Clan Leadership

[Craterus]

Give them positions that sound official and important but don't give them any power whatsoever. That's the way to do it.

[Viking]

Ideally, I guess there's only one leader at top. However, there should be someone who you could trust enough to be assistant leaders; one leader and no one else with real powers sounds like a bad idea. Powers as in them being able to add, and perhaps kick, members to/from the clan. If there are no one in the clan one can trust enough to assign to such positions of power, it's far from a well functioning clan.

[TevashSzat]

Yea, make sure there is one leader like everyone said before.

That way, if there is an argument and a schism occurs, the clan wouldn't fall apart as easily.

In my guild wars guild, one officer and the guild master had an argument irl (they were college buddies) and out of spite, the officer kicked everyone lower than him out of the guild and it just basically collapsed afterwards since most people immedietely got into other guilds they had friends in....we were pretty good too, top 200 ranked

[Crandaeolon]

One person at the top with some assistant leaders (officers) works well in casual clans with varying amounts of member activity, but total democracy can also function if the clan is cohesive and competitive.

By this I mean really cohesive - as in, same nationality and some ties in real life. The all-Finn Guild Wars guild (around top 20 for about two years) I was in had a policy of shared leadership and it worked quite well, with responsibilities and assets (like vent servers, wiki, prize conversion to money, contact persons etc.) delegated to members with the time, inclination and ability to take care of these duties. Daily dialogue over an irc channel or vent made it all work.

That way, if there is an argument and a schism occurs, the clan wouldn't fall apart as easily.

Arguments happen in competitive environments all the time, it's just a matter of identifying and dealing with the problems. Sounds like the officer in your example was clearly ill fit to be in a competitive guild, and the guild in general was not solid enough to survive any reformation.

[Decker]

Just hire some thugs to go beat them up in real life... should work... works for Diablo anyways



But in all seriousness, what the others said is what you should do... if you've been around as long or longer, you are inclined to the top position, the others under you... especially the new guy...

[Togakure]

The point about maintaining control of physical assets--the website and forum, information resources etc.--is particularly good advice. If these can be compromised then control is compromised. I've only given control over these to members that I trusted completely.

As a leader you will encourage loyalty and commitment by sharing responsibilities and associated prestige. My preferred method has been to acknowledge others who have demonstrated trustworthiness, solid values, and loyalty over time by sharing responsibilities like moderating, recruiting and training, documenting, and tactical leadership in game--and even administrating as an ultimate perk. As mentioned, the last should be reserved for those you trust completely, else you could end up with destroyed assets if a power contest turns into a war.

Many so-called leaders view others as "tools," to be used to accomplish their objectives. For a group to truly excel beyond the vision and capability of that leader, others need to be free to consider, decide and act for the benefit of the organization. Generally speaking, an executive's primary roles are 1) to be a model leader, and 2) to identify potential co-leaders possessing the right capabilities and values, and provide clearly defined domains for them in which to operate. Then they need to let go, maintaining override authority but only using it when absolutely necessary. In such cases it is very important that the domain leader understands why an executive override was needed. Ideally the domain leader is convinced privately and makes the public decision/announcement so perceived authority isn't compromised.

There is always risk (incorrectly assessing/choosing leaders), but as they say, "no guts, no glory." An organization ruled by a tyrant cannot aspire to the heights possible for a group of synergized leaders.

[LittleGrizzly]

Something to consider of your assistant/co leader(s) do they share the same views as you ? for example they may want more or less recruitment than you do... a higher or lower skill levelas basic to join the clan...

you want someone with relatviely similar views and a loyalty to the clan (shown by years of loyalty 2 months is not long enough to earn that kind of trust...)