It's time to wish Robert and his Rules a fond but firm farewell.
In 1876---1876--U.S. Army Brigadier General Henry Martyn Robert--sorry but I can't help it, Army Brigadier General--and some of his buddies developed Robert's Rules of Order as a process for conducting meetings and make decisions, and we've been using them ever since. What qualifies an Army Brigadier General who bossed people around in 1876 to determine how we conduct business together today? NOTHING.
I guess you could say that Robert's Rules gives a meeting a reliable structure--a way to keep meetings and meeting participants on track. But I won't say that. Instead I'd say that Robert's Rules are designed to deter input, silence dissent, intimidate real people who have a stake in the meeting's outcome, signal who holds the most power in the room, and establishing a division between insiders and outsiders.
If you Google Robert's Rules of Order, you will find pages and pages of links to quick start guides, cheat sheets, summaries "in plain English", charts and diagrams, spreadsheets, (spreadsheets!), illustrations, and lots of pictures of a gavel. I would argue that a meeting process that is this complicated isn't a process at all--it's a scare tactic and a method of tight control and gatekeeping. Not to mention, it's guaranteed to make the meeting dull, dull, dull.
How many times have you felt embarrassed that you don't know the correct way to ask a question, make a point, or offer an idea in a meeting that follows Robert's Rules? After all, we can't all be Congresswoman Maxine Waters (I include the whole clip because it is such a delight, but you will get my point in the first two minutes):
As you can see, the person holding the gavel holds the power.
Robert's Rules are antiquated, convoluted, and confusing. They also discourage participation from the folks that matter most--those whom the organization is supposed to serve. Many public meetings use Robert's Rules to limit public comment--my own school board limits comments to three minutes, and they tell this to each person who wishes to speak. To my knowledge, the time limitation is not directly advised in Robert's Rules, but its framework and norms make it easy to put in place, and enable those with power to stifle input from the people who elected them.
I say we move on from Robert and his Rules and make some People's Rules. There are plenty of ways to facilitate a meeting and get to decisions without all this gibberish. Governance, whether of a city, school district, nonprofit, or neighborhood association should be something that is easy to follow and understand (transparency), welcoming to people wanting to weigh in (constituent-focused), and clear about how decisions are made (accountability). The models that worked in the past, when the people who held the gavel were typically white men over the age of 55, aren't useful in a world being led by the New Majority--young black and brown people who are often women or nonbinary folks. They only make us less accessible, less equitable, and less effective.
Robert, you can sit down now. We'll take it from here.
(P.S. Share alternatives to Robert's Rules in the comments!)