Alternative Decision-Making Models Sample Clauses

Alternative Decision-Making Models a. There may be alternative decision-making processes that are appropriate at times. IC’s must determine which decision-making model is best suited for the issue at hand (i.e.: consensus, majority vote of the IC, vote of the entire staff, adoption of committee recommendations, etc.).
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (19)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Alternative Decision-Making Models. There may be alternative decision-making processes that are appropriate at times. IC’s must determine which decision-making model is best suited for the issue at hand (i.e.: consensus, majority vote of the IC, vote of the entire staff, adoption of committee recommendations, etc.). Determination of the model to be used needs to be made through consensus. The model used may change from issue to issue. Decisions reached by the IC must be collaborative in nature among the role groups participating in the IC process. Collaborative problem solving provides more resources, more diversity of ideas and more social support for the decision Instructional Councils: Considerations for a Successful Collaborative Structure o IC representatives are elected. o The representatives are elected to serve a specific constituency. o The selected representatives constantly communicate with their constituents. o Communication with constituents is focused on giving information and getting their constituents’ perspectives in order to represent all points of view at the meeting. o The IC has taken the time necessary to be clear about: o What decisions it makes and;
Sample 1
Alternative Decision-Making Models. There may be alternative decision-making processes that are appropriate at times. IC’s must determine which decision-making model is best suited for the issue at hand (i.e.: consensus, majority vote of the IC, vote of the entire staff, adoption of committee recommendations, etc.). Determination of the model to be used needs to be made through consensus. The model used may change from issue to issue. Decisions reached by the IC must be collaborative in nature among the role groups participating in the IC process. Collaborative problem solving provides more resources, more diversity of ideas and more social support for the decision Instructional Councils: Considerations for a Successful Collaborative Structure • IC representatives are elected. • The representatives are elected to serve a specific constituency. • The selected representatives constantly communicate with their constituents. • Communication with constituents is focused on giving information and getting their constituents’ perspectives in order to represent all points of view at the meeting. • The IC has taken the time necessary to be clear about: o What decisions it makes and; o How it makes those decisions. • All members of the Instructional Council openly discuss and share all information pertaining to an issue so that the best decision can be reached. • The IC is able to focus on issues related to teaching and learning because there is some other structure or mechanism to address the daily “nuts and bolts” issues. • The IC positions are desirable and there is healthy participation. • Agendas and past minutes from IC meetings are made public. • ICs make meaningful decisions; they are not solely “advisory.” • All IC members are viewed and treated as equals.
Sample 1

Related to Alternative Decision-Making Models

  • SITE-BASED DECISION MAKING A. The District shall provide the training and staff development to support accountability/site- based decision-making activities. Teachers shall be given release time to attend these programs.

  • Alternative Resolution Methods Any time during the grievance process, by mutual consent, the parties may use alternative methods to resolve the dispute. If the parties agree to use alternative methods, the time frames in this Article are suspended. If the selected alternative method does not result in a resolution, the Union may return to the grievance process and the time frames resume. Any expenses and fees of alternative methods will be shared equally by the parties.

  • Decision Making All decisions of the JCC require unanimous agreement of the Parties, with each Party having one (1) vote on all matters presented to the JCC for resolution or decision. The members of the JCC will attempt in good faith to reach consensus on all matters before the JCC. In the event that the JCC cannot, after such good-faith efforts, reach agreement on a matter within the jurisdiction of the JCC, including any adoption, amendment or update to a Co-Promotion Plan within […***…], the issue shall be elevated to a Executive Officer of each of Ambit and Astellas, to seek in good faith to reach agreement on the issue. Solely in the case of a dispute regarding the Direct Marketing/Promotion Expenses or the Indirect Marketing Expenses proposed to be included in the Co-Promotion Plan budget (or any proposed amendment or update thereto) (in each case, a “Proposed Expense Dispute”), the Parties shall exchange written proposals regarding the portion of the budget in dispute in advance of elevating such dispute to the Executive Officers. In the event such executives cannot resolve the issue after good-faith efforts within […***…], then (a) if the dispute is a Proposed Expense Dispute, either Party shall have the right to cause the Dispute to be resolved by expedited arbitration pursuant to Exhibit E, and (b) if the dispute concerns any other issue the issue shall be decided by Astellas, in its reasonable discretion but subject to Astellas’s obligation to use Commercially Reasonable Efforts as set forth in Section 3.6.1 and taking into account the legitimate business issues of Ambit with respect to the issue. Astellas shall provide Ambit with a Decision Notice with respect to such decision, which decision shall be final and binding on the Parties. For clarity, in the event of a dispute concerning the Co-Promotion Plan budget which is resolved by expedited arbitration, Astellas may, but shall not be required to, perform the activities contemplated in its proposed Co-Promotion Plan budget, but the Direct Marketing/Promotion Expenses and Indirect Marketing Expenses incurred by Astellas during the Calendar Year covered by the disputed budget shall only be included in the calculation of the Annual U.S. Profit/Loss up to the amount of the Arbitrator-Determined Marketing Budget (as defined in Exhibit E), and such additional amounts shall be borne solely by Astellas. ***Confidential Treatment Requested CONFIDENTIAL 4. FEES, MILESTONES, ROYALTIES AND PROFIT SHARE

  • Initial Decision Maker The Architect will serve as the Initial Decision Maker pursuant to Article 15 of AIA Document A201–2017, unless the parties appoint below another individual, not a party to this Agreement, to serve as the Initial Decision Maker. (If the parties mutually agree, insert the name, address and other contact information of the Initial Decision Maker, if other than the Architect.) « » « » « » « »

  • Alternative Tenders 12.1 Unless otherwise specified in the TDS, alternative Tenders shall not be considered.

  • Alternative Dispute Resolution Limitations This is a requirement of the TIPS Contract and is non-negotiable. TIPS, a department of Region 8 Education Service Center, a political subdivision, and local government entity of the State of Texas, does not agree to binding arbitration as a remedy to dispute and no such provision shall be permitted in this Agreement with TIPS. Vendor agrees that any claim arising out of or related to this Agreement, except those specifically and expressly waived or negotiated within this Agreement, may be subject to non-binding mediation at the request of either party to be conducted by a mutually agreed upon mediator as prerequisite to the filing of any lawsuit arising out of or related to this Agreement. Mediation shall be held in either Camp or Titus County, Texas. Agreements reached in mediation will be subject to the approval by the Region 8 ESC's Board of Directors, authorized signature of the Parties if approved by the Board of Directors, and, once approved by the Board of Directors and properly signed, shall thereafter be enforceable as provided by the laws of the State of Texas. Does Vendor agree? Yes, Vendor agrees Does Vendor agree? Yes, Vendor agrees No Waiver of TIPS Immunity This is a requirement of the TIPS Contract and is non-negotiable. Vendor agrees that nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as a waiver of sovereign or government immunity; nor constitute or be construed as a waiver of any of the privileges, rights, defenses, remedies, or immunities available to Region 8 Education Service Center or its TIPS Department. The failure to enforce, or any delay in the enforcement, of any privileges, rights, defenses, remedies, or immunities available to Region 8 Education Service Center or its TIPS Department under this Agreement or under applicable law shall not constitute a waiver of such privileges, rights, defenses, remedies, or immunities or be considered as a basis for estoppel. 5 Does Vendor agree? Yes, Vendor agrees

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.