Robert’s Rules of Order by Henry M. Robert

This short work is commonly known as “the classic manual of parliamentary procedure.” And if my experience is in any way typical, it is casually referenced far more frequently than its principles and procedures are rigorously applied.

As the blurb on the front flap describes:

Even groups which have their own constitutions or bylaws frequently state that procedures not covered therein shall be governed by Robert’s Rules. One might not be able to identify General Henry M. Robert, but almost everyone knows that Robert’s Rules is a standard manual outlining the conduct of meetings.

Something that surprised me is what that outline actually looks like. Here’s one I found on the Internet that’s very similar to the one reproduced in my copy of Robert’s Rules:

Got that? Ready to chair your first session, guv’ner?

Much more useful that this chart and the encyclopedic description of each line that follows is the few places where the General offers some practical wisdom for anyone seemingly foolish enough to go down this road of managing his parliamentary procedure.

The chairman should not only be familiar with parliamentary usage, and set the example of strict conformity thereto, but he should be a man of executive ability, capable of controlling men; and it should never be forgotten, that, to control others, it is necessary to control one’s self. An excited chairman can scarcely fail to cause trouble in a meeting.

Anachronistic with regard to gender, sure, but as important today as it was in 1905. Anyone who has spent any time in association board meetings has undoubtedly seen the contrasting results affected by chairs who meet with Robert's admonition and those who do not.

But there's more:

A chairman should not permit the object of a meeting to be defeated by a few factious persons using parliamentary forms with the evident object of obstructing business. In such a case he should refuse to entertain the dilatory motion, and, if an appeal is taken, he should entertain it, and, if sustained by a large majority, he can afterwards refuse to entertain even an appeal made by the faction, while they are continuing their obstruction. But the chair should never adopt such a course merely to expedite business, when the opposition is not factions. It is only justifiable when it is perfectly clear that the opposition is trying to obstruct business.

Another pervasive problem even today -- factions using the very forms of parliamentary procedure to bend an assembly to its will rather than to its own. Chairs should have none of it, and must be able to master those factions at their own game when needed.

Some final advice from the General:

A chairman will often find himself perplexed with the difficulties attending his position, and in such cases he will do well to heed the advice of a distinguished writer on parliamentary law, and recollect that

“The great purpose of all rules and forms is to subserve the will of the assembly rather than to restrain it; to facilitate, and not to obstruct, the expression of their deliberate sense.”

That seems far more useful to me that the entire Table of Rules. Err you might, but never do so in support of obstruction; only in your efforts to quell it and to allow the will of the assembly to sensibly take form.

+ + +

This post first appeared on Eric Lanke's blog, an association executive and author. You can follow him on Twitter @ericlanke or contact him at eric.lanke@gmail.com.