We (2NCR) found that equipment that works & works everytime is the BIGGEST way to keep Volunteers happy, this is of course the Presenter Volunteers, that makes up 90% of our Volunteers anyway.

2nd would be COMMUNICATION, without COMMUNICATION everything & everyone falls apart, I have seen this many times, not just at our station, but many others...

Finding Volunteers that only want to volunteer & not present any programs can be a problem, well that is what radio is about afterall, Broadcasting:BUT it's not everything, without the "background" Volunteers doing their job, there is no station...it's as simple as that....getting a balance of all this & a happy (& open) Management Team, this then makes everyone equal team players, no one should be seen to be higher (or more powerful) then the rest....

After all, "we" are ALL Volunteers...

Cheers
Dave Russell
Authorised 2NCR Representative
(as approved by the Committee)

Hi Tracy. There are about 120 members of our Association. The upper limit to this number relates to how many slots there are in a radio week and how many people we can train vs the natural turnover each year.

In theory we have no volunteers, as everyone at Three D is a member of the Association. So they all have the same opportunities to influence the direction of the station by standing for the Board and being on committees, etc. I don't want this to sound pedantic or contradict my last post, but it's important I get the concept across as it's fairly central to how we run without any paid staff. We don't really train people either - in the sense of a certified training course. It's more about inducting someone so they know how to behave appropriately and survive in what can be a demanding and rewarding club.

We induct new members about 4 to 5 times a year. That's about the limit of our trainer's endurance as it's quite an involved process. An average course has about 7 people in it, which is more a function of limited training space than anything else, and on average 6 make it through and 5 are still here a year later.

Hi John. It's true that members are expected to do their bit, but I'd like to think that the members do the things that they do (be that broadcasting or taking out the garbage) because they like being part of a club that's doing an amazing thing and that they want to assist and influence it as well. Oh and there's the bit about inflicting your musical taste on a rather large audience of listeners - that's pretty cool too :wink:

It still gives me such an amazing buzz when I broadcast, as I perceive that I'm really continuing a musical conversation with the listener that began about 30 years ago - about 8 months after you started a similar conversation at 3PBS - you star :)

During an induction course, we actually play the first few minutes of our opening broadcast (from 1979) to the new members so they can hear what those founders of the Association said about what sort of station we would be. It's great stuff.

Tracey, thanks for the thoughts. And for bringing me back to a topic about which I'm passionate.

The word "force" is a bit of a worry. You can't force volunteers to do anything, because they will walk. However, you can set reasonable groundrules, which become the currency for being permitted to play in the sandbox. You can also set stretch targets, and reward appropriate performance - or even the attempt.

For instance, Tim's volunteers are either expected or embarassed into doing things that are important for the station. That's fair. You want to do a show: you take out the garbage too when it's your turn.

If you're a member of the team, you behave like it. The trick is to move volunteers into an understanding of their role and responsibility as part of the team. Sometimes thats just a simple matter of asking.

And the same principles apply in industry: give people a valid reason to be there that they can internalise ("what's my motivation for being in this scene?") and they will happily contribute. But provide no feedback, and no support, and no encouragement, and yes: they will walk.

John

Perhaps the topic is misleading....... however both conversations are excellent.

I will admit I had a giggle with some comments about egos.

I don't think there's one simple answer in making volunteers happy. Their personal happiness means they are satisfying why they are at the station in the first place.

Probably the most important factor is the recruitment. I've got some amazing volunteers who do it for the community first and foremost and some who use it as professional development. Both kinds of volunteers work hard and are dedicated doing whatever role they take on.

Tim- I really like the idea of training everyone at the station so everyone is equal. How many vols do you have? How often do you run training?

I came into community radio because I have technical skills which I knew could be put to good use. This is just an extension for me of what I do to earn my living.

I started working in broadcasting in 1987 when I was employed under contract at the ABC in Canberra. My job was to install the equipment that was used in both radio & TV broadcasting. I was even involved in the installation of the ABCs radio/TV facilities in Parliament House.

My present job requires me to talk to the end user then design & install a system that works for all concerned.

A good techie should understand the needs of presenters. As an installation tech you get to know what the presenter (operator) requires because you talk to them before you carry out the installation.

As I said before I have not inclination to be a presenter. It is not my thing. Good luck to those who want to do it. My own wife is one of our presenters & she loves it.

I do however get involved with the training of our presenters & show them how to get the most out of the equipment that I install.

One thing that seems to be missed here is that we are all volunteers & we should not force other volunteers into doing something that they do not want to do. We should utilise the skills that our volunteers have & are happy to give to us.

John makes a good point - all techies should have the experience of using their own "inventions" under broadcast conditions. Only then do you begin to understand some of the frustrations that non-techies feel about trying to broadcast under some pretty frustrating conditions. Although the reality is that many of us wouldn't be broadcasting at all if it were not for those same techie inventions that allow us to broadcast at a fraction of the cost of what most commercial/national stations would spend on equipment.

Re the main part of the discussion - at our station we turn this argument on its head and say that EVERYONE who's involved with the station must be a trained announcer. So even if you just want to catalogue music or play with a soldering iron, you have to know how to drive the broadcast desk and do an acceptable general music show.

We started doing this when we went 100% volunteer eight years ago, as you had to make sure that the "last man standing" in the station could fill in if the next announcer couldn't make it. The flip-side of this is that all announcers have to know how to be the receptionist/cleaner/station manager/etc., as you might be doing your show and someone comes in to pay their subscription, etc.

The interesting thing that happens when you train everyone like this is that we all becomes a bit more equal. Being an announcer is no longer something more special than being the receptionist. Because everyone knows how to do it, announcing becomes de-mystified and that's a really good thing. All members of the station can talk on an equal level and barriers break down. This leads to more understanding between people and you tend to have better AGMs as well.

We have two techies on our Board and both are on the finance committee.

If you think you're having trouble getting the numbers at AGMs, then setup a bulletin board like this one (google phpBB) for all your members. These are the best way for people to have their say - especially for people who aren't quick speakers or like to take time to think about what they say. Often they can make the best Board members too :wink:

Ahhh,

the balance of volunteer presenters and others on Boards; and it IS a problem. The participation in *decision making* violations is a major complaint source with the ACMA.

The announcers are the recognised names when it comes to an AGM, so the names that get picked aren't the background people, the technican, the producer, the tireless office worker or the lawyer. (It is Mrs Country Music program, or "Hits and Memories" Bob whose only qualification is being able to play the same 45 songs in a different order each week for the nursing home audience.)

So, the membership vote them in, and the others are simply out numbered. Status quo remains. ArrrGH!

How to fix? Install sub-committees, try to encourage a diverse range of people to become members/VOTE, educate people, and take every opportunity to thank the technologists.

Maybe make an induction as a committee person part of every new committees first meeting - maybe something like "Hi, we are the technologists... Play nice with us, or no more magic music box..."

One good technologist I know in the sector was recently heard to say"If people ask for my advice, why don't they take it?"
:-) Why indeed...

Jack@!

Re Alf's comment about jobs that people do - and crossover of activities...

It's not necessarily a bad thing to wear the other guy's shoes. It gives you a better idea of what sort of hugs are needed, for a start.

One of my guiding principles is that every technologist should be forced to feel the pain that we inflict on our customers. While that might sound a bit brutal, it's not a bad philosophy. You get design input for free, from direct personal experience. You get to know what's broken, really quickly. You get to develop techniques that can be passed to other people, and improve the quality of their experience.

So if your people say "do the training", then they are doing you a favour.

But I take your point, and it goes even a step further. There is a general inequity in the skills demanded of a technologist compared to a business or operations manager when it comes to a Board. It's almost a given that business folk will say "I don't need to understand that" when referring to technology. It's also a given that technologists are expected to understand the P&L, accounting rules, legal ramifications, and... well... everything else, and we don't get to hide.

The point is that broadcasting IS a technology business, and someone has to understand the technology to the nth degree (including operational roles) if only to ensure that problem determination is quick. That's us.

The other thing about learning to do more jobs is that it does add to the fun. I enjoy on-air work immensely - more for the buzz than the egoboo, and through related activities I've taken the opportunity to learn how to direct live video, stage-manage, mix live sound, and do a heap of other things which make life extra interesting.

Perhaps, and this is a perhaps, the trick is to work out how to enthuse non-techos into picking up techo skills. What would be the value proposition which would drive them? Do they get a recognised hug within your station if they complete techo 101? Can you invent a hug?

No, you can't change the animal, but you can be super enthusiastic, and hope that some of it rubs off.

And, by the way, I would not be doing ANY of the professional things I'm doing now had it not been one-way-or-another for the experience received in community broadcasting. Absolutely, for sure. So I'm happy to owe the sector my.... gratitude. 8)

John

Hello All

Indeed an interesting topic.

Being involved in 3 community radio stations in Southern Tasmania, I'm fortunate to get an opinion of a wide range of volunteers.

(i am a paid manager at one, volunteer (+ president) at another, and do contract (paid) work for the third)

All volunteers speak of recognition for their efforts (not necessarily public)
Others mention the social benefits in country areas of volunteering.

Current economic circumstances are affecting the abundance of volunteers, more people working more (part-time) jobs, etc.
(ive seen newspaper stories on this)

I've personally asked volunteers "why do you do this?" and am pleasantly surprised by the genuine desire "to do something for the community" by most of our volunteers

At one station, we estimate that each year, some $80,000 of volunteer work is done. We can't praise volunteers highly enough.

Mel

I was voted in as the president of our station at the last AGM. I work in the broadcast industry as a techo. I enjoy doing this sort of work & have no desire to be a presenter.

Unfortunately there is only one other member of our board who is not a presenter. This other board member does not want to be a presenter either.

Both of us make valuable contributions to our station without presenting. However there are members on our board who think that all board members should do a presenters course so that we understand what it is like for them. Of course these same people do not want to do a technicians course.

To be a good technician not only takes doing a course to gain your qualifications. It also takes years of experience to develop what has been learnt in a class room & apply it into practice.

Having worked in broadcast for as long as I have I realise that the presenter is only the public face of radio/TV. It is the behind the scenes people who make the rest of it happen. If you can get these people into your organisation do your best to keep them.

Hi guys,
great topic, Just a general reply

I've seen some of the interesting "happenings" when on-air people become decision makers
(maybe others have experienced it as well)
It seems it can divide very quickly the ones who are there to be “on-air” and ones who wish to commit a little more to the station (although we need both types, it needs to be carefully spread out within all areas, departments etc of an organisation) or what I call the “nine-to-fivers” and the “workers” and a healthy interaction between all is a must. If you are aware that a particular person is only a “nine-to-fiver” I wouldn’t expect to set a task for that person that requires a “worker” but at the same time you need the workers to understand that they are not obligated or if things change on the home front etc, there are other people willing to help and/or take over or even better set the task for workers to work in a group (often they can become a self help group and are willing to work together on into the future)

As far as getting non-air people on board, one of the best ways is the project work eg, OBs or open days etc, as very nicely said at the Conference by John Maizels, you can always ask somebody to help once, what happens then.......

And my thoughts on volunteers, only want three things, I see most volunteers will have their own reasons for being “on board” and more often than not they are there for the right reasons, it’s just sometimes people don’t always know how to do the things they want to, due to lack of understanding, training/education and/or experience. What appears to be a lack of access to education and more so for remote areas for various reasons. We also need people to want help/education. Without the “need” you can’t force education on people as it is also what drives volunteers away. (I say that with careful reasoning) Station policy, codes of practice is a great place to start.

There is nothing more off putting for me to hear at a board meeting the complaints the board has to make about a particular air-show, “they talk to fast”, “leave the mics on all the time” etc, when no attempt to provide a formal education to the presenters has been made, and more so when the board is made up of.....presenters. So when things like that happen I see a need for education for the decision makers but if these people are not willing as volunteers themselves, we need to look at changing something.

One thing I’m not sure of; is this type of volunteer interaction a sector wide problem or not? Regards to volunteers not willing to look all options to make their goals achievable and in line with organisation goals and community needs.

Anyhow, just a thought.
Cheers,
Steve

John,
well put, and I agree.
Paul,
yes some of the volunteers just want ot get on air and "play radio to all those people out there" (shudder).
It is important that we keep explaining our guiding principles, our Codes of Practice and that we instill the idea of participation in decision making as being one of the main differences between us and other types of broadcasting.

Putting together an induction program that covers this rather than "theres the mic on switch, off you go" approach is hard to get past Boards who have never had to do that before. They think it is not based in reality, or is just needed to sneak past the ACMA at licence renewal time... :-(

Not all volunteers want air-time for their ego, in fact we need heaps that don't want that. Paul how do you attract non-on-air volunteers at SWR?

Jack@!

Paul, I'm not sure whether you're replying in context of my article, or more generally.

I think you're right about many people - those volunteers who are drawn to community radio purely for the egoboo certainly fit your criteria. Those are the people who won't much care about who is listening, or the quality of listeners, or the quality of the signal. They just want to be on-air.

My hope is always that those people are in the minority, because the probability is that they deliver inwardly-focused and irrelevant programming... which ultimately attracts nobody to your station.

Where I disagree is that volunteers want three things only. Those three are all wrong criteria to apply to technologists, and it's worth considering a broader reality of volunteerism. There are many many people who are totally consumed by activity in the sector, and who have NO desire to be on air. I'd be interested in your further comment on how that applies.

What we must do (as a sector, and must) is ensure that people are only given programming opportunities once they can demonstrate commitment to their station's credo, to the craft of broadcasting, and to servicing the needs of the listeners ahead of everything else.

Otherwise, how do those people meet the criteria expressed in the Code of Practice?

John

Community Radio Volunteers want three things only;

1.) More Airtime (So they can get on the air).
2.) People to Listen (i.e. Publicity for the station)
3.) A Strong, Quality Signal (So people CAN and WILL listen).

Everything you do, every decision you make as a Board of a Community Station should be focused on these three things. If they're not then your volunteers will end up leaving.

Paul Matthews
SWRFM Blacktown