[⬆⬆⬆... also known as "Industry Standard".]
Why does the SECU Board/CEO appear to have a problem listening to the SECU membership on critical issues like RBL?
😎 Talking down to the membership is not the same as talking with the membership.
- Time to pause and listen harder to members' concerns on RBL?
- How can that hurt?
- Why not explain, re-validate, and confirm your RBL decision publicly?
- Why not share the decision data and invite member critics into the discussion?
- Does the Board believe that the national "PR" on discriminatory lending (as in the video below) will enhance the reputation of SECU?
- Is the Board afraid of being wrong (again)?
- Wouldn't the Board/CEO want to be "d-sure" they're right on this issue? And, avoid another "good faith" retraction snafu?
- What's the rush to ruin a great organization?
... maybe the Board and Ms. Brady need another letter from a lawyer?!
Imagine that can probably be arranged ...
but, wouldn't it be wiser (and cheaper!) to argue "your case" before the membership?
SECU can't afford to lose on this one... all the members will never forgive you!
