[Chapter-delegates] ISOC Business Plan and Budget - Chapter representation and participation.

[Raul Echeberria]

Christopher:

Just some comments with regard to the Budget and Business Plan.
In my view the Budget is not the result of a Bottom-up process. The Budget is elaborated by the staff and approved by the Board.

I think that the membership should be, yes, involved in the strategic planning process. While strategic planning is also a duty of the staff and is not either a bottom up process, is of high value to have inputs from the membership. That is the process in which be highly involved, not in the discussion of the annual budget. 
The budget and business plan is just the operational part and it is supposed that it should be aligned with the strategic definitions. 

You can so ask why the budget proposal is published before being approved if this is not part of a consultation process and to be frank, I don't have an answer but that this is just for information. It is not usual to do it in other organizations except in those in which due to their bylaws the budget is approved by the general assembly. 

Other thing that is important to remark is that the business plan and budget is just a framework within which the staff has to preform its work. So, the approval of the business plan is not the approval of a complete list of detailed activities nor in any way is a conceptual document in which we resolve the relationship between chapters and the rest of the organization. 

The approval of the budget is not an obstacle for continuing discussing this kind of very important things. 

Regards, 

Raúl 



El 19/12/2010, a las 15:52, Christopher Wilkinson escribió:

> Good afternoon:
> 
> We have just had an extensive discussion about the relationship between Internet Society Chapters, ISOC staff and with the Board of Trustees.
> I would now like to revert to the starting point, which was the role of the Chapters as presented in the Business Plan and Budget, 2011-2013.
> 
> First, a general comment: I have seen on more than one occasion the staff view that <<Trustees are on the ISOC Chapter Delegates list and therefore in receipt of your comments.>> Which reads very much  like <<Thankyou. You have been ignored>>. Frankly, that is not good enough. When a Chapter or a group of Chapters make substantive comments within a consultation, initiated by the staff, then we expect an equally substantive _reply_ either from the Trustees or from the senior staff concerned.
> 
> In addition, to render the internal consultation process more transparent, efficient and constructive, the staff could be invited to provide the Board with a summary of comments received during on-line consultations on each major topic or document, with an indication as to whether these comments have been taken into account, or not, as the case may be. That would have the advantage of ensuring - for us all - that the Trustees know what has been said in the consultation. It would also permit the Chapters to know what comments and advice the Board and staff are receiving from ISOC members (organisational, individual  . . . )
> 
> More specifically, during recent months, I have made several proposals to which there has been no response, to date:
> 
> 1.	Chapter membership of the Internet Society:	 Following a discussion of the Affiliation agreement proposal after the London INET, I proposed that the Bylaws could be amended to provide for the membership of the Chapters.
> I believe that this is being considered by the ISOC Executive Staff. I do not know whether this has yet been considered by the Board. (Contrariwise, if the formal position today is that Chapters are NOT members of the Internet Society, that might go some way towards explaining part of the current malaise.)
> 
> May I recall that I consider that it is quite anomalous that the Chapters appear not to be members of ISOC and even more curious that the Bylaws do not provide for the voting rights of any of the categories of membership, as required by the Articles of Incorporation.
> 
> 2.	Affiliation agreements:	In the light of strong reservations that had been expressed, I had made specific proposals to amend the formal structure of the proposed affiliation agreements, in order to get us out of this impasse. Apart from the matter apparently being still under consideration by the Sphere group, I do not know where the Chapters now stand.
> 
> 3.	Business Plan and Budget:	I have responded (twice) to the invitation to comment on this document, including suggestions for policy regarding the Bureaus and explicit requests for changes in the language relating to Chapters. I note that these have all been ignored, to date, without explanation.
> 
> In conclusion, regarding bottom-up processes:	Some chapters would prefer that ISOC staff would engage in more thorough consultation before finalising policy statements. This is particularly the case when the subject matter has a regional or national dimension. This approach could be applied to underlying policy issues in a timely manner. Clearly, Trustees, senior staff and other ISOC representatives cannot do this in every case particularly where very short third party deadlines are concerned.
> 
> I trust that these matters may be resolved positively early in the New Year.
> 
> With the Season's greetings and best wishes to you all,
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Christopher Wilkinson
> Chair, ISOC-ECC
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Chapter-delegates mailing list
> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates

Raul Echeberria
raul at lacnic.net

Twitter: http://twitter.com/raulecheberria