Single or group leadership?

[Fester-Rotcrotch]

Depending on the members of the clan/guild, and the mechanics of the game, that group leadership can cover much more than despotic leadership can.

The clan I am currently in (I am one of two founding leaders, and 1 of 4 total leaders) has a group leadership system. We make decisions concisely and with minimal time. I find that we make decisions faster as a group than I have pondering them by myself in the past.

Only two of us share a similar outlook on most subjects, otherwise we all have our different opinions on things. This allows us to look at every possible aspect/outcome of a decision before doing anything rash. A lot of people think this would bog everything down with disagreement and make the process lengthy, which is true in some cases, especially when you have impressionable people who think more about a cause other than the clan's. Although, when you get reasonable people together, all with the goal of increasing the health and standing of the clan, decisions are made quickly, moreso if you have people who think logically and not with their emotions/strong personal opinions.

Like I said, it greatly depends on the membership of the clan to which method would work best.

Humbly,
Fester

[Ama-Ebi]

As an Imperial (and possibly Sith...but will not admit to it), I naturally support one person in power over a group sharing power. The key is in who holds the power. A good leader will ALWAYS listen to those he/she selects to assist in duty and to guild members. Having one person also makes more of a figurehead for the guild and people like to know there is one person ultimately responsible.

My first guild had 3 leaders, but one person was designated as THE lead. That person spoke on behalf of the guild and was the final say in decision making. That worked fine in a small guild setting.

If a guild is larger, I'd like to see a section leader for certain groups (ie- PvP leader, PvE lead, Commerce , RP or whatever).

The problem with everyone having to vote on an issue all the time is that things take too long to get done and often a decision needs to be made swiftly.

[Blasphemous]

The way I ran my guild was very successful using the group leadership approach for many years. I was always very reluctant to give members that type of role and they truly earned their positions, some being in the guild for almost 2 years before becoming part of the "inner council" (stealing that term from SB). However, once the group of decision makers grew to about 10 people, that's where serious problems began. We had to keep revising rules because some of the IC began to think their voice didn't mean as much as one of the other ICs, who is my opinion, was just taking a proactive approach to situations. In the end, I would have the final say, but very very very rarely did I exercise my right to "veto" the ICs decisions on any particular matter, whether I agreed or not. For the most part, it worked, but when the **** hit the fan, the **** hit the fan. It's tricky and I don't think there's a right answer. In the end, I think leadership that can adjust how it operates according to the current need of the guild is the best approach.

[Sensational]

A good leader always has indirect influence from other players, it doesn't matter if they have the official "officer" tag, but most people will always voice their opinions on the big decisions and therefore affect the leadership. To me it's not so much about dividing the power as it is about giving the power, be it to one person or more, to the one who can use it best. The whole guild should always be in control and always make the decisions together. The leader will always pick the option that the guild would want, else he's not the right leader for the guild.

As for divided opinions, majority wins unless the leader can convince the majority that the other option is the better one for the guild. Burning bridges is alot worse then building them in the wrong places. You can always cross back over to the other side if you still have the loyalty of your guild and try again, if they don't like you then you're screwed and that will almost always put the guild back further then if you pick something that didn't benefit you all that much.

[Droniac]

I suppose I should provide you with a bit of my background here before going into how I prefer to lead my guilds... sooo, here goes:

I've been leading clans and guilds since I started playing online back in 1999. Over time I've come to the conclusion that the only way I can comfortably set up a system of leadership for a clan or guild of mine is by going slightly towards the dictatorial route. In fact I've created a sort of template of guild creation that I generally follow regardless of the game I'm forming a team/clan/guild for - because I've found it works best for me and my members.



So, I like to start off a guild together with one of my friends whom I've lead clans/guilds with before (i've actually got four such friends, so there's always one willing to start off with me), because I know they'll make capable officers. Together we write up a full plan for a guild, build a site and make sure we've got as much of the organisation done prior to inviting anyone else. This can take a very long time as we do this in detail. Once me and one such friends spent 2 months designing a clan before making it operational (this turned out to be the best clan I've ever been in, with the greatest community and amazing in-game performance).

After all that we start inviting people as members. We make sure to only invite people who seem like they might mesh well with our plan for the Guild and we fully inform them of all the details. With me making most of the end decisions and my friend taking up a few tasks of his own, most of which don't require any assistance from me (such as IRC management, teamspeak management, providing new members with basic info, etc). As the Guild grows (slowly) we start seeing some members who are willing to do more - and eventually our team of officers (or staff, whatever you want to call it) expands.

The end result is a largely autonomous Guild (if you take it that far, which I never have), where active members take care of the regular tasks such as recruitment, team leadership during PvP, organising events, training new recruits, etc. This all in accordance with what they themselves want to do for the Guild, which in the beginning (several months) usually means that me and my friend will be doing nearly all of the work. Whenever the time comes for big decisions I step in, although we try to plan ahead for these decision and post up polls in the forums to have the members try to decide our course of action. Only in very odd, extreme situations does the Guild leader really need to intervene... otherwise the Guild basically runs itself. In essence it's a group-based leadership, because it's a group that takes care of most of the work that goes into running the Guild and decides on many of the topics of discussion, but it has a single person at the top who can (but normally should not) overrule anything.

I never really let my Guilds get to that point, because I always figured that if you want something done right you have to do it yourself. So I tend to take on most of the tasks myself and this especially goes for recruiting and event management. I always make certain that most of the members are recruited by me personally and that I know all the recruits very well... this has the unfortunate side-effect that you'll be stuck in the leading position forever. Nearly all of the members of the Guild will be there because of you, which can make you the glue holding the Guild together (and that has happened to me a lot). Of course that's great when you're happily leading your Guild, because everyone will listen to, respect and like you. On the other hand, if you ever go on vacation or even decide to stop playing - your Guild will fall apart, even though your entire plan was designed so that it wouldn't possibly fall apart even if you left for a while. That kinda sucks :/

[Mr. Scary]

We've always been a group leadership, however I am the overall leader of the guild and can dictate change, but never have had to resort to it. All of our guidelines were established by and voted on by the core members when we first formed up then any changes were voted upon by every member. I do have junior officers who run their own gaming sections and I let them run 'em the way they like to run it, as long as they adhere to the general guidelines (i.e. no hacks/exploits, etc.).

Wait, I take that back. I am making some changes on my own decision, however, the reason behind it is we built up so many different standards, that true membership eligibility would rival the content of "War and Peace." ...ok so it was like getting to be a full page of rules & regs, so I streamlined a few things and submitted it for review by my 2nd in command.

[Esraymuk]

The most efficient way of running a guild IMO is definately the "single benevelent dictator" sort. I have the ultimate say in my guild, but I certainly wouldn't be stupid enough to do anything if my members disagreed with what I was trying to do.

I make decisions as I see fit, with a LOT of input from everyone in the guild as well as the officers, but in the end, I have ultimate deciding power.

If after a decision is made, anyone can argue with the decision; but they better have a REALLY good reason for arguing with it, ie. the decision has had a major negative consequence. I've never had this happen; simply because I would have thought through the decision before I made it, and thus none have had any major negative consequences.

Yet, I'm perfectly willing for people to argue against me so long as they have a decent, logical, and structured argument.

[SpugNothuson]

I've never been a Guild Leader, mostly a follower, occasionally a second in command figure.

My experience has always been that the Guild Leader does as his title suggests, it's their position to shine the torch in the right direction, it's the Council members position to keep the batteries charged up and the flock in the right position. Sometimes they may need to widen the arc of light (some leaders have a very small spotlight).

Guild Leaders should be responsive to their Council and in turn they should be responsive to their followers. If however you find yourself in the darkness, even after discussing it with the Council Members, this may not be the Guild for you.

Their are many Guilds with many different torches, like a moth you must decide which is the prettiest to you.

To answer the original question, their needs to be a strict hierarchy. The Leader should not stand alone, it is too much for one person. He should be surrounded by 4 (or more) like minded Council Members that aren't afraid of dishing out orders OR giving suggestions to the Leader.

[DeathBlossoms]

I agree with the above, in that the officers and guild leader need to be like minded and on the same page. Our current setup is this, 1 guild leader, 4 officers (2 friends and 2 in-game recruits). Each one of the officers has the same power as the guild leader, except they cannot disband the guild or make any alliance decisions. That is a game mechanic design though and has little to do with day to day decisions in the guild.

Me personally, I am fine either way with the leadership. I can follow and I can lead. The big thing for me would have to be how receptive the leader/s are to suggestions.

[grinreapress]

Hi all...

I am an officer in my guild...but have a lot of influence with guild leader (due to the fact we are great friends)..i support all of his decisions..but will add my comments either for or against....we tend to run the guild together and help our members..officers are given the following rules and everything works a treat...officers also have a vote on promotion and other stuff allowing guild leader to do his own thing..

1. officers need to have knowledge of a campaign
2. Offer support to new recruits and members
3. recruit new players and help them at start
4. be dipolmatic when a new member is constantly asking for help
5. have fun and enjoy game
6. be active
7. organise guild events..that they are interested in

we have some really good officers..but it tends to be me that has final say (i am the oldest after all by at least a century..lol)

my guild leader supports any decisions i make on his behalf as we have the same ethos on how the guild is run....and we are great team and work well together..

regards grin