Survey of Cameroon Democracy

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/PSJWCP2

Click the link and carry our the survey for Cameroon Democracy

Civil society should engage with the ELECAM teams

Civil society should engage with the ELECAM teams on the field

Dear colleagues of the civil society

As you may  already know, ELECAM teams are on the field with a mission to inform/educate, voters and stakeholders on the new electoral code as well as sensitize and mobilize them to get ready to register massively in the electoral list when the process starts in 2 months.  I sincerely think it’s an excellent thing for them to do. Based on their availability on the field, we the civil society should also mobilize to make significant contribution in the process at all levels and arranging for meetings with the teams through  our regional networks. 

Please consider the following urgent actions and points during your meetings with the ELECAM team:

Action point: All the ten regional civil society networks as well as thematic networks should mobilize their members and take appointments to meet and discus with the ELECAM team when they are in your respective regions:

Things to consider during such meetings or appointments:

1. The civil society should seeks meaningful dialogue and collaboration with ELECAM beyond mere words by concretely discussing join action plans and strategies of implementation and participation of the civil society in civic education and monitoring before, during and after the voters registration extending to the periods before, during and after the twin elections.

2. All civil society members should ask ELECAM to make public the comprehensive list of all polling stations and to update such a list whenever new polling stations are created or modified
3. Ask ELECAM to seriously and sincerely collaborate with the civil society during the training of registration agents and further towards the grassroots mobilizations to encourage voters to register.

4. ELECAM and the civil society should agree on a working plan for early accreditation of all interested civil society organizations to participate in the electoral processes right from the start of the registration process which we consider fundamental to any free, fair and transparent elections

5. The Civil society should ask ELECAM to recommit to their promise of using  the SMS voters verification system which they agreed to use during the twin elections especially now that voters’ cards will not be delivered on the spot to avoid the same situation observed with millions of uncollected cards during the presidential elections

6. We should ask ELECAM to improve the performance of their communication unit by integrating vital information in their website which till date is holding outdated information about the presidential elections.

7. Once done, I pray that all of us should also commit to help ELECAM in their mission towards meaningful democracy in Cameroon

8. The civil society should indicate through the national civil society observation poll their geographical areas of interest to mobilize voters towards the registration process, monitoring of the processes extending from the registration to the voting in 2013 or whenever the electorates are convened.

Note: when you refuse to be part of the success story, you will inevitably be part of the failure

I am on standby for further details

Christian Tanyi

CEO, LUKMEF-Cameroon

La société civile doit s'engager avec les équipes de ELECAM sur le terrain


Chers collègues de la société civile

Comme vous le savez sans doute déjà, les équipes de ELECAM sont sur le terrain avec pour mission d'informer / éduquer, les électeurs et les intervenants sur le nouveau code électoral ainsi que les sensibiliser et les mobiliser pour se préparer à s'inscrire massivement dans la liste électorale lorsque le processus démarre en 2 mois. Je pense sincèrement que c'est une excellente chose pour eux de faire. Sur la base de leur disponibilité sur le terrain, nous la société civile devraient aussi se mobiliser pour apporter une contribution significative dans le processus à tous les niveaux et l'organisation de réunions avec les équipes est nos réseaux régionaux.

S'il vous plaît envisager les mesures urgentes suivantes et les points lors de vos réunions avec l'équipe ELECAM:

Point d'action: Tous les dix réseaux régionaux de la société civile ainsi que des réseaux thématiques devraient mobiliser leurs membres et de prendre rendez-vous de rencontrer et de discussions avec l'équipe de ELECAM quand ils sont dans vos régions respectives:

Les choses à considérer lors de ces réunions ou rendez-vous:
1. La société civile devrait cherche un dialogue constructif et de collaboration avec ELECAM-delà des mots par concrètement discuter rejoindre les plans d'action et des stratégies de mise en œuvre et la participation de la société civile dans l'éducation civique et de suivi avant, pendant et après l'enregistrement des électeurs qui s'étend aux périodes avant, pendant et après les élections.

2. Tous les membres de la société civile devrait demander ELECAM à rendre publique la liste complète de tous les bureaux de vote et de mettre à jour une telle liste à chaque fois de nouveaux bureaux de vote sont créés ou modifiés
3. Demandez à ELECAM sérieusement et sincèrement collaborer avec la société civile au cours de la formation des agents d'inscription et d'autres vers les mobilisations populaires pour encourager les électeurs à s'inscrire.

4. ELECAM et la société civile devraient s'entendre sur un plan de travail pour l'accréditation  de toutes les organisations intéressées de la société civile à participer dans les processus électoraux dès le début du processus d'enregistrement que nous considérons comme fondamental pour toutes les élections libres, justes et transparentes

5. La société civile devrait demander à ELECAM pour renouveler leur promesse d'utiliser le système de vérification SMS électeurs dont ils ont convenu d'utiliser lors des élections conjoindre surtout maintenant que les cartes d'électeurs ne seront pas livrés sur place pour éviter la même situation observée avec des millions de non perçus cartes lors des élections présidentielles

6. Nous devrions demander à ELECAM afin d'améliorer la performance de leur unité de communication en intégrant des informations vitales sur leur site web qui jusqu'à ce jour est la tenue des informations périmées sur les élections présidentielles.

7. Une fois cela fait, je prie pour que chacun d'entre nous doivent également s'engager à aider ELECAM dans leur mission vers une véritable démocratie au Cameroun

8. La société civile doit indiquer dans le sondage national de la société civile d'observation de leurs zones géographiques d'intérêt pour mobiliser les électeurs vers le processus d'inscription, le suivi des processus s'étendant à partir de l'enregistrement au vote en 2013 ou lorsque les électeurs sont convoqués.

Remarque: Lorsque vous refusez de faire partie de l'histoire à succès, vous serez inévitablement faire partie de l'échec

Je suis en attente pour plus de détails
Christian Tanyi
Chef de la direction, LUKMEF-Cameroun

Obama et Sarkozy ne voulaient pas de Kadhafi vivant

Obama et Sarkozy ne voulaient pas de Kadhafi vivant, de crainte qu’il ne parle trop lors de son procès devant la Cour pénale internationale.

Le 19 octobre en fin d’après-midi, un colonel du Pentagone téléphone à l’un de ses correspondants au sein des services secrets français. Chargé du dossier Kadhafi, l’une des priorités actuelles des généraux de l’équipe Obama, l’ Américain annonce que le chef libyen, suivi à la trace par des drones Predator US, est pris au piège dans un quartier de la ville de Syrte et qu’il est désormais impossible de le « manquer« . Puis il ajoute que laisser Kadhafi en vie le transformerait en véritable « bombe atomique« . Son interlocuteur comprend ainsi que la Maison-Blanche a rendu son verdict, et qu’il faut éviter à Kadhafi la tribune internationale que représenterait son éventuel procès.

Depuis quelques jours d’ailleurs, des commandos des forces spéciales américaines et françaises participaient ensemble à cette chasse au Kadhafi. A Paris, au Centre de planification et de conduite des opérations ( CPCO), à la Direction du renseignement militaire ( DRM) et au Service action de la DGSE, plusieurs officiers évaluaient à une cinquantaine de membres du COS ( Commandement des opérations spéciales) les militaires français présents à Syrte.

Leur mission: porter assistance aux unités du CNT qui investissaient la ville, quartier par quartier, et, selon le jargon utilisé par un officier du CPCO, « traiter le guide libyen et les membres de sa famille« . Une autre formule avait cours à la DGSE : « livrer le colis à Renard« , et agir en sorte que Kadhafi n’échappe pas à ses poursuivants ( une unité du CNT baptisée « Renard » ?).

A l’ Elysée, on savait depuis la mi-octobre que Kadhafi et l’un de ses fils s’étaient réfugiés à Syrte, avec gardes du corps et mercenaires. Et Sarkozy avait chargé le général Benoît Puga, son chef d’état-major particulier, de superviser la chasse à Kadhafi. Ce qu’il a fait en relation avec la « Cuve », le bunker souterrain où des officiers du CPCO sont en contact permanent avec tous les militaires français engagés à l’étranger et les différents services barbouzards. A la DGSE comme à la DRM, on ne se gêne d’ailleurs pas pour évoquer l’ « élimination physique » de Kadhafi, à la différence des formules bien plus convenables employées à l’ Elysée, s’il faut en croire un conseiller de Sarkozy.

» La peine de mort n’était pas prévue par les résolutions de l’ ONU qui ont permis à l’ Otan d’intervenir, ironise un diplomate français. Mais il ne faut pas jouer les hypocrites. A plusieurs reprises, des avions français et britanniques avaient déjà tenté de liquider Kadhafi en bombardant certains de ses repaires, à Tripoli, ou en détruisant notamment l’un de ses bureaux. » Et le même de signaler que, lors d’un procès devant la Cour pénale internationale, » ce nouvel ami de l’ Occident aurait pu rappeler ses excellentes relations avec la CIA ou les services français, l’aide qu’il apportait aux amis africains de la France, et les contrats qu’il offrait aux uns et aux autres. Voire plus grave, sait-on jamais ? »

Le 20 octobre à 8h30 du matin, l’objectif allait être atteint. 3 avions de l’ Otan s’approchent de Syrte. Rien à voir avec une mission effectuée par hasard : une colonne de 75 véhicules fuit la ville à vive allure. Un drone américain Predator tire des roquettes. Un Mirage F1CR français de reconnaissance suit un Mirage 2000-D qui largue 2 bombes GBU-12 de 225 kilos guidées par laser. Bilan : 21 véhicules détruits et Kadhafi seulement blessé.

Des membres des forces spéciales françaises sont alors présents sur les lieux. L’histoire ne dit pas à quelle distance de ce qui va survenir, et que raconte avec une abondance de détails un officier des services de renseignement militaires : « Kadhafi est capturé vivant par des combattants surexcités. La foule scande Allah Akbar à pleins poumons, le menace de ses armes et se met à le tabasser pendant que d’autres combattants, qui peinent à prendre le dessus, crient de le maintenir en vie. »

On connait la suite, et quelques images de ce lynchage suivi d’une exécution par balles sont apparues sur les écrans de télévision et dans la presse écrite. Mais la mort de Kadhafi n’est pas la fin de l’histoire car, à en croire une analyse barbouzarde, « la Libye est entrée dans un no man’s land politique, une zone de turbulences imprévisibles« . Voilà qui devrait inquiéter ceux qui, dans plusieurs capitales occidentales et arabes, ont poussé des soupirs de satisfaction à l’idée que Kadhafi ne serait jamais la vedette d’un procès international.

Letter to ELECAM President

Dear Dr. Fonkam;

Once more I congratulate you and your team for the steps towards improving our young democracy. During our last meeting on the need to implement the voters verification system we proposed last year, following your strong and firm recommendation for its immediate implementation, mindful of the fact that the implementation was later halted because of your agency’s excellent decision to recompile the electoral list;

We will like to come back to you to restate the following points and action points as we soon get into the full registration process:

There will be the need for the civil society to engage with ELECAM at multiple levels with focus on grassroots mobilization and civic education before, during and after the registration processes leading to and including the election day activities

Mr. President, you may agree with me that voters apathy is still high, citizenship trust and confidence in the processes still questionable and so together as Cameroonians we must find robust and innovative ways of reversing such positions towards a more citizen driven democratic process. 

Now that the biometric registration is soon going to start, with voters’ card not going to be delivered on the spot as hoped for, the voters’ verification system becomes even more relevant as an add-on layer of confidence building measures in our electoral system. As of now, we only hope that the card distribution will go hitch free, but there are always unforeseen circumstances, human or technical errors as well as carefully planed systems of sabotage.  

With the contract awarded, we are once again asking that we continue to work towards the implementation of the proposed system so that in the worst case, voters will know their polling stations, get their full voters information delivered directly to their mobile phones by them sending a simple SMS with their National identity card number to the short code 8001 which will be linked to the database in your office.

Based on the fact that this system will NOT require any financial engagement from ELECAM, it remain therefore an excellent opportunity to build voters confidence both in the electoral process and in your institution.

It will there be required that we work with any of your staffs to set-up and test the system pending the full registration process.

How to rig an election with Biometric voters List

Biometric voters list is one of the sure quick fixes in the endless list of preconditions for a free, fair and transparent election. Biometrics will almost eliminate double voters’ registrations as well as fake/nonliving registered voters.  I completely agree it will contribute to a small percentage to an election performance.  If you think you got the magic solution to your electoral fraud, put on your reading lenses and read on.

THE only poll that counts, supposedly, is Election Day. But for the sophisticated vote-rigger that is terrible advice. Election day is too late. If you go around beating up your opponents’ voters, stuffing ballot boxes and making up results, someone somewhere is bound to complain. All those foreign busybodies will take you to task. It enrages the crowd and it dents your reputation.

It is also unnecessary. If you set about rigging the vote well in advance, you can have an election that looks all right on the outside but guarantees the result you want. And nobody will be able to object. The secret is to obey the rules—having first written them yourself.

It all starts with television, where most voters (especially the poorer and less-educated) get most of their news. Don’t clamp down completely—it makes you look weak. Tolerate small, ill-funded opposition outlets (not least so that you have an idea yourself of what is going on). But make sure that you or your allies control all the main television channels. Television news should trumpet your successes, portraying you as statesmanlike, and perhaps also enjoying manly sports and cuddly charity work.

This makes you the dominant brand in voters’ minds. Your propaganda machine should also highlight the opposition’s foreign links, making them look disloyal and alien. It should play up splits and divisions and any personal foibles (your own vices, meanwhile, must remain state secrets).

This makes the next stages easier. Gerrymandering is an excellent tactic. In a parliamentary election, corral your opponents’ votes into places where they pile up uselessly, while making sure that yours are spread across plenty of marginal constituencies. Then sort out the electoral registers: you need tough registration requirements for the voters who dislike you. You can count on votes from prisoners, army conscripts and others, so make sure they are registered en masse.

With little funding and inability to send representative in all polling stations, it makes your work even easier. Where some poor opposition representative show up at the polling stations, just buy them over and move on with the process. After all what is the mount they will get from the opposition compared to what you give them from state funds?  

The laws governing political parties are in your hands too: make them burdensome. That will sap the opposition’s energies—and if they make a single slip-up, you can always have their candidates struck from the ballot. Your own party will control a mighty bureaucratic machine and will meet the requirements easily. A sophisticated twist on this is to create your own tame opposition parties, in several flavours. They will distract attention from your real rivals.

You will have to allow some foreigners into your country on polling day. So make it easy for the right ones (your ideological soul mates and those from other autocratic countries). Nosy nit-pickers from the West can come too, but only at the last moment, so they have little time to get organised. Discredit local election-monitoring outfits as foreign-funded and partisan. Trumpet your fans’ verdict at home: it will offset the complaints from those foreigners who, your television channel can argue, are secretly bent on doing your country down.

Stuff and nonsense

Do not waste much time campaigning. Anything beyond the odd triumphant rally makes you seem like a mere politician. Instead say you are too busy minding the affairs of state—and make sure you are shown on television doing so.

On polling day hand out free food and booze in poor areas. In places that will not vote for you, have the polling stations open late and close early. If necessary, they can run out of ballot papers. Long queues are a deterrent to busy people.

As insurance, you need to be able to fiddle the results. A computerised system which is apparently secure but actually accessible is ideal. If ballot-boxes are used, make sure they can be stored overnight in a discreet location where, if all else fails, you can add and subtract votes as necessary. If you get caught, say provocateurs are trying to discredit you.

None of this helps you run the country when you win. But who said politics was easy?

Compiled and complemented from Economist

Christian Tanyi

LUKMEF

The tides could be turning on the Cameroon leadership

The tides could be turning on the Cameroon leadership following a senate hearing that took place on April 18, 2012, at the US Senate/Subcommittee on Africa that was dominated by discussions on the Biya one-man-leadership that has been in power for over three decades.

A Tsunami on Biya and Cameroon was unleashed in opening remarks by the US Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs at the US State Department; Johnnie Carson, in which he revealed that, following the conclusions of the 2011 Presidential election in Cameroon, he wrote to President Biya, urging the re-establishment, as soon as possible, of the term limit and the implementation of constitutional reforms and a more transparent and an independent electoral commission.

In his remarks to the committee on Cameroon, Hon. Carson accused the Cameroon political leaders of the ruling party of having taken advantage of the country's relative stability, prosperity and system of patronage to entrench their leadership.

He added that the little oil that Cameroon has got has helped to provide a cushion to Paul Biya and encourage a patronage system as well as fuelled corruption in the country. In his words:
"Oil has been behind some of the corruption and patronage that has helped to keep Paul Biya in power."

Hon. Carson further declared, before the committee, that the 2011 Presidential election in Cameroon was seriously flawed: polling stations opened late, citizens were allowed to vote multiple times in some cases, ballot box stuffing and voter intimidations were observed in various parts of the country. He lamented the fact that the Supreme Court received credible complaints of fraud from opposition parties, but, unfortunately, the Court unjustly dismissed all the cases.

Hon. Carson’s testimony could explain why, until this day, the US has not sent any form of congratulatory message to President Biya, following the October 2011 Presidential election.
On comparing the US policy response between Cameroon and Senegal where both Wade and Biya had "tinkered" their constitutions by removing term limits, Carson explained that the US acted differently in Cameroon because the threat of violence and wide spread instability was not as great or as serious as it appeared to be in Senegal on the eve of the Presidential election. This is clear confirmation of the role the people's power played in stopping Wade from another term in office. In contrast to the passive civil society in Cameroon, Carson considered the Senegalese civil society to be active, saying it played a key role in organising the grass-roots support that quickly turned into an anti-Wade movement.

In his closing remarks, the Assistant Secretary of State remained optimistic about the future of Cameroon. He reiterated the popular belief that a democratic change is irreversible in Cameroon, especially with President Biya getting close to 80 years old. This implied that if the awaited change doesn't come from Cameroonians themselves, time will catch up with Biya eventually.

He called upon the Senate/subcommittee on Africa to write to President Biya in the same way it wrote to President Wade of Senegal, calling on him to respect the democratic norms so as to enable a smooth and peaceful transition of power in Cameroon.

He also urged the Senate to remind Biya that the international community is focused on what is happening in Cameroon and the need to put stronger institutions which will ensure a stable transition when the time comes.

Meanwhile, on the second panel of the hearing, Dr. Christopher Fomunyoh, Senior Director for Africa at the National Democratic Institute (NDI) reminded the committee that, for the past 50 years, Cameroon has failed to conduct national elections that were not overshadowed by controversy.

Fomunyoh further stressed that, in Cameroon, the opaque handling of electoral processes and government-imposed hurdles impede the ability of the civil society and the independent media to monitor and report on elections. He decried the fact that, the Cameroonian youth, prompted by restrictive laws and a lack of confidence in the country's political system and institutions, are becoming apathetic and apprehensive of their future.

Fomunyoh, who is widely expected to play a key role in the transition process in Cameroon, raised legitimate concerns to the committee on the fact that the lack of political will to create the appropriate framework for credible democratic elections, while preserving an entrenched regime in power, may push the country to the brink of violence and instability.

He equally insisted on the need for the Cameroonian civil society to be strengthened given the importance of their role in the democratisation process in Cameroon. Other panellists at the hearing included Dr. Mo Ibrahim of the Mo Ibrahim Foundation and Hon. Earl Gast, Assistant Administrator for Africa, US Agency for International Development. Senior Senators like John Kerry and Isakson were also present at the hearings.

IS the wealthy world turning its back on the world's poor?

Recent figures on aid spending released by the OECD show global aid spending has been cut for the first time in 14 years, down in real terms by 2.7 per cent (or $3.27 billion) to $130bn.
This means wealthy countries are spending just 0.31 per cent of their collective national income - or 31 cents in every $100 - on aid.
And it means hundreds of thousands of people living in poverty will go without life-saving medicines, and many more children will continue to live without access to clean water or adequate sanitation.
The biggest cuts, not surprisingly, were made by Greece and Spain with Austria and Belgium also slashing budgets.
Rich countries are now even further off-track from meeting their promise to invest 0.7 per cent of their national income in the world's poorest people.

Oxfam's analysis shows that at the current rate, donor countries as a group will not hit the UN's target of 0.7 per cent for 50 years.
It's not all doom and gloom. Norway, Denmark and Luxembourg still meet their pledge to give more than 0.7 per cent of their national income in aid, and Germany and Sweden have increased their aid budgets.
Importantly, just recently the British government reaffirmed its determination to enshrine in law the commitment to 0.7 per cent of its national income to overseas aid.
Despite the dire economic situation in Britain leading to massive cuts in government spending, the aid budget has been quarantined from the razor gang.
This act has the support of all three major parties.
British PM David Cameron has said: "There is a strong moral case for keeping our promises to the world's poorest and helping them even when we face challenges at home."
Australia has been another bright spot.
While this country ranks only 13th on the aid spending league table up from our previous position at No 15 our aid budget is increasing.
And the government - backed by the Coalition - has a clear trajectory for increasing aid spending.
If the reported delays to Australia's foreign aid budget become a reality, it will be a cruel blow to the world's poor.
Australia devotes just 0.35 per cent of its national income to overseas aid - well below the OECD's average of 0.46 per cent. The bipartisan target is 0.5 per cent by 2015-16.
All the signs are that Wayne Swan's budget next month will be a tough one.
Hard choices are being made
as the government strives to meet its pledge to deliver a budget surplus.
Australia's finances are not in the same condition as those in Europe. Times are tough but, as the Treasurer is fond of saying, Australia has less government debt and smaller budget deficits than any of the major advanced economies.
In this context, and with the knowledge that each day 4000 children die because of preventable diarrhoea, a delay to aid increases would be difficult to justify.
Every minute counts in our efforts to save lives.
This budget will test the strength of Australia's convictions - and commitment - to help the world's poorest.
Aid supporters are not asking for anything more than that Julia Gillard delivers on her promise.

Nommination des membres du gouvernement de Nkondengui

Nommination des membres du gouvernement de Nkondengui

Premier Ministre         Chief Inoni Ephraim

Secretaire General de la Presidence    Atangana Mebara

de la Republique

Secretaire General Adjoint de la       Titus Edzoa

Presidence de la Republique

Ministre de l'Administration               Marapha Amidou Yaya

Territoriale et de la Decentralisation

Ministre Delegue charge des collectivites  Ongongdong

Decentralisees

Ministre des finances:       Polycarpe Aba Aba

Ministre des P&T     :  Mounchipou Sedou

Ministre de la Sante charge du SIDA: Urbain Olanguena Awono

Ministre des Transport charge de la CAMER-CO: Yves Michel Fotso (Dans l'attente  de Dieudonnee Ambassa Zang en mission)

Ministre des Mines de l'eau et de l'Energie: Alphonse Siam Siewe (Detache a New-bell)

Ministre des enseignements de base:   AMAN ADAMA

Ministres des Travaux Publiques: Zacheous Mangue Fordindam (Dans l'attente de Polain Abono detache a la PRISON CENTRALE DE Yokaduma)

Ministre des Relations Exterieures:  Gerome Mendouga

Ministre de l'Urbanisme et de l'habitat:  Jules Roger Belinga

Ministre des affaires Sociales: Desire Engo

Ministre du petrole:    Jean Baptist Nguini Effa

Ministre delegue charge de la Gendarmerie:   Edouard Etonde Ekotto

Ministre des Sports et du Fooball:        Iya Mohammed (Dans l'attente de la construction de sa villa au  quartier 13)

  Le reste sans changement.

 Les regisseurs des differents penitenciers sont charges de l'application du present arrete.

 Les elections presidentielles se derouleront selon le calendrier du PR.

why Cameroon might go to hell

 Why Cameroon might go to hell

Dear CC, I do not regret the fact that I was born a Cameroonian. I am only a shame to be proud of being a Cameroonian. How should I be proud of my country that is fast losing its soul? How can I be proud of my country where millions go hungry while a few individuals swim in the wealth that rightfully belongs to all of us?  How can I be proud of my country where elected MPs suddenly become more powerful than those who elected them? Where tax payers’ money is spent consulting citizens just to issue to them a bounced Check which reads “No electoral Code as you thought”?  How can I be proud when I cannot truly fight corruption because the servants are more powerful than the master?

If Martin Luther King Jr. had lived up till today, He would have still preached the sermon “Why Cameroon might go to hell” not because he would have loved Cameroon to go to hell but because our injustices have greatly separated us from God.

But If I were to ask God to give me the choice to choose where I will be born next, I will still choose to be born here because there is a Lot of work to do. It’s a disgrace

sent to Cameroon calling Sunday 16/04/2012

How Organizations Suffer – and Can Recover from the Founder's Syndrome

Founder's Syndrome

How Organizations Suffer – and Can Recover

July 2009

What is "Founder's Syndrome"?

Founder's syndrome occurs when an organization operates primarily according to the personality of a key person in the organization, such as the founder, director, or board chair. Founder's syndrome is a problem when the organization is centered around this key person rather than focused on its overall mission. Dealing with founder's syndrome is a typical problem among small organizations. It is often a natural part of an organization's life-cycle and occurs when people bring an organization through tough times (a start-up, a growth spurt, a financial collapse, etc.). Often these sorts of situations require a strong, passionate personality - someone who can make fast decisions and motivate people to action. Once those rough times are over, however, the decision-making needs of the organization change. This requires mechanisms for shared responsibility and authority. It is when those decision-making mechanisms don’t change that Founder’s Syndrome becomes an issue. Founders Syndrome is no one's fault -- no founder sets out to damage their organization. Staff and board members who avoid responsibility are often also part of the problem. There are actions that founders, Board members, and staff can take to avoid the problems of Founder's Syndrome.

What are the symptoms of Founder’s Syndrome?

The founder is at the center of all decision-making. Decisions are made quickly, with little input from others. No one really seems to know what's going on. In other words, everyone who is NOT the founder is only a support to the Founder. - Planning is not done collectively and any ideas that do NOT come from the founder usually don't go very far. People can even become afraid of the founder.

The board is recruited by the founder, rather than by the board itself. Often they are friends of the founder, who may have been there from the beginning. Staff may also have been chosen due to their personal loyalty to the founder. - The board’s role is to “support” the founder, rather than to lead the organization. They are often a rubber stamp board, having little understanding of the work the organization does. Their commitment is not to the mission, but to the founder.

They are unable to answer basic questions about the organization - such as the size of the budget, the major funding sources, the extent of the programs, without checking first with the founder.

- A casual observer would hear a lot of “I, me, my” in conversation. "My staff..." "My organization..." "My vision..." It would also not be unusual to hear the words, “Because that is how we have always done it.”

- There is resistance to any changes that will result in a (perceived or actual) loss of control. There can be a resistance to new staff or outsiders because they are perceived as a threat. There is a (perceived or actual) fear that the organization will become “something we no longer recognize.” Some may ask, “So what’s wrong with that?” And the answer is simple: If the “founder” is hit by a truck tomorrow, the organization is not sustainable, All the good work the organization has done over the years is in danger of ending.

Positive & Negative Characteristics of Founders:

 Founders are dynamic, driven, and decisive. They carry clear vision of what their organization can be. They know their community's needs and are passionate about meeting those needs. However, founders can also: · Be skeptical about planning, policies, and procedures. They claim "these processes weigh me down." · Make reactive, crisis-driven decisions with little input from others. · Hand-pick their staff. See these people as working for the founder as much as working towards the organization's mission. Count on whomever seems most loyal and accessible. Motivate by fear and guilt, often without realizing it. · Attract board members through personal connections rather than the organization's mission. Work to remove Board members who disagrees with founder. · Have a very difficult time letting go of the strategies that worked previously in the organization, even if they know the organization can no longer function this way.

Am I Really That Kind of Founder?

The following questions may help you search your soul and determine if you are indeed that kind of founder. If you are brave, you might ask those around you what they would answer. You may be surprised at what you learn.

- Can you say (and mean it), “When I’m gone, things will be done differently, and that’s ok”?

- Are you fighting to stay on “for the good of the organization”?

- Can you not envision what your life would be like if you didn’t have the organization to run? Is it part of who you are?

- Are you afraid that if you leave, the organization will change into something that is no longer what you want it to be?

- Can you separate the issues your organization addresses in the community from your own stake in the issues? From your stake in the organization?

- Do you use the words, “My organization,” or “My staff”?

- Do you brag about the fact that the organization "needs" you? Do you also complain about this?

Eventually, most founders realize they must change the way they operate. Many go on to develop their leadership style to the next level. First, they realize they must change from within. They: · Understand that the problems are not their fault -- they're doing the best they can. · Are willing to ask for and accept help. · Communicate often and honestly (this is sometimes difficult for crisis-driven, "heroic" leaders). · Engage in stress management. · Are patient with themselves, their Boards, and staff. · Regularly take time to reflect and learn, particularly about their value in service to others.

What Can Founders Do?

First, if you are the founder of a brand new organization and you are just starting out, build it right. Build it to sustain for the future. Build it as if you won’t be there to see it through its life. The major actions below are intended to help an organization become more stable and proactive. Each organization follows the practices according to its own needs and nature. They are not developed overnight and are never done perfectly. Start simple, but start.

 1) Acknowledge that some day, you will leave the organization. The only way to ensure that your legacy is to acknowledge, right now, that you cannot be there forever. Take that to heart and be conscious of it as you plan for your organization!s future. You will then likely put the needed tools in place.

2) Formalize the vision and values that are at the heart of the organization. Create a working mission statement and strategic plan that will guide both the board’s future decisions and those made by the staff. There is nothing to say that these won't over time. But the core of what is important will remain, and that will be another part of your legacy.

3) Find and accept a mentor outside the organization to help you change your style of leadership. Founder's syndrome comes from doing what's natural for you. Changing your leadership approach may be rather unnatural. Seek and accept help from someone who can help you work out the personal aspects of your eventual separation from the organization.

4) Ensure a community-driven organization. Regularly ask beneficiaries what they need and how the organization can meet their needs.

5) Set direction through joint planning activities. Support the board and staff to carry out strategic planning. Ensure mutual understanding of the organization's goals and strategies.

6) Conduct regular meetings to hear input from staff and volunteers. Develop staff-driven procedures for routine, but important tasks.

7) Delegate, delegate, and delegate! This can motivate staff and volunteers to meet the organization's goals. Get their input as to how the tasks can be completed. Give them the decision-making authority to complete the tasks. Celebrate their successes

8) Guide resources to meet goals. Share management challenges with the Board and ask for policies to guide management. Work from the strategic plan and develop an associated budget to earmark funds.

9) Cultivate a strong finance committee and help them to fully understand the organization's finances and fundraising plans.

10) If you are thinking about leaving, create a succession plan that proactively deals with all the things you (or the board) is scared might happen when you leave, such as:

• Ensuring the link to the community

• Preserving the public image of the organization

• Document the institutional memory of the organization that resides inside your head.

• Continue fundraising and external relationships.

As part of your succession plan, train and mentor someone now who could replace you, even temporarily, in the event something happens to you. This doesn’t mean you are going anywhere soon. You may not be leaving for the next 10 years! But find someone with whom you can share your institutional knowledge. Train them to share the load now, while you still can.

What can the Board do?

Making a change in leadership style is often confusing, lonely, and stressful for the founder. The Board can be the founder's greatest help.

1) Understand and take full responsibility for the role of Board member. Insist on focused Board training to review the roles and responsibilities of a governing Board. Undertake a yearly self-evaluation of the Board to ensure it is operating effectively.

2) Once a year, conduct a key exercise: pretend the founder suddenly left the organization. Who will/can quickly step in? Are you sure? What activities are the staff really doing to carry out programs? In the case of nonprofits, what grants does the organization have to perform against and when report them? What is the cash flow situation? What stakeholders must be contacted? Where are the files/records?

3) Strategic planning is one of the best ways to engage the Board and take stock of the organization. Conduct regular and realistic strategic planning with the Board and staff. Focus on the top three or four issues facing the organization. Although most organizations scope plans to the coming three years, focus careful planning on the next 12 months. Establish clear goals, strategies, objectives, and timelines.

4) Develop a highly participatory finance committee. Too often, Boards are extremely reluctant to face the founder by getting involved in finances. However, troubles with a director's performance are often revealed in financial problems. If a director struggles or leaves, finances are usually the first to become major problems. Therefore, closely review regular cash flow, income and balance statements.

5) Don’t be part of the problem! Don’t take on the traits of the crisis-driven founder and staff, or worse yet, just ignore the issue. Meet consistently and make decisions based on mission, planning, and affordability, not on urgency. Avoid the notion of any quick fixes, such as hiring a deputy director with “people skills.” This doesn’t address the problem and may make things even worse.

6) Help Board members and staff to keep up their hopes through regular communication. Remind each other that the recurring problems are the result of the organization's success and that current changes are to best serve the needs of its customers. Note that staff members' morale will improve as they perceive stability, security, and progress.

7) Support the founder with ongoing encouragement and affirmation. The founder will change to the extent that he or she feels safe, understands the reasons for change, and accepts help along the way.

8) Carefully monitor implementation and deviations from plans. Don't hold the founder to always doing what's in the plan or budget -- but do hold him or her to always explaining deviations and how they can be afforded.

9) Implement performance plans for the founder. Include his or her input. Be consistent with the founder's accountability to implementing the plans or explaining deviations from them. Evaluate the founder according to meeting strategic objectives and to his or her job description.

10) Consider policies to carefully solicit feedback from staff to Board. Establish a grievance procedure where staff can approach Board about concerns if they can prove they have tried to work with the chief executive to resolve these issues.

What can staff do?

Founder's syndrome can be quite stressful for staff. They can lose motivation amidst the continued confusion and anxiety in the workplace. If they've been in the organization long enough, they, too, can become part of the problem. Staff can also play a major role in helping the organization to recover from Founder's Syndrome. However, staff may be in somewhat of a high-risk situation because the founder (who often values loyalty at least as much as effectiveness) may perceive staff actions as hurting the organization, rather than helping it.

1) If you are electing to stay in the organization and try help it to recover, use the organization's structure. That is, communicate your suggestions with colleagues, whether that is the founder or not. Give them a chance to address your concerns. Promptly go to the Board only if symptoms of the problem result in discrimination or harassment of you.

2) Provide various suggestions from those listed in the sections for the founder and Board above. Don't provide all of the suggestions at once. Always associate your suggestions with description of how they can constructively advance the mission of the organization.

3) Don't personalize your descriptions of concerns by blaming them on someone. Always accept your own responsibility in the health of the organization. If you communicate your concerns, be respectful and tactful.

4) Monitor whether the organization is recovering or not. Have you given the organization time to address concerns? Has the organization made substantial changes and the symptoms have decreased? Or, do you see the same symptoms over and over again?

Typical Traits of Well-Developed Leaders:

 Leaders of lasting, well-developed organizations have experienced numerous changes, and managed to develop their organizations and themselves along the way. Developed leaders:

Ö        · Appreciate plans and budgets as guidelines, and realize these ultimately make their organizations more responsive to the needs of their customers.

Ö        Make proactive decisions based on mission and affordability. ·

Ö        Make staffing decisions based on responsibilities, training, and capabilities. ·

Ö        Value board and staff members for their strong expertise and feedback.

Ö        Sustain strong credibility among beneficiaries and the communities they serve.

Who Me?

-          One Founder's Story For me, this issue is personal. I am a founder. Let me write this advice - from one founder to another - as someone who has learned the hard way. Think first about the community, which is why you created the organization in the first place. Have you prepared the organization to survive (and dare I say thrive) without your presence? Can you think of leaving? Would the organization fall without you? If your answer is "no," then you have somehow made the organization about yourself, rather than about the community. This may be difficult to hear - but it’s not about you. It is hard to acknowledge that no matter how much you put into nurturing the organization you founded, none of that really matters in the long-run. The sad truth is that nobody owes us anything for your sacrifices. It cannot be about your emotional needs or the recognition or gratitude you think you should get. The world doesn’t owe you anything for having founded your organization. Once you have "birthed" an organization, it is no longer your baby. Just as it is with your own children, they are their own persons. We can guide our children, teach them, nurture them - but our son or daughter is not ours. Just as it is with your own organization. So it is irresponsible to run your organization as if you will be around forever. It is simply not fair to the organization, nor to those who benefit from the work you do. The only responsible approach, therefore, is to raise this child or organization to NOT need us. Yes, it was your vision that founded the organization in the first place. But as the organization grows, your vision isn’t nearly as important as the organization’s and the community’s vision. Your organization is an amazing gift for your community. But now that it is used and depended upon by others, it is no longer yours. It belongs to the community. Just think, your greatest gift may be by inspiring others to keep your vision alive

Recognitions:

-          The content of this document was adapted from the following websites: http://www.managementhelp.org/misc/founders.htm and http://www.help4nonprofits.com/NP_Bd_FoundersSyndrome_Art.htm

-           

-          This is part of our mission to share relevant resources and information with civil society organizations via e-mails. We hope that by facilitating access to information for grassroots, community-focused organizations, programming for children and families, as well as organizational development, is enhanced. We welcome your comments, feedback and ideas at Christian@lukmefcameroon.org  _______________________________________________   

My Letter to Cameroon Calling Sunday 8 April 2012

Dear CC; While our elected official are celebrating an extension of their mandates for stalling our economic and political advancement with bad laws, my
worry is on how the biometric voters registration processes in Cameroon are being
handled.  Up till date, the Cameroon public is not aware of the content of the terms of
reference for the call for tender nor know where and when such a call was published. A
good process with good intentions poorly handled with poor inclusion of stakeholders will
only bread suspicion and put our electoral process in a Mary-go-round type of system. It
is about time our elections commission understand that transparency of the electoral
system starts with transparency in the work of the commission itself.

Dangers of another sleeping parliament

Dangers of another sleeping parliament

Once again it is becoming more and more evident that this great nation’s development, governance and democratic process may be stalled again by another eventual parliament of sleeping parliamentarians.  Over the last many decades the nation has been unfortunate to have a parliament without parliamentarians.  Almost all bills tabled to the assembly passed with little or no resistance or reason. The parliamentarians themselves for all this while have never tabled a single bill or consulted the electorates relating to any bill tabled before them.  So the role of the electorate seem therefore to end after drinking a few bottles of bears or afufu ( local whisky), accepting a few cups of rice and selling out their consciences and the lives of their children to individuals who careless about the life of the nation other than their selfish individual interest. One of the only bills highly debated in parliament was the bill modifying the allowance of the MPs. So you can now understand what these guys really are.

You will be surprised to know that very few MPs have an idea about the natural and human resource potentials of this nation let alone know which foreign companies are exploiting what resources under what conditions. So if these guys truly represent the voters and are this blank, then we are actually in trouble.

The head of state has said it time and again – action, action – yet the most inactive guys are so closed to him and keep masking themselves as the busy and humble bees that bring virtually nothing to the hive yet keeps the hives noisy all day long.  When ministers are appointed just to keep to some dead principle of regional balance and pay off for singing praises, when MPs are voted into parliament on tribal lines instead of based on ability to deliver, when contracts are awarded based on who chairs the award commission and who knows who, then the head of state is in for real trouble in trying to fight these ills by simple words.

What is the role of the plain cloth police? Is it to identify and victimize poor citizens who are complaining about the wrongs of the state and not paying lip service to the head of state? I would think that it’s about time these guys give way for the head of state to have a first hand knowledge of the national realities.  Tell him the truth even if it pains and puts him on a temporal stress.

I get frustrated more and more and day after day by the reaction of the so called government ministers who even after gaining the confidence of the head of state to be appointed at the service of the nation are so childish and blind to understand the mission of their appointment. “ I thank the head of state for my appointment. I am here to serve him to the best of my ability”  “I was appointed by the head of state and so I serve him and not the Cameroonian people” .  Statements like this are often enough to depose a minister or force him/her to resign.  Yet such statements made by our ministers are often carried away in the wind and nobody cares.  What a free nation!!

Corruption has installed itself as a way of life or as a culture in Cameroon. Virtually on a daily basis we have seen different agencies with the same mission or the same kind of persons formulated to tackle the same problem using the same old and failed tools.  What does it take for this nation to privatize the fight against corruption? After all if very important and cherished state institutions, companies and agencies have been privatized, why not the fight against corruption.  Those who want to make money can join the state in pointing and stopping the corrupt individuals as well as the corrupt processes including our failing electoral system and our corrupt governance processes.

The head of state noted and stated clearly that there were shortcomings in our electoral system and hope to correct that for a better 2012 electoral year. While he is probably still thinking of this, the same body that failed Cameroonian has announced the revision of the electoral list. You may say it’s based on the provision of the constitution. But if our father’s will is in the hands of an appointed heir who fails in every turn and corner of the implementation of that will, we cannot wait and watch as cowards. When the president of ELECAM instead of drawing lessons from what worked or what is good, keep comparing us to other nations where double registration was a problem, it makes good students who want to improve in their academic performance feel reluctant. After all if you are not the last in your class, why bother to be the best! So he tells Cameroonians

As the nation will soon start seeing another round of citizens with no national agenda combing the nation and constituencies for votes, it is about time the Cameroonians and the civil society put an end to all this nonsense by scrutinizing and setting an agenda for the next parliament. 

1. All candidates must address the population in the different town halls in a live debate so that the poor citizens can make informed choices.
2. All candidates must propose concrete agendas with tangible and measurably indicators and milestones. The time for picking and choosing what is good for the population is over
3. All communities (cities, villages) should within the very few weeks and months defined in tangible terms their short, mid and long term development and policy needs that should be signed upon by whichever candidates may need their votes.
4. The youths must understand that no government in the world creates jobs by recruiting into the public service. Jobs are created by generating wealth. Woealth is generated when the business environment is friendly and good enough to attract  investors.  Note that best salaries are paid by the private sector and NEVER by the public sector.  If you need a car or a good house while in the public sector in it’s currently form, then your place is kudingee central prison because you must hence dirty your hands to get what you need.
5. The civil society to lead sector-based action plan and road maps that must be adopted by the different potential MPs should they really want the people’s votes.  Such road maps and sectors include constitutional reforms, agricultural reforms, governance, corruption, trade, health, education etc.  One of the reasons our parliament has been this long without true parliamentarians is purely because these buys are often sent to parliament with BLANK checks so they choose to fill just any amount and any date on its.  This time we must give them filled checks with due dates.
6. The civil society must not allow MINATD to pick and choose who get accreditation to observe the elections. After all if you have built a good new house, you should simply be happing to get many people have a look unless you have a stolen set of chairs installed in there.

When a nation fails to lead its citizens to the Promised Land, the citizens must stand up and lead their nation to the Promised Land.