[chapter-delegates] New Membership Level

[Jacek Gajewski]

Dear Veni,

Veni Markovski wrote:

>
>  The fact that they are being called "associate members" would not 
> change their skills. It may change their passion, but only to some extent.

We had voices on this list, that for several persons it may change their 
passion by 100%. They simply will go away from ISOC.


> I think we need to build a process within ISOC for better 
> communications between chapters and Reston. We also need to have a 
> process for preliminary consultations on important decisions, 
> concerning chapters. We need to define a process that keeps HQ 
> accountable for all aspects of ISOC activities - standards, education 
> and policy.
>
I fully agree with You, that  this  is very much needed. What had 
happened  is that HQ lost contact with ISOC membership [apart from  Mr 
Sanchez asking for
input to newsletter],  HQ started several actions and worked hard to 
realize their ideas, which they thought should be useful for members and 
chapters. They just forgot to cross-check, if their work is really 
needed and expected by members and chapters. 


> While I may agree or disagree with some of the points in the mailing 
> list, I think we're facing one of the many crisis, but we don't have 
> crisis management - neither chapters, nor ISOC HQ. Of course, in an 
> ideal world, there will be no crisis between chapters and HQ, but we 
> don't live in such a world.
>
Here I don't agree with You - I think we do have a crisis: several 
people expressed their opinion here [I personally share this opinion] 
that mutual confidence between HQ [not BoT] and  ISOC membership was 
broken by a series  of HQ mistakes  and by the lack of  
response/apologies from HQ to their own errors. Everybody can make an 
error, it is human, I fully believe that  nobody at HQ neither wanted to 
insult members nor to create a divide.  But it is normal, that once an 
error becomes obvious, somebody should say at least 'sorry'. In some 
countries, people responsible for management, whose subordinates made an 
error took personal consequences. If I am not mistaken:  Willy Brandt, 
German Chancellor and Nobel Prize Winner resigned just because his 
secratary misbehaved - he was a man of great honour.

But we haven't heard any sorry yet from anybody from HQ...



> I think that me, Patrick and Rosa will raise that question in 
> Minneapolist this coming Friday, but this will be another "ad-hoc" 
> work, without proper process how to handle this. In fact, when 
> chapter-elected Trustees do something like that, this may raise the 
> question about that very fact - since although elected by chapters, 
> why do we raise that problem, etc.

Clearly, the problem should be raised by those who made the error, which 
trigerred all this crisis. They should report what happened, and suggest 
solutions.



>
> I believe that the best outcome after solving the current problem, 
> would be if we build a process of building proper communications and 
> procedures for working with chapters.
>
> What do you think?
>
You are right, the transparent procedures and consultations are needed 
to limit the chance of making a human error.
I keep fingers crossed that your intervention on Friday is 
constructively received.

Jacek Gajewski
ISOC-PL