[Chapter-delegates] Ways for the board to move forward if we agree the chapters should have a more active role.

[Dave Burstein]

Folks

Earlier today, chapters at the North America meeting stressed the
importance of the chapter role. Below are two suggestions of policies the
board should immediately adopt. To get this going, I write this personally
but I have listened to many. Most of us have seen the comments on the
mailing list.

Kathy Brown came in with strong support for involving the chapters more
deeply and making ISOC a "bottom up, multi-stakeholder" organization. She's
done an excellent job getting the chapters to speak up. But decision-making
at ISOC is very much a top down system concentrated at the top.

I'm told by a former board member that proposals like this have come up
every two or three years for a decade. There was general agreement but
little action, At ISOC, the senior staff is principled and dedicated to
working cooperatively. That's why I think we can do much better. I
understand it is very hard for those running any institution to yield any
power. It doesn't have to be impossible.

I suggest the board immediately set two simple policies:

First, that staff discuss in depth with the relevant chapters any major
policy move, *before the policy is decided.* (Unless time is very short.)
This is the right way to run the organization. It also will lead to better
policy choices.

Our staff is skilled but not expert in everything. For example, a top
staffer made a forceful policy recommendation that would have resulted in
30-50% less wireless capacity in Kenya. (LTE Carrier Aggregation efficiency
takes some study to understand,) Most of us lack detailed knowledge of the
networks in other countries. The frequent result In an ITU filing, we
insisted on competition as the solution. The context was mostly about
bringing broadband to rural regions that have difficulty attracting even a
single provider. Competition can be great but doesn't work everywhere.

This can be as simple as the staffer involved writing a note to the mailing
list. It would explain what policy changes are being considered and who we
would be working with. A joint effort with the World Wide Web Consortium is
very different from a similar alliance with, say, Jacob Zuma's South
Africa. If people speak up, they need to be treated with respect and the
issues discussed in depth. Most of the time we'll move forward with very
little extra effort.
--------------------------------------

Second, the board should propose that ISOC start immediately on a program
to allow chapters to decide how to spend, say, 3% of the ISOC budget. Jason
made the sensible decision on coordinating this through the new Chapters'
Committee. If the principle is agreed, the details can be worked out
quickly.

I suggest we start modestly, making a $2,000-$10,000 allocation to each
active chapter. The guideline would be to spend the money as ISOC is
currently spending funds on chapter support: events, expenses to F2F
events, web sites, necessary fees for non-profit status, ... These are
expenses that ISOC is often covering today, but with an inefficient process.

It should be accompanied by serious but easy to follow rules
on accountability.  For example, any amount spent above petty cash must be
reported on a simple web form within 30 days and posted so others can see
where the money is going, Someone independent should check the accuracy of
the bank account fairly regularly.

Sure there will be some wastage, but there's some waste in everYthing we
do. Modest supervision should keep it under control.

----------------------
Improvements welcome.

Everyone, including the board, has been in general agreement on deepening
the chapter role.

Time to make it so.

Dave Burstein
(who is separately requesting from the chair two minutes of the time set
aside at this evening's open board discussion.)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20160409/a5521bda/attachment.htm>