...
- Continuing the discussion about the survey results
- Review/reminder of the timeline for the next few months
- Starting today on Slide 18 - Question #1 Principles
- Good support, but high percentage of neutral/negative
- 'Principles' beget 'Practices' - they matter!
- Q: Would it make sense to adopt and enhance something like the OpenStand.org principles: because they seem aligned
- Q: We have the problem of 'lists' - risk of missing important ones that will become exclusionary
- Focus on the 2nd sentence of the principles: "We succeed when members have equal access to opportunities: to learn, to work, to teach, to share and to apply with integrity, best current practice to the body of knowledge appropriate to the relevant societal norms, regulations and industry contexts."
- Q: Instead of 'knowledge' shouldn't this read 'work' instead?
- Q: what if we remove "body of knowledge"
- Q: How do we emphasize 'keep up to date' - is 'current' sufficiently strong?
- ACTION: ACH Post the Q1 thread & updated phrase to the DG list
- Question 4: What should the organization offer?
- Today - initial discussions
- Note that the overall collection of results could be read as opinions of mid-late career professionals - we must take care that we ensure that 'new-to-id-profession' people find the association attractive - other associations 'patch' or 'add on' features for new starters instead of integrating with all activities. e.g. we might reserve a seat on all committees for a <5 year career person instead of having a 'student chapter' function exclusively
- The list will change over time - to adapt to priority and member needs
- "Advocacy" item
- Is this lobbying? Other?
- Is it 'outreach'
- It is about keeping the external communications front and center to help decision makers and other influencers be ready for what is developing in the industry - help to 'mainstream' the newer ideas that are viable
- Need to keep outreach to associations of other industries in mind
- "Standards development orgs" item
- Is this a surprising response?
- This kind of activity allows members to get involved at a higher level than otherwise possible. It lets experts to get more direct influence and advice to the national bodies - good engagement.
- Sometimes standards might make sense from a technical perspective, but do not mesh with business realities. More direct access could help make standards more effective/adoptable.
- Overall: the group feels that the association has expertise that should/could be very useful to standards development organizations and perhaps is not being tapped sufficiently
- Other associations do mappings and crosswalk publications between standards and regulations - to help practitioners to address real world topics
- Today, lots of the public policy work is actually happening above standards work. Being an association could help to influence at the top levels.
- "Networking of Us"
- Online forums for information sharing
- Should these online forums be private to members?
- Yes there should be member-only places
- Yes there should be open-access places too
- Should Vendors be in the same spaces as individuals and builders?
- Yes - for the openness of discourse
- Some vendors could be uncomfortable sharing openly - it will vary
- We could have specific channels for commercial/marketing messages - to inform members/community in a 'safe' place
- We will need a Code of Conduct for any channels that are offered
- Should these online forums be private to members?
- In Person opportunities
- The normal conferences, summits, events
- We must deliberately choose the modes of interaction: for example teaching conferences are a different type of engagement than 'typical' conferences
- Look at 'tacking on' ID Pro meetings to other events
- Online forums for information sharing
- Nominations period closed
- Stay tuned to the list for Voting information to come soon