A guild without officers

I know. It’s like I can’t shut up about guild leadership lately. But I wanted to take a moment to reflect on what the immediate outcomes have been of not having any officers in the new guild.

Honestly, it’s been great so far from a GM perspective. Yes, we have a few little wrinkles to get worked out, such as figuring out which ranks should have which permissions so that I am not, as GM, stuck with being the only person able to invite, promote, demote, have bank access and so forth.

Small potatoes.

In our short time of being a guild without officers, I have personally been able to really relax into the game for what feels like the first time in years. As an example of how things have been going:

Guildie X points out that if we want to attract raiders, we need to get raid-ready ourselves, poking a little at a few people who haven’t been doing their dailies. In response, Guildie Y goes a bit mad with creating spreadsheets of who is and isn’t enchanted and gemmed and makes a post praising Guildie Z for being fully decked out. (The GM is chastised for having been rather lazy on the enchanting front and ashamedly gets most of her gear enchanted that day.)

Meanwhile, Guildie Y has also seized command of the guild calendar, and nightly signups for heroics or just regular 5-mans to get some more people geared for heroics have proliferated.

I look back on how it used to be, with too damn many officers, all of whom did very little to actually help the guild, preferring instead to treat officership like some sort of insiders club where they could talk amongst themselves in their little clique. I recall making rules and chivying and cajoling and beating my head against the brick wall that was getting anyone else to step up and take responsibility for anything.

I find I much prefer being fenceless and officerless. If I can be a dork for just a moment, it makes the opportunities in Eff the Ineffable seem boundless.

To steal more words from Zel, the officers in WWAB needed incentive to do their jobs. In EtI, we don’t have jobs, but we all have incentive to get shit done.


A guild without officers — 12 Comments

  1. I really like the no-officer method for smaller guilds.

    In my small, very close-knit raiding guild, we don’t have any officers, not really. Everyone is equal in privilege and status, with the practical exception of restricted bank access based on guild tenure to avoid ninjas, of course.

    One person takes control for raids, but that’s more so we have only one person dedicated to Vent directions/call-outs and explaining strategies (plus he’s our most experienced raider). But if he were unavailable someone else would simply step up and do the job.

    I really like this method. We all look after our own gear, monitor our own performance, and no one ever looks at / critiques someone else’s spec or gear or what have you. Now granted, this only works because our members are all dedicated and skilled enough to manage themselves properly, but it makes for a stress-free, totally relaxed atmosphere.

    I do think this would only work with small guilds though, where 10-15 people can organize themselves without someone holding everything together. Still, that sounds like what Eff the Ineffable is aiming towards, so best of luck with it!

  2. Pingback: Tweets that mention Kiss My Alas » Blog Archive » A guild without officers -- Topsy.com

  3. My dream is not NOT hold hands on calendars and such. Officers or not, our guild has the bad habit of not clicking teh little button to look at what’s up. Seriously. Sigh.

    Glad things are going well for you now. You need some goodness in wow.

  4. This sounds like a great idea, having no officers.

    I know my guild is small, we used to be a big 25 man guild in TBC and back then having a bunch of officers was a good idea. However, the officers have stuck around but the size of the guild is not. Having the amount of officers we do for the size of guild we have is ridiculous. Especially when the majority of them do squat other than complain. (But I’m still grumpy after the last few days’ debacle.)

    I’m really looking forward to hearing more about how you guys work it out (and silently sometimes wish it was possible to convert an account from EU to US)

  5. I’ve always chosen my officers not to be a clique, but instead to represent the “cliques” that inevitably form. Having officers from all different backgrounds and passions in the guild help keep it well rounded and you have people to work with when you need to communicate to certain player types. Gosh, it sounds like I run a Republic. Maybe I should divide them into groups and cast votes…I always wondered if Redridge Mountains was a blue or red state anyways.

  6. A poor officer structure where the role is treated as a reward rather than a job seems to be the downfall of so many, many guilds.
    I’ve experienced it first hand (as I expect many have) and it causes so much friction and exasperation it’s untrue.
    I think for a small guild your way forward is ideal – that way people that want to contribute CAN contribute without a) feeling stifled by a ‘lack’ of a title (ie, I’m not an officer therefore I can’t do this sort of thing) and b) there’s no sensation of stepping on toes and most importantly c) nobody is failing to do their job – because such a job doesn’t exist.
    If that makes sense!
    It also gives you a good grounding – should you grow and decide some structure should be in place – to see which people do want to contribute and continue contributing – title or no.
    Good luck!

  7. Pingback: No Officer Chat? No Officer Forums? Unpossible! | Murloc Parliament

  8. Pingback: Guild VS Raid « Looking For More

  9. Pingback: Tough Call: Are your officers carrying their weight? | World of Matticus