[Chapter-delegates] On Board Diversity

[vinton cerf]

just a thought: with a moderately small board, one might need to measure
its diversity over time rather than expecting any particular board instance
to show all the desired level of diversity. A kind of rolling 2 or 3 year
view of diversity of the board might be appropriate.

vint


On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 7:39 AM Veni Markovski via Chapter-delegates <
chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

> Thanks, Ted.
> It is good to see that at some level of the BoT (though you said you are
> speaking in personal capacity, I understand it that it's not an opinion of
> the BoT, but your own), there is someone, who is recognizing that this is
> an issue, which could (should?) be addressed.
> See some comments below, please.
>
> On 10/7/21 03:23, Ted Hardie via Chapter-delegates wrote:
>
> I'm speaking on this topic as an individual, not on behalf of the board.
>
> After reading a few of the ongoing threads, I wanted to point out that one
> of the more unusual aspects of the Internet Society's board of trustees is
> the rate at which membership can turn over. Our election processes put 4
> seats up in any one year and impose a limit of two consecutive terms.
>
>
> This is not unusual; it is happening at other Internet-related
> organizations, too.
>
> That means that any diversity that is attained for the board is subject to
> rebalance as soon as the following year, and it means that three different
> groups are responsible for attaining or maintaining that diversity.
>
>
> Correct. However, currently this seems to be the responsibility of only
> one of these groups - the Chapters. There was also a comment by a former
> Trustee (I hope I am not mixing who said it), which could be interpreted as
> a criticism, that the Chapters actually dared to choose 1 of the 4 they
> elect to be from the USA. Such criticism, no matter how delicately (or not)
> is said, has the potential to silence some of the chapters leaders, who
> might feel intimidated, when a person of a certain authority speaks.
>
> All three groups essentially run open candidate  solicitations,  and then
> each runs its own selection.  In none of the IETF cases that I was involved
> in can I recall a balanced set of incoming candidates, whether measured by
> gender or region.
>
>
> That's a serious problem, which the IETF could (should?) address; however,
> based on some comments of people, who are affiliated with the IETF in some
> ways, it seems they don't see this as a problem... at all?!
>
> In the other selection processes I've been involved in, things were
> better, but there were often other differences among the candidates that
> were equal in importance to regional and gender diversity.   Put another
> way, the complexity of managing the diversity of experience needed in a
> board is also significant, especially when the turnover can be a third of
> the total board membership.
>
>
> True; perhaps this can be addressed in the by-laws, so that the three
> groups are aware that they have to make an effort to address at least some
> of the diversity issues?
>
>
> But I think the current system embodies something important:  the
> principle that the constituents of the society select members of the board.
>
>
> This won't change, if the constituents select members, who are coming from
> different geographies, for example.
>
> Once on the board, each member is expected to represent the interests of
> the whole, but each clearly has experience in one or more of the
> constituent bodies which they bring to the table.  They are known to and
> voted in by the chapters, the organizations, or the IETF's delegated body.
>
>
> Correct. However, it may be just a coincidence, but so far all BoT chairs
> have been elected by (primarily?) the IETF-elected Trustees, and not a
> single chairperson has been elected among the chapter-elected Trustees,
> right? It would be interesting to find out why is that.
>
>
> One concern I have is that efforts to create specific targets for the
> board's diversity might end up limiting that principle.  If you assign the
> task to the board to manage its own diversity,
>
>
> The other option is to assign this task to the constituencies.
>
>
> Again, just my personal thoughts,
>
>
> Thanks for sharing them!
>
>
> --
>
> Best regards,
> Venihttps://www.veni.com
> pgp:5BA1366E veni at veni.com
>
> The opinions expressed above are those of the
> author, not of any organizations, associated
> with or related to him in any given way.
>
> _______________________________________________
> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
> Chapter Portal (AMS):
> https://admin.internetsociety.org/622619/User/Login
> View the Internet Society Code of Conduct:
> https://www.internetsociety.org/become-a-member/code-of-conduct/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20211007/55f3ee7f/attachment.htm>