Hi Folks,
For our new bike collective, I would like to see a more bottom-up approach than a top-down Board managing everything. Anybody here doing management as a Worker Self-Directed Nonprofit? https://www.theselc.org/worker_selfdirected_nonprofits
Rather than majority or consensus decision making, how about Dynamic Governance / Sociocracy: https://communitydevelopment.ces.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/What-is...
While we are starting as an all-volunteer effort, I see much room for growth, and paid employees receiving a living wage. Does your shop make enough money to pay any employees?
Thanks and good health, Weogo
Hi Weogo,
I don't have specific experience with the worker self-directed nonprofit or the dynamic governance that you mentioned. I have been part of two bike collectives, so I can share my experience with the general category of top-down and bottom-up board structures. I hope this insight gives you something to consider.
The first group was a fledgling organization in a transition period between mobile-only operations and leasing a workshop space. At that time, there was no paid staff and the board consisted mostly of the volunteers who were deeply involved with the daily operations. This was an effective group because everyone cared deeply about the mission of the organization and the value we provided in the community. Possible limitations of this model include the reduced exposure to other social and professional circles outside the bike community and a reduced ability for these in-the-weeds volunteers to step back and consider the broad, strategic vision of the organization. The more time you spend doing administrative work, the less time you get to fix bikes, so people can quickly get burned out on admin stuff if they really just want to be wrenching.
The second collective experience is with a group which is more established. We have a paid executive director, paid staff mechanics, a paid part-time fundraising coordinator, and paid staff to run the charitable programs. Many groups in larger cities and/or wealthier locales are able to sustain this kind of staffing thanks to higher volume of business and a larger pool of potential donations from the community. Our board includes former volunteers as well as other interested professional , who have not participated with our organization previously. The benefit of this model is that we can tap a broader range of professional skillsets, such as accountants / professional fundraisers / event planners / HR managers. These skills would be harder to find within our organization if we were limited to volunteers and staff. We can also reach a wider range of professional and social networks for fundraising. On the flip side, this group may be less informed about the difficulties and opportunities that present themselves during day-to-day operations, so this leaves the opportunity for friction to develop between the operations team (staff and volunteers) and the board.
I can't really recommend one version or another without hearing more about what you want to accomplish with your group. Either way, good luck and keep us updated on your success!
I would say a bottom-up approach only works if everyone in the collective started the collective together, and were on the same page from the get-go. It's nearly always difficult and prohibitively messy to try to coalesce a government with a group of different people who arrived separately and at different times.
If you do have that chemistry where you have broad consenus without prolonged deliberation and debate and feel a bottom-up configuration is realistic for you, you probably want to stage visits or talks from professionals who have those skillsets and experiences which fall outside the range of your existing collective.
After absorbing the info sessions, you can have conversations about whether or in what fashion you'd all like to implement those roles or functions. Ideally, you will be able to access professionals in your community willing to liaise pro bono as consultants periodically to help you develop capacity.
~Cyclista Nicholas
Congratulations on your new bike collective!
It's encouraging to see groups using other than traditional hierarchical structures. I have found that they have substantial benefits, especially for mission driven organizations.
From a legal perspective, if you are USA based, you should look into forming a "non profit domestic corporation" in the state you operate. That status will allow the organization to apply for IRS 501(c)3 status, which allows for tax deductible donations and qualifies the entity for assistance from other non-profit and government entities.Typically, these organizations are operated by an "Executive Director" but could be directed by a committee or other structure. You will need to specify the structure in your bylaws which are part of your 501(c)3 application. So, playing around with structure for a bit, while starting out and building a core group, skills and resources. If the group needs to accept donations or become eligible for assistance, a different, allied 501(c)3 can act as a "fiscal sponsor" for the group, accepting and disbursing funds.
Regarding the process, I have been an active member in co-ops and collectives, participating in a variety of decision making processes from majoritarian to consensus. Simple majoritarian is expedient but, especially where majorities are slim, often leads to division and resentment. Consensus can take a long time, but doesn't have to and can be "safety valved" with super-majoritarian processes. Most decisions are better made the way a group of friends decides what restaurant they should go out to eat at. I would echo what Cyclista said with a little twist: organizations go through an arc and those that start it are often the types of people that start up lots of (good) things. Once established, an organization usually needs refinement, attention to detail and has greater administrative activities. Often this arc involves different types of people with different levels of commitment (hours) and experience. Those differences (and changes in group composition) can make strict consensus time consuming and limit opportunities.
The Dynamic Governance model seems rather complex for an org starting out, but I have found two of those ideas very helpful: 1. Don't use a volunteer process to assign tasks/responsibilities; 2. Develop structures that elevate all voices. A volunteer process ends up favoring the loudest and most passionate voice, which reinforces many different power/privilege imbalances in our society. A nomination process, random method or assignment can result in a more equitable distribution of authority and work. The referenced "go rounds" to ensure all voices are heard is a great way to undermine the power structures inherent in the volunteering of ideas. Rotating meeting facilitation, varying meeting style, polling, small group breakouts and socratic or outside facilitation are some other methods to elevate all voices.
Some bicycle collectives pay staff, with some in the USA paying top level full time staff $50+K and benefits. One benchmark to consider is "what do local bike shops pay mechanics?" In my experience, bicycle collectives that get to a level where they can pay near local market rates for mechanics (along with benefits and added flexibility) are able to maintain a stable core group of staff.
Thanks for your good work!
@Fahzure
On Fri, Apr 18, 2025 at 3:52 AM cyclista--- via TheThinkTank < thethinktank@lists.bikecollectives.org> wrote:
I would say a bottom-up approach only works if everyone in the collective started the collective together, and were on the same page from the get-go. It's nearly always difficult and prohibitively messy to try to coalesce a government with a group of different people who arrived separately and at different times.
If you do have that chemistry where you have broad consenus without prolonged deliberation and debate and feel a bottom-up configuration is realistic for you, you probably want to stage visits or talks from professionals who have those skillsets and experiences which fall outside the range of your existing collective.
After absorbing the info sessions, you can have conversations about whether or in what fashion you'd all like to implement those roles or functions. Ideally, you will be able to access professionals in your community willing to liaise pro bono as consultants periodically to help you develop capacity.
~Cyclista Nicholas_______________________________________________ TheThinkTank mailing list -- thethinktank@lists.bikecollectives.org To unsubscribe send an email to thethinktank-leave@lists.bikecollectives.org To view this discussion on the web visit https://lists.bikecollectives.org/hyperkitty/list/thethinktank@lists.bikecol...
Hi Andrew,
Thanks for the reply. I looked at your website and it looks like your group is doing a lot!
I live in a rural county with no bike shop. People buy parts at walmart or online, or go to bike shops in neighboring counties.
One of us is a former REI bike shop manager. Another was a mechanic at a shop in a neighboring county. Currently I volunteer with The Recyclery in Asheville, NC. Some of us are helping with a local after-school program teaching high school students to repair bikes, through the local RepairCafe organization.
I know of two established bike shops that considered opening stores in the county but ended up not doing so, and am guessing that currently, this would not be profitable for them.
The group working to open a non-profit bike shop has the intention of serving first those most in need, the general population, and mountain bikers & tourists from out of town. Our initial focus will be teaching folks to work on their bikes, and refurbishing donations to go back out in to the community. The local community college wants to partner with us to do continuing education classes.
We are taking the long-view on how to make this organization continue far down the road. Part of this is having key-holding volunteers and paid workers in on management and decision making processes. Over the years I’ve been a part of multiple non-profits, some smaller and similar to your first example, some larger and more like your second. We want to bring together the best of both options, and option-C.(I don’t know what option-C is, but am betting there are multiple possibilities!)
Does this answer your question?
What kind of management and decision making does your group use? Is everybody happy with the way it’s working?
Nicholas, we are just starting and have a group of people with a wide variety of backgrounds & skills, that really want to work together. We are looking at our diverse backgrounds as a strength, and Dynamic Governance as a way to make good use of that.
It turns out a national-level educator for WLSDNP and DG lives near here. I’m a volunteer with the Asheville Tool Library and know her from there. She’s excited about what we’re doing and has offered free teaching to get us going; am pretty sure we will end up paying her some anyway. Our first meeting is Monday.
One person who knows a good bit about all of this said two of the best things we could bring to our community are WLSDNP and Dynamic Governance.
Kevin, thanks for your thoughtful post - much to consider there. We’re working on the non-profit status. A community non-profit has already said they can accept donations on our behalf and disburse to us - they are already doing this with another group working on non-profit status.
Thanks and good health, Weogo
participants (4)
-
andrew.westphal＠bikestogether.org -
cyclista＠inventati.org -
Kevin Dwyer -
weogo＠liveedge.net