The modern age seems to have brought us two things: more meetings and more ways to meet. But what are the limits of how we can or should use technology to help us make decisions more efficiently? Deciding that means thinking about why we meet and what we give up when using technology to make decisions. The short answer is that teleconferences and Skype are acceptable means to make a decision, e-mail and chat rooms are not. And none of these is permitted unless your organization’s governing documents expressly allow for electronic meetings.
Meetings are more than just a vehicle to take a vote. They are an opportunity to share ideas and deliberate about decisions. Conversation is an essential part of decision-making. Religious organizations might include openness to the divine as an essential part of making decisions as a group. Being open to one another’s viewpoints is much more difficult when all we see is text or when we don’t have an opportunity to communicate live, meaning at the same time, not necessarily in person.
Most organizations’ governing documents do not address electronic meetings. But they do (almost always) state something like, “The latest edition of Robert’s Rules of Order (R.O.N.R.) governs parliamentary procedure at all meetings under these bylaws unless otherwise provided or ordered by the assembly.” Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised (11th ed.), the “latest edition” of those time-tested rules, does not allow for electronic meetings without a provision in the bylaws allowing them. (See § 9, page 97.)
Where a governing document allows for electronic meetings without elaboration, at a minimum the format of the meetings must provide “conditions of opportunity for simultaneous aural communication among all participating members equivalent to those of meetings held in one room or area.” R.O.N.R. at p. 97. So even if your governing documents allow for electronic meetings, any decisions made by e-mail aren’t valid actions of the organization. If something is urgent enough to need action between meetings, make sure to schedule a teleconference.
Organizations can adopt adopt rules governing electronic meetings that might allow for less than that minimum standard. But I advise against it, even for routine matters like considering minutes. (See one way to make that take less time here.) If you do decide to allow for less than that minimum, make sure to include rules limiting the medium (e.g., e-mail only) and provide for other clarifying rules that aim to include all members of the body in the decision and provide some semblance of discussion. For instance, you might require members to all vote and explain their vote in an e-mail, prohibiting silence to count as a vote. You might require 100% participation or set a minimum amount of time to wait for all to chime in.
Similarly, if your organization regularly uses electronic meetings, you might set parameters in addition to those found in Robert’s Rules. You might require videoconferencing, for example. You might set out a separate notice provision for phone conferences. Or you might require documents to be discussed at the meeting to be distributed electronically a certain amount of time before the meeting. Or you might require all participants to have access to a live view of the document on the leader’s computer.
The bottom line is that you must remember hearing each other is the bare minimum of good, deliberative decision-making. E-mail, chat rooms, and similar technologies just don’t make the grade on this score.
Have a question about legal issues affecting religious organizations? Let me know at questions@lawmeetsgospel.com or @LawMeetsGospel.