The worse offense of the head table I ever saw was when our Superintendent, a special guest at our meeting, was addressing our members and the officers stayed seated at the head table while he spoke. Because of the tight space, he stood in front of the head table (his back to the officers) while he talked. The officers must have thought themselves invisible, because not only did they stay seated instead of moving out the chairs where they could face the Superintendent, but they whispered and interacted through his talk. It was awful.

I agree with PresJim, though. There are often very legitimate reasons why officers might need to confer during a meeting. But sitting side by side makes it all too easy to confer at non-essential times. If your room or tradition or size of group keeps you in a "head table" set up, you have to wrok really really hard to resist the temptation to lean over to your fellow officers and make a comment. Yes, the members in the chairs are doing it, but you are on stage where everyone in the room can see you. And without the benefit of hearing your comment, anyone could assume that little whisper was some snippy comment about the person speaking.

We are a board of 15, so we all do not sit at "That Table". The 4 of us that do are not too comfortable with the idea.
Our other officers are mixed throughout the meeting and we even mix in amongst the newer parents to make them feel comfortable and welcome. We would never want a parent to make an effort to come to a meeting and sit alone.
Our meetings are well attended because we all have one common goal, The best for our children .
I will bring the ideas from the message board to our board meeting next week and l will keep you posted. Thanks for your ideas.

Why don't the officers that need to speak sit with the "audience" but at the "front" where they can just step up to the microphone and be standing so everyone can see and hear them????? I see no reason why they should be required to sit together at a separate table just to be seen. I would assume that the parents, staff attending the meeting would know who the officers. The president, secretary, and treasurer of course would be speaking, any other officers probably don't feel it necessary to be pointed out unless there is a reason for it....

My group doesn't have a "head table", per se, but the Treasurer always sits to my right and the Principal sits to my left.

I go out of my way to try to have a "round table" of sorts (though since we've moved the meetings to the Library it's been more of a rectangle).

I believe that the members of my group do not feel as though there is a clique, though I can see how a "head table" might feed that. The thing is that often I am confering, quietly of course, with the Treasurer during other reports. So I wouldn't want to not have him right next to me.

At the same time many of the other "old timers" spread themselves around. The Fundraising Coordinator usually sits at the other end of the circle. The Volunteer Coordinator sit somewhere else. So hopefully this helps prevent the idea of the PTO clique.

PresidentJim

At our elementary we always made sure our board meetings were done before the folks arrived for the general meeting and then we would just mix in with the people as they came in for general meeting. The board would end up scattered all about the room. Makes for a much more informal feel and eliminates, or at least reduces, the very impressions that Tim talks about above.

Hi emmbrandi (and all) -

Emmbrandi is referring to my email tip that went out this week. (Not getting the weekly email tip? forms.ptotoday.com/pto/emailSignup.html) , where I spoke of getting rid of ahead table set-up where your 5 or 7 officers sit up front facing the masses.

I find that head tables subtly add to a common impression (misconception, hopefully) that leaders are a clique or that everything is run by leadership (group isn't open).

But emmbrandi is right that it's tougher to do in a group where attendance is through the roof (120 at your meetings - wow!). Quick observation: it sounds like you folks aren't really struggling with one of the key issues that this tip is written to address (very little engagement with the masses; very few people involved).

That said, though, it is possible to have no head table at even a big meeting. Up to 40-60, it's usually still possible to set room so that folks are facing each other. Biiig circle/square or even 4 or 5 rows on each side facing the middle (as opposed to 8 or 10 all facing front). And then, no matter how you set chairs, you canalso have your speakers (and even your chair) come up from audience to address crowd (and then return to audience), as opposed to sitting on high at the front.

Key here is that you don't simply want the head table to become the first row. Mixing/mingling is definitely better. One thing that drives members/parents crazy is to see the "insiders/leaders" talking amongst themselves while the meeting is ongoing, giving the impression that the real decisions are being made in the front row or head table.

A big part of growing involvement is sales and impressions. These little things matter. There's a reason why Target's stores are bright and their rows don't feel too crowded. Little things matter.

Tim