home > publications & resources > knowledge center > article index

Have you ever been at a board meeting and felt you hadn’t been handed a copy of the rules? Have you ever chaired a meeting only to end up feeling like you hadn’t been as successful as you would have liked in moving the meeting forward and keeping order while having everyone’s views heard? If you answered yes to either question, this article on Parliamentary Procedure, submitted by Robert A. Hall, CAE and Executive Director of the American Academy of Cosmetic Dentistry, can help. From outlining the varying motions used to explaining the responsibilities of chairing a meeting, this article can serve as that guide you’ve been looking for.

Many people approach Parliamentary Procedure as though it were some arcane ritual, complex and unknowable—and a little scary, because they might make an embarrassing mistake.

Others treat it as a game of “gotcha,” where their primary purpose at the meeting is to catch the presiding officer in an error of procedure. I once attended a veterans group meeting, where the fellow next to me kept whispering, “Watch me get her on this,” before raising some esoteric point. There were a total of four people in the meeting.

Parliamentary procedure is not intended to be a game of scoring points, nor an impediment to doing business. Nor should it be a maze that is so confusing that the body is unable to do what it desires—the old, “You can’t get there from here” routine.

As a rule of thumb, the smaller the body, or the less formal the setting, the more relaxed the procedure can be.

Parliamentary procedure is intended to expedite the flow of business, to ensure that decisions are arrived at in an open and democratic manner, and to protect the rights of minorities to be heard. Different sets of rules may vary slightly—AACD uses Sturgis (The Standard Code of Parliamentary Procedure), while I tend to view parliamentary questions through the lens of my experience as a state senator. Many organizations use Roberts Rules of Order, where the form may be slightly different. Regardless, there is enough commonality that once you have a basic understanding, you will be comfortable in most meeting situations.

Every professional should have a knowledge of parliamentary procedure, both to participate in and to chair a meeting.

Chairing a meeting

Being an effective chair is an art, and a valuable skill. Everyone called upon regularly to chair meetings as part of their duties should have read—or at least be familiar with—a book on parliamentary procedure. The chair must be seen to be firm, fair and impartial, allowing all points of view to be heard. It’s the chair’s responsibility to put an end to sidebar conversations that are both rude to the speaker who has the floor, and distracting from business. The member who has the floor deserves the undivided attention of the assembly, and it is the chair’s duty to protect that right.

The chair (often called the presiding officer) has the responsibility of recognizing who has the floor. It is desirable to alternate between proponents and opponents of a particular point of view, but not always possible, as this may not be known. It is perfectly proper for the chair to ask if the person wishing the floor is a proponent or opponent. The person who made the motion should be given the right to speak first. Members who have not spoken should have priority over those who have already addressed the body on the question. It is also desirable to recognize a member who speaks infrequently over one who regularly holds forth. The chair may find it helpful to keep a list of individuals who are seeking to speak. Making sure everyone is heard, and all points brought out, while encouraging participants not to rehash the same thoughts, is a delicate balance.

The chair should ensure that the question before the body is fully understood, and to bring out the full ramifications of the motion. The chair customarily does not engage in debate, and turns the gavel over to the appropriate person if wishing to do so. However, this is often ignored in smaller, more informal bodies, especially committees.

The chair has the right to vote, though it is customary in most bodies that the chair only votes when doing so changes the outcome, that is, to break a tie or to create a tie and thus defeat the motion. The chair also votes when there is a ballot vote (but cannot then vote a second time to break a tie). Not engaging in debate or voting except for a tie preserves the sense that the chair is impartial.

The chair makes rulings on parliamentary procedure. This is so even if there is a professional parliamentarian present to advise the chair. However, the body is the judge of its rules, and the chair’s decision may be appealed and voted on by the assembly.

The goal for the chair is to have members on both sides of hot questions say, “Great meeting!” afterwards.

Motions

The business of an assembly is accomplished through motions. Motions have rank, that is, some take precedence over others. Most motions must be seconded, though Sturgis does not require the second to be listed in the minutes.

A motion may be amended by another motion (first rank amendment), and the amendment may be amended (second rank), but the amendment to the amendment cannot be amended (third rank).

Contrary to popular opinion, amendments may be hostile. That is, if the motion is to increase spending for lunch by $1,000, the motion to amend might be to cut spending on lunch out entirely, and that motion would be in order, though entirely contrary to the original motion.

Below are the principle motions that are likely to arise, in order of precedence, and the preferred form. All of these motions require a second, and a majority vote, unless otherwise noted.

• I move to adjourn.A motion to adjourn, as the old quip goes, is always in order. This is not debatable, but the chair should note if there is unfinished business before the vote. In less formal settings, the presiding officer may say, “There being no further business, the meeting is adjourned,” without taking a vote.
• I move to recess for (or until)... A meeting can recess for lunch, to take a break, or until the next day. If the same meeting is to be continued, a motion to recess should be used, rather then a motion to adjourn. For short breaks or lunch, in informal settings, the chair usually just declares a recess, if there is no objection.
• I move the main motion be postponed temporarily. Used when you want to take something else up first.
• I move to close debate (call the question) or I move to limit debate to …. These motions require a two-thirds vote. Limiting debate should be used very sparingly. First, there may be additional facts or arguments the assembly needs to hear. Second, members who feel they have been denied the right to speak may either lose interest in participating, or retaliate, creating needless animosity.
• I move to postpone until ….. This puts the question off to a later time, perhaps a later meeting.
• I move to refer the motion to (a committee). This can be used because more information or consideration is needed. However, it is also used sometimes to kill a motion. In the senate, we called the Ways and Means committee the Bermuda Triangle, as bills were usually never heard from again after being “referred.”
• I move to amend the motion(or the amendment) to….. This is how you change a motion to improve it (or, sometimes to kill it!). It is the second most common motion members will make. Note that an amendment hostile to the intent of the main motion is in order.
• I move to…. This is the way main motions are made, and the principle way of getting business done. It is helpful if the maker of the motion writes it down, both so the minutes will be accurate and so it can be repeated to the assembly for clarity. This is the most common form of motion a member of a body will make. Example: I move to adopt the recommendations of the committee.
• I appeal the decision of the chair. This is a motion to challenge a parliamentary ruling of the presiding officer. This is not often used.
• Restorative motions may be made to amend a previous action, reconsider a previous action or rescind a previous action when no other motions are pending.

I rise to a point of … (If you are feeling very formal!)

• Point of privilege. (Register a complaint, e.g., “Mr. President, there are side conversations and I cannot hear the speaker.”)
• Point of order. (Enforce the rules, e.g., “Mr. President, that motion is out of order as there is already a motion on the floor.”)
• Parliamentary inquiry. (Ask a parliamentary question, e.g., “Mr. President, is it in order to offer an amendment to the motion at this time?”)
• Call for a division of the Assembly (or a standing vote, or a roll call vote.)

The agenda is prepared in advance by the chair, and sent to all members of the assembly. However, the assembly has control of its own agenda, and may add items, change the order of business or delete items. This is usually done at the start of the meeting, but is open to action at any time.

AACD uses a consent agenda (to dispense with routine items quickly), an Action/Discussion Agenda (to deal with the important issues that are the heart of the meeting) and lastly an Information Agenda (for routine reports, preferably in writing to conserve the members’ time). If, however, a member of the body wishes to make a motion to take action on an item during the information agenda, it is perfectly in order to do so. The body may take action when and as it wishes.

Unanimous consent

The Massachusetts Senate had two rules that expedited business. First, a quorum was presumed to be present unless a member doubted the presence of a quorum. That meant the chair and one other member could conduct routine business.

The second rule was that anything could be done if there was “unanimous consent,” that is, if 100% of the senators present agreed. Sturgis calls this “General Consent.” Again, the body can pretty much do as it pleases if there is no objection.

For example, the chair might say, “If there is no objection, we will take the third item out of order.” The phrase, “if there is no objection,” is sometimes called the magic phrase. It allows bodies to get out of parliamentary mazes they have become lost in, correct errors and get things done as desired. For example, “If there is no objection, we will recess and reconvene in the bar!”

And now, if there is no objection, I’m going to end this article and go home.

*****

Robert A. Hall, CAE, the Executive Director of the American Academy of Cosmetic Dentistry in Madison, WI, has 22 years experience as an association executive. Prior to that, he served five terms in the Massachusetts state senate. He can be contacted through the AACD website, www.aacd.com or at bobh@aacd.com.

Top ^
To Articles Index
To ASAE home