When my guild stood up, we began with a team of 4 officers . We started with an even 4-way split and none of us held anymore ‘power’ than another but soon I emerged as the “first among peers.” I had more leadership experience, I had more time as an officer previously and had been raid leading since Black Temple. As the guild grew people responded more to my leadership than the others.
Initially we were just going to do a small private 10 man guild in Wrath, but the guild we left exploded just after our departure and the group felt kind of guilty that we were a part of a lot of good people being left out in the cold without a guild in the middle of an expansion. We didn’t intend to kill the old guild, we just didn’t want to raid there anymore.
We decided to absorb our old teammates and provide them an opportunity to continue raiding. Two of the three other founders looked to me for final decisions as they wanted to help direct the guild, but not the responsibility. We were all from a dedicated raid guild background and “rule by council” was very uncomfortable to a lot of people. Additionally there has just been a huge upheaval and folks were looking for stability and comfort.
A couple weeks into the new guild, one of the founding officers was at odds with every single decision the team made. It was almost always 3-1. He was fairly inflexible and looking back on it now I can understand his position on some things but it wasn’t healthy. Regardless, he quickly become uncooperative and at times acted to make things more difficult.
We added a new officer to round out the roles as we were continuing as a progression 25man guild. The decision of loot distribution came up and in new found freedom from the old guild, a lot of folks wanted to try Loot Council. I was strongly opposed to it as was the other officer I’ve been describing. At the end of the discussions, only the two of us remained opposed so I announced we would give it a shot.
As most leadership teams know once a group decision is made, the leaders should support it equally. With some coaching and initial stumbles, we dove into the new loot method and it showed great potential. As much as I didn’t want to use Loot Council, I was determined to make it work since the guild wanted it. I couldn’t understand why the other officer was so set to make it fail.
As a general rule, I don’t like confrontation. I like my utopian world where everyone does their job or asks for help if they are unable. In this case something had to be done and the climate was a downer on the fun of the game and it was just getting poisonous. I have little patience for people who try to damage the group.
I finally had to put a stop to it and offered him a few choices. He could continue on as a leader of the guild and work with the other officers, give his input, cast his lot, and present a unified front when a decision was made; step down from the leadership position; offer a suitable alternative; or leave the guild. The only option that wasn’t on table was the situation remaining unchanged.
He continued to say that he didn’t know why we ever asked his opinion as we never chose his plans, etc. In the end general consensus between the leadership was that he had incompatible goals for the guild and he simply needed to leave. I hated to ask that of him, but in the long run I believe it was the best for the officers, the guild, and him.
If you ever run across this guy, I don’t know if he still plays or not, he may have a difference of opinion about things. However, there is little growth and change that doesn’t come with some awkward moments or out right pain and suffering. More than two years later, I look back and see that it was right and good to have that discussion when I did. I hate that I had to let him go, but in the end the guild was stronger without his influence. Sometimes being the leader sucks.
