to day. Cat's
away, mice play. An internet-distributed office might
be an even harder situation to supervize.

Has anyone had any first-hand experience at actually
running such a 'virtual' headquarters ? How did it
work out in practice ? What sort of safeguards were
used to ensure productivity and financial integrity
were maintained ?

My own limited experience with teleconferencing suggested
that it was lousy for management purposes, but very
effective for engineering. Things that can be reduced
to hard numbers can be disseminated easily; anything
that has human factors or personalities involved tends
not to travel well through the ether. Or perhaps I'm
just a reactionary old fuddy-duddy on this.

Ian





At 00:54 13 September 2006, wrote:

Bill Daniels wrote:
Tom, you make a eloquent argument against the 'edifice
complex' that has
plagued so many organizations. The organization is
not the building nor is
the building the organization. Broadband internet
makes communication and
collaborative tasks vastly better and cheaper that
anything possible when
the Hobbs site was selected. I use internet based
VoIP and
videoconferencing and prefer it to physical travel.
However, allow me to become the 'devils advocate'
for a moment. There are
many outsiders who will first ask, 'who are you guys
and what do you do?' A
headquarters in a real building on a soaring site
where one could point out
the window to answer that question would be a real
asset. Many of these
visitors might be people who could help us if the
headquarters were located
near places they pass through anyway.

I don't know exactly where that magical building site
is but I note that the
AOPA is in Frederick, MD on an GA airport near Washington,
DC and the EAA is
located on their 'Aviation Center' campus in Oshkosh,
WI. Putting the SSA
on a year-'round world class soaring site near some
international crossroads
might have some advantages.

Bill Daniels

Yeah, that old 'nesting instinct' rears its ugly head,
pushing us into
making irrational decisions. In reality, our public
persona is really
our web site. Have you ever been to the SSA headquarters?
I haven't and
don't intend to in the foreseeable future.

The SSA is in dire circumstances requiring an equally
dire response. I
admit that I am thinking 'outside of the box' here,
but it is
definitely worthy of consideration.

Tom

This whole discussion is amusing given that the SSA has proven that it
can't even perform the most basic functions required of an
organization. There was no oversight, no accountability and hundreds
of thousands of dollars are gone.

What amazes me is how many people here seem to see this mess as just a
normal bump in the road.

Before any discussion of relocating can take place, I think that it
would be wise to first see if there will be any organization left to
relocate.

Ian Cant wrote:
Without wishing to throw out the fresh thought, it
might be well-advised to be very cautious before abandoning
the physical headquarters concept. A main contributor
to the present debacle would appear to be that nobody
on the Board, and very few ordinary members, was ever
in the office to see what happened day to day. Cat's
away, mice play. An internet-distributed office might
be an even harder situation to supervize.

Has anyone had any first-hand experience at actually
running such a 'virtual' headquarters ? How did it
work out in practice ? What sort of safeguards were
used to ensure productivity and financial integrity
were maintained ?

My own limited experience with teleconferencing suggested
that it was lousy for management purposes, but very
effective for engineering. Things that can be reduced
to hard numbers can be disseminated easily; anything
that has human factors or personalities involved tends
not to travel well through the ether. Or perhaps I'm
just a reactionary old fuddy-duddy on this.

Ian





At 00:54 13 September 2006, wrote:

Bill Daniels wrote:
Tom, you make a eloquent argument against the 'edifice
complex' that has
plagued so many organizations. The organization is
not the building nor is
the building the organization. Broadband internet
makes communication and
collaborative tasks vastly better and cheaper that
anything possible when
the Hobbs site was selected. I use internet based
VoIP and
videoconferencing and prefer it to physical travel.
However, allow me to become the 'devils advocate'
for a moment. There are
many outsiders who will first ask, 'who are you guys
and what do you do?' A
headquarters in a real building on a soaring site
where one could point out
the window to answer that question would be a real
asset. Many of these
visitors might be people who could help us if the
headquarters were located
near places they pass through anyway.

I don't know exactly where that magical building site
is but I note that the
AOPA is in Frederick, MD on an GA airport near Washington,
DC and the EAA is
located on their 'Aviation Center' campus in Oshkosh,
WI. Putting the SSA
on a year-'round world class soaring site near some
international crossroads
might have some advantages.

Bill Daniels

Yeah, that old 'nesting instinct' rears its ugly head,
pushing us into
making irrational decisions. In reality, our public
persona is really
our web site. Have you ever been to the SSA headquarters?
I haven't and
don't intend to in the foreseeable future.

The SSA is in dire circumstances requiring an equally
dire response. I
admit that I am thinking 'outside of the box' here,
but it is
definitely worthy of consideration.

Tom

Ian Cant wrote:

Things that can be reduced
to hard numbers can be disseminated easily; anything
that has human factors or personalities involved tends
not to travel well through the ether. Or perhaps I'm
just a reactionary old fuddy-duddy on this.

You're spot-on. We demonstrate that truth here every day.


Jack

Ian Cant wrote:
Without wishing to throw out the fresh thought, it
might be well-advised to be very cautious before abandoning
the physical headquarters concept. A main contributor
to the present debacle would appear to be that nobody
on the Board, and very few ordinary members, was ever
in the office to see what happened day to day. Cat's
away, mice play. An internet-distributed office might
be an even harder situation to supervize.

Has anyone had any first-hand experience at actually
running such a 'virtual' headquarters ? How did it
work out in practice ? What sort of safeguards were
used to ensure productivity and financial integrity
were maintained ?

My own limited experience with teleconferencing suggested
that it was lousy for management purposes, but very
effective for engineering. Things that can be reduced
to hard numbers can be disseminated easily; anything
that has human factors or personalities involved tends
not to travel well through the ether. Or perhaps I'm
just a reactionary old fuddy-duddy on this.

Ian

I am on the board of a not-for-profit with 400 employees located in 8
counties of southeastern Washington state that delivers in-home
services for the elderly. The board rarely makes trips to the head
office, even though it is within a short driving distance. We are
briefed monthly by the executive director, finance officer and
department heads. The organization turns a small surplus in a
notoriously money losing business. This can only be accomplished by
very good management and a committed board.

Do not confuse head counting with effective management, because it is
not. Management of people requires the setting of goals (tasks) and
close monitoring of work product.

Communication systems have come along way since the speaker phone. I
just got back from a demonstration of Cisco's Internet telephony
systems. They provide high quality voice and video world wide:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/...esw/index.html
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/...dies_list.html

Major U.S. companies are going this route with at least part of the
work force. Telecommuting is a fast growing trend, and I think it can
work for the SSA. Whether the members can accept it is another, totally
different, question.

Tom

How many members have every been to the SSA headquarters? As far as the
members are concerned, having a headquarters location is probably at the
bottom of the list.

Mike Schumann

P.S. People's attitude toward this might be different if there was a
historic or other draw that made the SSA headquarters a desirable and
relatively easily achievable destination.

wrote in message
ups.com...

Ian Cant wrote:
Without wishing to throw out the fresh thought, it
might be well-advised to be very cautious before abandoning
the physical headquarters concept. A main contributor
to the present debacle would appear to be that nobody
on the Board, and very few ordinary members, was ever
in the office to see what happened day to day. Cat's
away, mice play. An internet-distributed office might
be an even harder situation to supervize.

Has anyone had any first-hand experience at actually
running such a 'virtual' headquarters ? How did it
work out in practice ? What sort of safeguards were
used to ensure productivity and financial integrity
were maintained ?

My own limited experience with teleconferencing suggested
that it was lousy for management purposes, but very
effective for engineering. Things that can be reduced
to hard numbers can be disseminated easily; anything
that has human factors or personalities involved tends
not to travel well through the ether. Or perhaps I'm
just a reactionary old fuddy-duddy on this.

Ian

I am on the board of a not-for-profit with 400 employees located in 8
counties of southeastern Washington state that delivers in-home
services for the elderly. The board rarely makes trips to the head
office, even though it is within a short driving distance. We are
briefed monthly by the executive director, finance officer and
department heads. The organization turns a small surplus in a
notoriously money losing business. This can only be accomplished by
very good management and a committed board.

Do not confuse head counting with effective management, because it is
not. Management of people requires the setting of goals (tasks) and
close monitoring of work product.

Communication systems have come along way since the speaker phone. I
just got back from a demonstration of Cisco's Internet telephony
systems. They provide high quality voice and video world wide:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/...esw/index.html
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/...dies_list.html

Major U.S. companies are going this route with at least part of the
work force. Telecommuting is a fast growing trend, and I think it can
work for the SSA. Whether the members can accept it is another, totally
different, question.

Tom

How many people are actually planning to visit the SSA in the next year
no matter where it might be located?

I wonder how many would visit the SSA building if it was next door to
them?

I am asking myself is there some reason why I would want to visit....am
I missing something here?

Its just an administrative building with accountants, secretaries, and
some other committed individuals that are earning a living right?

Actually I'll bet the movers and shakers are mostly out of the office
rattling politicians cages and helping us glider pilots all over the
US.

So why all the talk about moving it? Hobbs is cheap...labor is cheap
and why take an airliner when you can fly a glider there ;-)

Lets just lend assistance putting it back in its proper place by
sending in our renewals early so they can pay the bills.

Help with your $$$ and leave strategic planning for another
day........priorities!

Ray