(11-15-2016, 05:26 AM)Valence Wrote: Officers OOC don't have to match whatever hierarchical positions characters have IC. OOC officers should always be nominated over their managing, creative abilities as well as their involvement and maturity or whatever you ask them to be.This. While in the Blades we do our best to match both for simple ease, at the end of the day we'd much prefer a competent officer who does not have an IC rank to match over one that does and abuses their position. Our own leader actually did not receive an 'IC' rank until recently, while my character was essentially the defacto leader in spite of my mere officer position. It can be done if the right people are involved.
Recently we went through a minor shuffling in leadership as our head DM stepped down and we ended up elevating another to fill the vacancy, so I can somewhat speak on the qualities our FC in particular looks for.
- Activity level is one of the biggest factors. We expect our officers to be able to dedicate at least four hours a week to the company and often times it extends far beyond that depending upon the week. Elevating someone who can only be online for an hour or best each night is only asking for problems. Both for the person who was given the rank and the people who might need their help.
- Ability to self-sacrifice for the betterment of the FC. This is a bit nebulous but for example I'm mostly the social officer as well as the person who provides the IC hook to get any new recruits into our ranks. While I do have the ability to put my foot down I've often had to sacrifice my time each evening for various reasons.
Someone wants to be recruited? That's three hours I have to set aside to interview them on both and OOC and then an IC level as we pride ourselves on responding in a timely manner. Another member isn't content with the status quo? Again, I set aside what I'm doing to speak with them. Our DM's, which are a subclass of officer with fewer responsibilities, are expected to provide story hooks for our 30+ members. Even if it's just a simple silly quest to go kill 'x' because the larger plot is on hiatus. This often means they sacrifice one day a week or more helping out or providing suggestions.
I literally have not finished the 3.1+ storyline on Odile as of yet in between my need to juggle my duties as an officer, need to level, wish to roleplay, and desire to simply draw and play other games. This is not something I know many people can handle and thus when I look for potentials to elevate I take their ability to put the needs of the many before their own greatly into account.
- In keeping with the mood of the former point, the ability to empathize with others is another trait I keep an eye for. Does a member get mad if they aren't the center of attention? Do they stop and offer help to people who need their dailies? Do they allow people to speak in the discord chat or rudely change the subject to focus on them and only them? Can they bite their tongue when they're clearly displeased and find a better way to fix the issue they're having, rather than blast the entire FC to all who will hear it? That's not saying an officer needs to be a paragon of virtue... But in my experience a lot of headaches can be solved rather quickly when an officer actually cares about the others in their group.
- Never will I or the leader of the company elevate someone simply because we share a bond of friendship. Likewise seniority has it's place but being the longest lasting member does not automatically mean you're fit for the job. I've seen a LOT of people fall into this trap. Either by giving their significant other a position of power or feeling they 'owe' that one member who was with them the longest some badge of approval for sticking around. Sometimes it sends well. More often than not it's the basis for guilds falling apart.
That's not to say your friends can't be officers and indeed the person Ave and I picked is a very dear friend that we both implicitly trust. Yet in an FC full of similar friends they were the only one that met our strict standards. Which leads me too...
- People that take things out of context or get angry at the littlest things are rarely a fit for the position. Petty people make petty outbursts which then can cause huge disputes to arise. The person we made an officer has a very even temper to round out the rest of the staff and so far has been a voice of reason. To the point that he's already shown himself to be a comfortable person for the other members to go towards when they have an issue.
That doesn't mean a go-getter or a more take charge personality won't make for a wonderful officer. But if someone seems aggressive and easily offended, do you -really- want them to have any amount of responsibility?
I also agree with everyone echoing that it might be necessary to thin the ranks if people simply aren't making the effort. What I'd recommend is taking the time to contact each of your members individually, yes this will take time, and talking to them one on one about their experience in the FC. You're going to get a lot of bullshit, a lot of straight answers, and a lot of something in between. Yet the members who want to continue will appreciate the venue to air out the 'laundry' so to say. Take this back and discuss what you found with the officers left that you trust and make a choice from there. Either set some standards around what was suggested, or let things continue. Yet it seems clear you're not at -all- happy.
