Strong Board, strong AMS

Onus on AMS for lack of long-term vision; Board must take responsibility

The AMS’s short sightedness is putting student dollars at risk.

On Mar. 11, the AMS corporate assembly voted down changes that would have increased the number of long-term members on the Board of Directors.

As the overseeing body of the AMS corporation, the Board looks after a $14-million budget—by no means a trivial amount of money.

The proposed changes may seem small, the implications are significant.

Over the past few years, AMS services’ financial performances have been inconsistent. Common Ground and the P&CC, which were profit-makers three years ago, are now budgeted to have losses. Destinations appears to be heading the same way.

Overall, the AMS services are budgeted to lose around $120,000 this year. These losses stem from inconsistencies in the creation and implementation of long-term plans.

The last available strategic plan covering the AMS corporation as a whole was created in 2003 and it wasn’t fully implemented.

The members on the Board have adopted various changes to address these issues including using long-term budgets to create long-term targets, hiring a marketing officer to listen to students needs and enacting a proper committee procedure to better conduct planning and oversight.

But these changes can’t function properly without the right leadership.

The Board identified one of the major problems hindering its ability to properly look after students’ money is the Board’s high turnover rate. This turnover creates a yearly shock that disrupts the Board’s ability to properly create and implement long term plans. It prevents experience from being built on the Board, thus hindering its ability to provide proper accountability and oversight.

With this in mind, the Board proposed two changes to the AMS.

First, scaling down the number of one-year memberships by one and replacing it with two additional two-year student members.

Second, adding another non-student member and extending their terms to three years.

By doing this, turnover is reduced and more experience can be built on the Board. It allows members to actually have time to learn and to use their experience to implement positive changes.

An additional non-student member would bring an external view to the AMS. They bring outside expertise and give the Board more legitimacy.

Increasing the number of independent Board members, those who aren’t executives or management of the AMS—steers the Board away from managing day-to-day operational issues and more into high-level decisions and long-term planning.

Half the Board is currently comprised of the executive and management members.

This change would bring more independent members in, allowing for more scrutiny and accountability from the executive.

The Board presented these proposals with the rationale mentioned.

The AMS voted it down. Their main reason? Refusal to cut down the amount of one-year members by one.

By refusing to eliminate one position in favour of more long-term members, the AMS sacrificed the chance to properly instate strong leadership that can carry on a long-term vision and to properly manage the corporation.

On Mar. 18, I resigned my position as a Board member. It became clear the AMS overlooked the need of more expertise to spend students’ money responsibly.

The lack of priority shown by the AMS to put the proper management of the services and students’ money first is troubling. It doesn’t bode well for the organization’s long-term health.

The AMS failed to listen to those who have the most expertise regarding how to improve the corporation—the Board of Directors.

The disregard for the need to strengthen long-term leadership in the organization will put students’ money at risk. Student fees may have to be raised if services’ financials don’t improve.

The AMS must revisit this decision or provide a similar solution that can increase the experience and decrease the turnover on the Board of Directors.

In addition, they need to change the balance of the Board so there are more independent members that can hold the executive accountable and not be bogged down with day-to-day operational decisions.

A stronger Board means a stronger AMS.

The AMS needs to shift its attitude and not be stuck in its ways. These changes are needed to serve as a first step towards significant improvement.

Members of the Board assessed the situation and developed sensible solutions. The AMS has turned them down. The onus is now on them to work on a path out of this situation.

The AMS’s lack of long-term vision has cost students money in the past; now, it must take responsibility and action to prevent this from continuing.
Gary Yeung, Comm ’11, is the former vice-chair of the AMS Board of Directors.

All final editorial decisions are made by the Editor(s)-in-Chief and/or the Managing Editor. Authors should not be contacted, targeted, or harassed under any circumstances. If you have any grievances with this article, please direct your comments to journal_editors@ams.queensu.ca.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Skip to content