World Board Proposed Motions Q&A for Campfire
Q1. Regarding Proposed Motion 1, if the World Board term of office changes to be two three-year terms, how do we ensure continuity and mitigate the risk of a complete turnover of Board members?
A1. Whilst this is a highly unlikely scenario, it is possible. As Trustees can still decide to run for re-election and serve up to six years if re‑elected, we believe this will preserve continuity, create stability and ensure institutional memory while allowing for agility, dynamism and new perspectives.
Strong onboarding and induction, robust handover processes especially for Chairs of Committee and the Chair of the World Board, our longer six-year WAGGGS Strategy and the continuity of leadership and management from the Chief Executive and Senior Management Team further ensure stability.
Therefore, on balance, we believe it is better to make this change as it will open the door to a wider and more diverse pool of candidates, and we already have experience of successfully running a similar model at regional level. Based on our Governance Review findings and other research, there is strong evidence that it will facilitate the increased participation of young women in governance and help to ensure that trustees are more accountable to our Members.
Q2. Regarding Proposed Motion 2, if the World Board term of office changes to be two three-year terms, how do we ensure continuity and mitigate the risk of a complete turnover of Board members?
A2. We recognise that any change to the size of the World Board must work well for Regions as well as for the global Movement as a whole.
A smaller Board is designed to strengthen strategic leadership and improve how the Board works as a team. For Regions, this can mean clearer decision-making, more focused governance, and a World Board that is better able to respond to regional priorities. Crucially, the five Regional Chairs remain full Trustees, so regional voices are not reduced. In fact, they will make up a slightly larger proportion of the overall Board, ensuring that regional perspectives continue to be central to global decision-making.
With fewer Elected Trustee seats overall, the nomination process becomes more competitive. It will be even more important to ensure that the pool of candidates reflects the diversity of our Movement — including different regions, ages, experiences, skills and backgrounds. This is something the Nominations Committee and Member Organisations will need to continue to prioritise.
Regional representativeness is protected through the continued presence of the Regional Chairs, and the Governance Review has reinforced the importance of strong collaboration between the World Board and Regional Committees. The intention behind this Proposed Motion is not to reduce regional influence, but to create a Board that can work more effectively while keeping regional voices at its heart.
Q3 – Regarding Proposed Motion 2, the rationale cites general governance trends favouring smaller boards. What WAGGGS-specific evidence shows that the current Board size is ineffective? What are measurable examples where Board size directly prevented effective decision-making? How will WAGGGS realistically maintain diversity in age, geography, expertise, with fewer elected trustees?
A3 – Global governance good practice (including an external review by NCVO), WAGGGS World Board self-assessments over several triennia, and feedback from our recent Governance Review consultations (including with current and former World Board members) have all identified challenges linked to Board size. These include impact on team cohesion, the capacity of the Chair’s Team and senior staff to engage effectively with all Board members, and the timeliness and effectiveness of decision-making.
Within WAGGGS specifically, several consistent patterns illustrate how the current World Board size can constrain effectiveness:
Prolonged decision-making timelines, with patterns of agenda items being curtailed or deferred due to limited time in meetings.
Variable participation in discussions, reflecting the practical challenges of large-group meetings where it is harder to maintain focus and ensure meaningful contributions from all members. For example, with 17 Board members, if each speaks for just two minutes on a single agenda item, over 30 minutes is used before discussion and responses begin—limiting the Board’s ability to fully engage with all its diverse perspectives.
Challenges maintaining consistent engagement and shared accountability across a globally distributed group, including meeting attendance and meaningful role allocation.
High coordination and management demands for senior staff and the Chair’s Team, which reduce agility in responding to emerging issues.
Based on this evidence, the World Board believes that reducing its size from 17 to 13 strikes the right balance – maintaining a representative, diverse and inclusive trustee board, while strengthening accountability, enabling time for deeper, more strategic discussion and real collective ownership and leadership. We believe this is the appropriate size to enable us to meet our future needs and respond in an agile way to future challenges.
Representation, diversity, and youth participation remain at the heart of WAGGGS. As Elected Trustees will continue to be chosen democratically at World Conference, the World Board is confident that Member Organisations will continue to nominate and elect candidates who reflect the Movement’s global diversity in age, geography, and expertise. In addition, maintaining Regional Chairs on the World Board guarantees representation from across all our five Regions. In addition to the World Board, there are also around 60-70 volunteers on the Board’s nine Sub- Committees, who play a valuable role in bringing Member perspectives to decision-making and make significant contributions to our governance at WAGGGS. The World Board is committed to continuing to promote diversity in all forms amongst its sub-Committees too, following on from Motion 8 at the 38th World Conference.
Q4. Regarding Motion No. 2, what are the positive and negative impacts for the Regions in relation to this Motion? Particularly in terms of representativeness.
A4. A smaller Board is designed to strengthen strategic leadership and improve how the Board works as a team. For Regions, this can mean clearer decision‑making, more focused governance, and a Board that is better able to respond to regional priorities. Crucially, the five Regional Chairs remain full Trustees, so regional voices are not reduced. In fact, they will make up a slightly larger proportion of the overall Board, ensuring that regional perspectives continue to be central to global decision‑making.
We acknowledge that we will need to continue to ensure that the pool of candidates reflects the diversity of our Movement — including different regions, ages, experiences, skills and backgrounds. This is something the Nominations Committee and Member Organisations will need to continue to prioritise.
Regional representativeness is protected through the continued presence of the Regional Chairs, and the Governance Review has reinforced the importance of strong collaboration between the World Board and Regional Committees. The intention behind this motion is not to reduce regional influence, but to create a Board that can work more effectively while keeping regional voices at its heart.
Q5. Regarding Proposed Motion 3, isn't it better to have a co-opted member without a vote so that they can be more objective and impartial with the advice they are offering to the World Board in their specialist area?
A5. Through Proposed Motion 3, the World Board is proposing a limited and exceptional provision: the ability to co-opt up to one additional World Board member with voting rights, only when a clear gap in skills, experience, or perspective has been identified. This is not a routine practice, nor a move away from elected leadership. It is a targeted tool to strengthen the Board’s effectiveness when it would otherwise be constrained.
However, the World Board strongly believes this Co-opted member should have voting rights. This will enable them to make a stronger contribution as they will share full collective responsibility for decisions, not just offer advice from the perspective of a non-voting member. Furthermore, historically, the co-opted member role has been linked to the Treasurer role, which is one of the most critical roles on the board, not an advisory one.
We do not believe that voting rights would reduce objectivity – in fact, we feel that they would ensure greater accountability. This is because the co-opted member will need to apply their expertise within the same governance framework and set of legal responsibilities as everyone else on the World Board as a charity trustee.
Having a non-voting co-opted member risks creating two tiers of World Board members and would limit full and equitable participation in shared decision-making. We believe that the option to co‑opt one additionalWorld Board member with voting rights enables the Board to respond in an agile, effective way to emerging issues and challenges, whilst still preserving the democratic foundation of the World Board.
Q6. What are the World Board trying to achieve with Proposed Motion 4?
A6. This Proposed Motion proposes a strategic change to Regional Committee election timings.
Proposed Motion 4a allows us to hold more than one Regional Conference in a triennium. This means we could formally recognise the Regional Gatherings at World Conference as Regional Conferences, as well as keeping the existing Mid-Triennium Regional Conferences.
Proposed Motion 4b moves the election of Regional Committees from Mid‑Triennium Regional Conferences to the Regional Conferences at World Conference.
We believe this change would lead to four main benefits for MOs, Regions and the Movement as a whole:
The World Board and Regional Committees would start their mandates together, within the same triennium. This would help build a stronger sense of “One Team”, with shared goals and strong momentum. For the World Board, it would also remove differences between different ‘types’ of members which can create practical and symbolic distinctions that make collective leadership harder.
Induction and onboarding for the Board and Regional Committee members would be more focused and effective, enhancing for cross-Regional learning and create stronger conditions for collaboration.
Having one election process per triennium would be more streamlined for everyone and would also give nominees more flexibility to choose where they can contribute most effectively.
Regional voice will be strengthened as there would be more time and space at Mid-Triennium Regional Conferences to focus on what matters most to Member Organisations. That is, shaping regional priorities, sharing learning, building connections, and influencing global strategy from the Membership upwards, through meaningful discussions and consultation.
If approved, we are committed to reviewing and evaluating the new approach and reporting back to Member Organisations.
An added benefit of changing election timings is that it would support us to achieve complete alignment in our 12-6-3 planning cycle, as intended when the World Board first approved this model. Currently, Regional and Global action plans are offset by one year. Aligning them improves cross-team planning and coordination, makes budgeting clearer, and ensures that regional priorities are visible and actively shaping global decision-making from the start of each triennium - rather than being developed mid-cycle.
This Proposed Motion does not have a direct impact on operational planning cycles as no Constitutional change is required to change them. However, we believe moving the Regional Committee elections would make planning cycle alignment even more effective and impactful, as well as bringing other benefits,
Q7. Regarding Motion No. 4.B: How would the participation and voting of Member Organisations be regulated and ensured? Will online participation be made possible? In this case, please place particular emphasis on funding to ensure the participation of Delegates and Observers. How do we maximise participation of MOs in World Conferences if Regional Committee elections will take place during them?
A7. Ensuring fair, accessible participation and voting for all Member Organisations is central to how we plan and deliver governance events.
Online participation is currently possible in exceptional circumstances. Proposed Motion 5 would make this easier, so that remote participation becomes a more accessible option for MOs who face barriers to travel. We strongly affirm the value of meeting in person — it is vital for relationship-building, shared learning and Movement cohesion — but we also recognise that circumstances sometimes prevent this. Providing an alternative route to participate is therefore essential to ensuring broad and diverse representation.
We now have strong practical experience with hybrid and online voting. Regional Conferences in 2025 used hybrid voting successfully, and the World Conference in 2021 and the EGM in 2024 relied entirely on online voting. We will be using these systems again at this World Conference. These platforms include robust verification processes to confirm voting rights, maintain quorum and ensure that each MO’s vote is counted accurately, whether cast in person or online. We have systems in place that are secure, tested, and we are continually improving based on experience.
Research into the barriers MOs face in attending governance events has already informed the operational planning for this World Conference and has shaped the Governance Review. The main recommendation — reinforced by the 2025 Regional Conference Evaluation — was that WAGGGS should adopt a hybrid model for governance activities to enable the broadest participation.
Alongside this, we already provide a range of mechanisms to support in‑person attendance, including:
- differentiated fees based on wealth band and age range
- grants for event fees and travel
- visa support
- solidarity funding, with an easy mechanism on the WAGGGS website for contributions
- close work with Host MOs to identify cost‑effective and inclusive delivery models
- and practical support such as group visa applications, organised airport transfers and varied accommodation options.
We will continue to support MOs to attend physically with grants and advance notice of events so that they can budget, fundraise, and plan travel more effectively.
We also think it will be important in future for MOs to think strategically when voting on hosting location for events to maximise accessibility. We would also encourage MOs to consider ways they can support each other to participate fully too. We are committed to continually monitoring and evaluating each governance event, including the impact of different participation methods.
Looking ahead, access to governance events for the widest range of MOs will remain a key consideration in future funding decisions, so that financial, visa or logistical barriers do not prevent representation. At the same time, we will continue developing hybrid tools and mechanisms that enhance accessibility and inclusion, enabling more Member Organisations to engage, contribute meaningfully and vote — whether attending in person or participating remotely.
Q8. Regarding Proposed Motion 6, what are the implications of adding in the word territory to the Constitution?
A8. The inclusion of the word territory within WAGGGS’s Constitution and Bye-Laws is only for the purposes of defining eligibility for WAGGGS membership and does not imply political recognition or a position on sovereignty status.
The WAGGGS Membership Policy already includes definitions of country and territory. Full Membership of WAGGGS has already been approved by World Conference for five Member Organisations that meet the policy’s definition of a territory – that is, a geographical area subject to the sovereignty, control, or jurisdiction of a state or other entity. Therefore, this Proposed Motion is intended to align the Constitution and Bye-Laws with historical and current practice, recognising that Full Membership has been approved various territories by World Conferences over the past fifty years. The World Board does not feel that there are significant implications of this decision,
However, we have approved an update to WAGGG's Membership Policy to set out the measures that need to be in place if territories which fall within the geographic, constitutional, or operational remit of an existing Member Organisation wish to be considered for independent membership of WAGGGS, The Policy now clarifies this is only possible if:
- The recognised Member Organisation in that country provides explicit written support; and
- WAGGGS is satisfied that such consideration would not undermine the unity, stability, or effective functioning of the existing Member Organisation or the Movement as a whole.
More generally, the Policy also clarifies that the World Board retains the right, at its sole discretion, to decline or defer entry into the membership process for any country or territory, where it determines that:
- The Proposed Member Organisation would not be operationally, financially, or structurally sustainable;
- Recognition would place a disproportionate demand on WAGGGS’ resources; or
- Proceeding would likely have a negative impact on an existing Member Organisation.
The World Board believes that these Policy additions provide appropriate further clarity and assurance on the rigorous assessment process for membership requests from territories.
Q9. What research about participation in governance events has informed the World Board’s proposals?
A9. The World Board has taken into consideration a wide range of research and evidence, including the results of previous governance research, our recent Governance Review, evaluations of previous Governance events, including the 2025 Regional Conference evaluation, 2024 Extraordinary General Meeting and 2023 World Conference. We have also considered the results of research undertaken by the Governance Committee and presented to the World Board into possible formats for future World Conferences.