Actually, USCF was also seeking a Scholastic Director at the same time. USCF was desperate to get that position filled by February in order to have the new SD be able to hit the ground running with his/her first huge task, the SuperNationals in Nashville in April.

The position for USCF Scholastic Director was filled (quite ably, I might add) by Jerry Nash, and I think he came through his baptism by fire OK, as the SuperNationals was a success. Susan of course can attest to that better than I can, since she was in fact there. ;-)

Jerry has his hands full, I am sure. He (officially) reports to the Executive Director, but I can tell you without a doubt that he is going to be pulled in many different directions...too many "special interests" within both the USCF Scholastic Council AND the Executive Board, who will try to influence things directly by pressing Jerry. My sister has had positions similar to that of the USCF Executive Director for years in a couple of non-profit organizations, and she has told me very similar things happen with her from certain board members, etc although they are not officially who she reports to. So Jerry has his work cut out for him...and so would the Executive Director.

As far as the "unprofessionalism" comment for the advertising of these USCF positions, I respectfully disagree. Who better to be involved with the workings of USCF than somebody who is already in the USCF (and by default gets Chess Life)? A love for the game is (in my opinion) just as important as the job requirements proper. The same goes for those who wish to seek election to the Executive Board. It is kind of like the US political system...we elect our own representatives...if they perform well for the good of the people collectively, then they deserve a chance to be re-elected...if not, then somebody else should be elected. Just like our own political system, we need to make the voting constituancy aware of the issues at hand, and, most importantly, GET THEM TO VOTE!!!

A shake-up of the existing Executive Board is just what USCF needs right now.

Regards

--

The USCF leadership needs to put every project and initiative on hold and take stock of itself, its customers and their needs. While financial stability is important, indeed critical, it is still secondary to successfully serving customers. Companies and organisations exist soley to find and serve customers. Everything else is a by-product of that relationship.

It's important to realise that those who are claiming credit for 'saving' the USCF by getting it on a firm financial basis have only dealt with the symptom, not the root cause of the malady. Organisations that obsess about financial statements usually do so because they have no positive business direction, and they imagine that business is about profit and loss. Repeat again: 'Companies and organisations exist solely to find and serve customers. Everything else is a by-product of that relationship.'

Financial stability buys a short window of opportunity for the USCF to figure out who its customers are and extricate itself from the grips of the current balagan. Presently, and unfortunately, this task is well beyond the competencies of the USCF board and staff. The best thing it can do is partner with a strong graduate business school and get down to the business of figuring this all out.

Once they have answered that, the USCF needs to then carefully evaluate its own resources & core competencies. Here the picture is rather bleak as there has been too much emphasis on the board and not enough on acquiring and developing quality staff. Boards exist to advise and set policy, and the USCF board has been overly involved, for too long, in the day-to-day business of the USCF to the detriment of attracting good staff and building a strong organisation.

This is the real challenge as the USCF, in spite of its large membership, has a budget that is roughly the size of a large suburban YMCA. This comparison is telling and shows just how limited the USCF is as a national organisation. With a such limited set of capital and human resources the USCF has to realise that it can only successfully address an equally limited set of customer oriented priorities.

BTW, It is perfectly possible for someone who has no experience with the organisational side of chess to be quite successful in fulfilling any of the staff USCF staff and board positions. The most important asset is to actually listen to customers.

The 'unprofessionalism' that I was referring to was the fact that the board felt it necessary to explicitly state in the request for resumes (quoting from memory here) something to the effect that the, 'Executive Director shall support the decisions of the board and not seek to change them unless the board chooses to reconsider them.'

Geeez, wasn't that the acronym for the secret police under Stalin?

Briefly considered choosing (Lavrentii) Beria for a handle but he met a rather inglorious end in the immediate post Stalin era. (Felix) Dzerzhinskii has a nice ring to it — but alas the name is too long. The Okhrana was the imperial equivalent of the NKVD but somewhat less infamous. For many Russians today the organisational apparatuses and personalities of the Soviet era do evoke ambivalent feelings.

If someone truly objects to the handle I can always change it — however, should we find ourselves on the slippery slope of determining which handles are offensive I suspect we will all quickly learn that almost anything can be offensive to someone at sometime.

Should we will establish a commissariat to determine which handles lack the proper political(ly correct) consciousness and purge them as enemies of the people?

Well thanks for your accessibilty.

Judit had a free and clear path to excel and she took full advantage of it. She works very hard on her chess and she deserves to be the best.

Chancho, muchos gracias!

Her chances is as good as any other player in this event.