DRAFT 2016-10-26 Meeting Notes

Date

2016-10-26

Attendees

x

Andi Hindle

andrew at hindleconsulting.com

x

Andrew Hughes

andrewhughes3000 at gmail.com

X

Catherine Schulten

catherine.schulten at lifemedid.com

X

Chris Adriaensen

chris.adriaensen at forgerock.com

X

Colin Wallis

colin at kantarainitiative.org

x

Ian Glazer

iglazer at salesforce.com

X

Kenneth Dagg

kendaggtbs at gmail.com

X

Mehmet Yaliman

mehmetyaliman at gmail.com

x

Scott Shorter

scott.shorter at kuma.pro

X

Shannon Taylor

shannon at kantarainitiative.org

x

Thorsten Niebuhr

tniebuhr at wedacon.net

Agenda

  • Administrative Business
  • ID Pro Timeline reminder
  • Survey Results Overview
  • Open Discussion of Survey Results

Discussion Items

  • 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
      • 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
  • Nominations period closed
  • Stay tuned to the list for Voting information to come soon

Action Items

  •