Interesting comments to my post "close our office volunteers" a few days ago. The comments you can read in the post . But mine is not a provocation, or a joke tantomento "educational" to the French. It 'really my thoughts, however, supported by decades of experience (not just mine) but colleagues in the field (Susan Ellis and his school first). Far be it from me to dismiss all heads of offices should remain voluntary for the important stages of selection, recruitment, invitation. But not on management and evaluation! My observation is strictly business. Being a volunteer does not mean anything except that you are not paid to do what you do. Being a volunteer does not mean you are good, does not mean that you do not have specific skills that you have no responsibilities, schedules, objectives raggungere, professionalism. Being a volunteer means "work" as is paid to any other worker nonprofit organization. Nothing different. So why relegate them to a children's playground "office volunteers" as if they were different types of classes? You choose and volunteers to enhance what they do, and they are Piazzino where their skills, the need of the organization, the willingness of the clients need support. Enter them in areas of "work" ... In a nonprofit organization, there should be only one type of personnel that is highly motivated to do the work he does, some paid, some nonretribuiti! (VM)