Policy Council Winter Email Meeting Discussion (IV)
From: List for System Dynamics Society Policy Council Members on behalf of Henk Akkermans
Sent: Fri 15/02/2008 7:03 a.m.
To:
Subject: Re: 2010 Conference
Dear everybody:
I understand Bob and Brian's point. However, it comes across to this Dutchman as a bit arbitrary, or one might even say imperial "divide et impera". Twice in Japan, yes, but once in Tokyo and once in Kyoto. Twice in Holland, yes, but once in Utrecht, once in Nijmegen. Many, many times in the US, but not always in New England and then not always, but repeatedly, in Boston. Three times in the UK, but once in Sterling, once in London, once in Oxford. Or is that once in Schotland and twice in England? Anyway, as I said, it appears to me to rather arbitrary to choose between cities, regions, countries or even continents. The main thing is not procedural justice but what is best for the Society, I think.
I fully realize there is no arithmetic solution to this luxury choice, but feel tempted to speak up for my far-away love, as one should, on Valentine's day, perhaps.
Fond regards, to everyone,
Henk Akkermans.
Op 14-feb-2008, om 17:58 heeft Brian Dangerfield het volgende
geschreven:
Colleagues:
I find Bob Cavana has jumped ahead of me but I will re-iterate his points!!
We have had a conference in Japan once before. So, despite the journey time from the airport (to be weighed against the other advantages of a one-stop location and relative cheapness), I am inclined to suggest we try Korea this time.
Best from a UK with 14-16 deg temps mid-Feb.
Brian.
Brian Dangerfield
Professor of Systems Modelling &
Executive Editor, System Dynamics Review
Salford Business School
University of Salford
Faculty of Business, Law & The Built Environment
Maxwell Building
The Crescent
Salford M5 4WT
U.K.
Tel: (44) 161 295 5315
Fax (44) 161 295 4947
-------------------------------------------------
David W. Packer
Systems Thinking Collaborative
7 Chestnut Ln., Bedford, MA 01730
781.275.4056
www.stcollab.com
Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2008 18:52:05 +0100
From: Lars Weber <
Organization: BTU Cottbus
Subject: Conference 2010
Dear everyone,
I am new in the PC and I just would like to add some comments from my side.
I do absolutely agree with the strategic focus of conferences and I think this should go along with our financial aspects. I see the financial part as an hygienic factor to sustain our health of the society but the strategic one is superior. We have to keep in mind to "invest" in our future. So far so good and I hope most of you would agree. I feel that under these two aspects we have separate policies to fulfill these:
As I told that I am new I don't know much about the financial aspects of the past conferences, but to calculate a net gain or a net loss it would be still revenues minus costs. Economically we have to ask ourselves as sd-people: What are the dynamic factors that change this equation? One that comes instantly in mind are the fixed costs for the location. As far as I understood Korea would be cheaper than Japan. There might some other additionally costs as well. In my view the "dynamic" and therefore unknown factor are the revenues. The important factor here are the sponsorships and the members who will attend the conference.
Who would come to which conference? Well, as some of you mentioned the Korea Conference would be cheaper and could attract more Asian members. I would add that in this case the unknown location for Non-Asians and the long and exhausting travel could lead to an significantly decline in attendants from other regions. Kyoto would as pointed out not favor to many Asians, but there would be probably more members outside Asia who would like to take the opportunity to visit Japan. The question is now: Which effect dominates? I can't answer this from Europe but maybe we get an good feeling for this - without being too scientific - by looking into old conference folders.
Apart from this economic perspective I would like to add another point. What do we think is better for an growing and connected society: a conference where would be a lot of Asian members and less from the rest of the world or an conference where we have a good mixture. I might be wrong but I had in Nijmegen two years ago the impression that a lot of Americans could not make it to the conference and it was a very European one. But I had the feeling in Boston 2005 and 2007 that there were a lot of Non-Americans, too. So, for the need of connection outside our home country I would prefer a good mix of people instead of dominating one group.
I agree with Martin about how the society could grow. I see that in that way, that a conference is the second step in a sd-member life cycle. It should bring people together and enable exchange of ideas. The first contact with sd comes probably from something different. So we should not expect to get a huge impact on memberships just by the conference or the location. Its more that it could strengthen the connection between the members and the society.
Summing this all up, I would prefer Kyoto by head and heart. Main reasons are - shorter travel time, attracting more sd-members outside Asia, better mix of regions. Unknown is still the financial point, as I explained above.
All the very best from Cottbus
Lars
Dipl.-Kfm. Lars Weber
Research and Teaching Assistant
BTU Cottbus
Faculty 3
Chair of Macroeconomics
Erich-Weinert-Strasse 1
03046 Cottbus
Germany
Building 10 / Room 417g
phone: +49-355-693967
fax: +49-355-693924
e-mail: mailto:lars.weber@tu-cottbus.de
www: http://www.wiwi.tu-cottbus.de/vwl1-makro/
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 11:08:17 -0500
From: System Dynamics Society <
Subject: Message from Mike Radzicki/Slate of Candidates
Dear Colleagues:
Here is the 2009 slate of candidates from the Nominating Committee. This time around we utilized several unprecedented procedures for identifying and selecting candidates for officers and positions on the PC. First we expanded the size of the Nominating Committee to six
persons in order to get a broader and more diverse set of opinions regarding officers and PC membership. The Committee this year consisted of myself, Jim Lyneis, Qifan Wang, Ozge Pala, Yaman Barlas, and Deb Campbell. Jim, Qifan, and I served ex officio as President-Elect, President, and Past President respectively.
Second, we instituted a new form, both web-based and paper, that allows Society members to suggest people for consideration by the Committee. It also allows members to volunteer for unofficial service to the Society. Although the form was modestly used this time around, we think it will become a widely-used instrument in the future. Moreover, despite its modest use, the form was quite helpful to us for identifying people we would not have previously considered.
Third, we created a "master list" of people who, in principle, can be considered each year for membership on the PC and/or for an officer's position. Although in any given year the Committee may wish to emphasize certain aspects of diversity and, as such, some people on the master list might not be considered "hot candidates," their names will remain on the master list and, in subsequent years, they might very well show-up at the top of the voters' preference schedules.
Fourth, we instituted the Borda Count method for voting by members of the Committee ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borda_count; http://www.ctl.ua.edu/math103/voting/borda.htm#The%20Borda%20Count%20Method). This method allows each member's entire preference schedule to be integrated into the voting process simultaneously. Although Borda voting takes some effort by each Committee member, it is an interesting way to reach a consensus and allows each member's views to be formally incorporated into the process.
Long story short is that, although we were far from perfect, I believe that we were the most inclusive, thorough, and scientific Nominating Committee in the history of the Society. I'd like to publicly thank my fellow Committee members for their service over the last four months.
Cheers.
Mike Radz
Past President & Chair, Nominating Committee
System Dynamics Society
President-Elect: Rogelio Oliva
VP Electronic Presence: Bob Eberlein
VP Publications: Deborah Andersen
VP Member Services: Krys Stave
Secretary: Brad Morrison
PC 1: Susan Howick
PC 2: Birgit Kopainsky
PC 3: Agata Sawicka
PC 4: Aldo Zagonel
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 20:05:32 -0500
From: James Lyneis <
Subject: Motion 104 Withdrawn
Dear Policy Council Members and Other Interested Parties,
Motion 104 regarding award presentation guidelines at the annual conference has been withdrawn. A number of concerns were raised in response to the motion that require further consideration by the Awards Committee. We will likely revisit the issues at the Summer Policy Council Meeting.
Sincerely,
Jim Lyneis
President
James M Lyneis
PO Box 121
Weston, VT 05161
(802) 824-4219
Dear Policy Council Members and Other Interested Parties,
Motion 104 regarding award presentation guidelines at the annual conference has been withdrawn. A number of concerns were raised in response to the motion that require further consideration by the Awards Committee. We will likely revisit the issues at the Summer Policy Council Meeting.
Sincerely,
Jim Lyneis
President
James M Lyneis PO Box 121 Weston, VT 05161 (802) 824-4219
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 14:45:06 -0800
From: Deborah Campbell <
Subject: Motion to formally accept International and Intra-national Conflict SIG
Moved by Deborah Campbell that the International and Intra-national Conflict (IINC) Special Interest Group be formally accepted into the System Dynamics Society. This motion has been formally made on the PC voting website and needs a second. The rest of this email message has also been uploaded to the Policy Council menu as a background report on the motion.
The primary goal of the proposed IINC SIG is to link together those SD researchers with an interest in building models of international and intra-national conflict, including such topics as e.g. wars, balance-of-power negotiations, insurgencies, and terrorism. There has been a great deal of work in quantitative models of international relations and political science relating to this area. However, with few exceptions, these models exclude feedback dynamics, limiting their explanatory power.
Hence, we would like to leverage the SIG to build a critical mass of SD researchers interested in this area to: (1) promote dissemination of new SD work in the area of conflict modeling throughout the SD community; (2) help bridge the gap with researchers from other fields interested in these topics; and (3) more effectively influence policy makers.
Twelve members have signed on and two people (Ed Anderson and Len Malcynski) will serve as the leaders of the group, responsible for reporting to the Policy Council.
The six Society members (all in good standing) who have confirmed by email that they would like to form the IINC SIG are:
1. Ed Anderson
2. Len Malcynski
3. George Backus
4. Tarek Abdel-Hamid
5. David Ford
6. Rogelio Oliva
Discussion by all is of course encouraged and appreciated on the PC Listserv. Please send comments, questions and discussion items to the Policy Council Listserv at
Discussion will continue until voting begins on Feb 28.
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 15:57:17 -0800
From: Deborah Campbell <
Subject: Athens 2008 -- risk management?
Hi all,
I sent an email a week or so ago, asking for an update on our risk management plans for Athens, since the same concerns we had as a governing body last summer seem to be cause for concern still. I have not seen any response.
Would someone please speak to what the plans are to address the concerns still outstanding for Athens (including increased room cost for attendees and lack of committed financial sponsorship, to name two I remember off the top of my head)?
Thanks,
Deb
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 20:48:00 -0500
From: James Lyneis <
Subject: Status of Motions
Dear Policy Council and Other Interested Parties,
As of Friday 21/2/2008, we will have one week remaining in this second electronic session of the Winter Policy Council Meeting. Three new motions have been added to the Policy Council Menu concerning (1) the 2010 conference site, (2) the Nominating Committee Slate of Candidates for 2009, and (3) appointments to the Awards Committee. Please review these motions and supporting documents, and initiate any further discussion and voting before the meeting closes on 29/2/2008. Thank you.
Jim Lyneis,
President
Status on motions:
VOTING IS OPEN FOR:
Motion #103: Revise Policy 9 Society Policies Re: Duties of Award Committee by James Lyneis, seconded by Robert Eberlein (voting closes 2008.02.27)
VOTING WILL OPEN 2/22/2008 FOR:
Motion #105: Hold the 2010 international conference in Korea by Andreas Groessler, seconded by James Lyneis (voting closes 2008.02.29)
Motion #106: Slate of Candidates to take office in 2009 by Michael Radzicki, seconded by Bob Eberlein (voting closes 2008.02.29)
Motion #107: Appointments to Awards Committee by James Lyneis, seconded by Bob Eberlein (voting closes 2008.02.29)
VOTING IS CLOSED FOR:
Motion #100: APPROVED: Disband Non-operational Ad Hoc Committees by David Andersen, seconded by Robert Eberlein. Yes: 21/No: 0/Abstain: 0/Did not vote: 4
Motion #101: APPROVED: Approval of the 2007 Summer Policy Council Meeting Minutes by Robert Eberlein, seconded by David Andersen. Yes: 21/No: 0/Abstain: 0/ Did not vote: 4
Motion #102: APPROVED: Increase Budget for Journal Support by Robert Eberlein, seconded by David Andersen. Yes: 20/No: 0/Abstain: 0/ Did not vote: 5
Motion #104: WITHDRAWN: Award presentations guidelines at the annual conference by James Lyneis, seconded by David Andersen
James M Lyneis
PO Box 121
Weston, VT 05161
(802) 824-4219
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 10:25:23 +0800
From: qfWang1701 <
Subject: Re: Motion to formally accept International and Intra-national Conflict SIG
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 08:57:38 +0100
Reply-To:
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Andreas_Gr=F6DFler? <
Subject: Conference 2010 : 090004090803030406050705"
I'm not sure whether my original message was delivered - apologies if you received this twice...
Dear Members of the Policy Council,
We would like to thank everyone for the input on both the specific choices for 2010 and the conference site selection process in general. Given the big part the annual conference plays in the overall activities of the Society it is appropriate to charge the site selection committee with developing a longer term plan. The suggestion that the committee should develop specific proposals rather than attempting a competitive bid process is also something that needs consideration.
For 2010 we continue to find both the Japanese and Korean proposals to be highly attractive, and the comments that have been made on the two proposals underscore that point. All of the points that have been made do seem sensible, though it is also true that some are probably of more importance than others.
Based on our study of the proposals, the discussion in the face to face
meeting, and the discussion by email we are recommending that Korea be selected to host the 2010 meeting and are putting forth a motion to that effect. The primary considerations that swayed us toward the Korean proposal were the simpler logistics of organizing within a hotel setting and the lower costs, both to the Society and to conference attendees.
The fact that both China and Japan have hosted a conference, while Korea has not yet done so was also part of our consideration. Though the Chinese conference predated the Chinese Chapter, we do see some value in reaching out to different Chapters as potential conference hosts.
Voting on this motion will open on February 22nd, and close on February 29th. Continued discussion on this, or any other open motion, is of course welcome.
Best regards,
Andreas Groessler
VP Meetings
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Dr. Andreas Größler
Associate Professor
Nijmegen School of Management
Radboud University
Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 09:25:53 +0100
Reply-To:
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Andreas_Gr=F6DFler? <
Subject: Re: Athens 2008 -- risk management?
In-Reply-To: <004c01c874e5$7d859b60$0301000a@fortuna: 080605050608070004060900"
Hello Deb,
as far as I understand, the situation is the following (and I would ask Roberta to add or correct, if wrong):
- room cost for attendees: room prices are fixed at an rather high level, admittedly. I don't think there is any chance to re-negotiate this, but when Roberta is in Athens in April, she will check for second option hotels nearby. The Greek team has signalled that there is no other appropriate hotel available, which could be used as a conference hotel.
- sponsorship: this will be one of the main topics of Roberta's talks in Athens next month. The Greek team still seems to be optimistic about this, claiming that it is quite usual that you can find sponsorship just now, that the new year has started... However, I don't know about any new and substantial sponsorship confirmation.
- exchange rates: again, rather unfortunate for people from the US when it comes to hotel room rates, but nothing that can be done (at least, registration fees and flights can be paid in USD).
- communication with local team: has been slightly difficult in the past, but it seems that the situation has improved recently, with Brian and Nikos doing their best to strengthen communication channels.
Best,
Andreas
Deborah Campbell schrieb:
Hi all,
I sent an email a week or so ago, asking for an update on our risk management plans for Athens, since the same concerns we had as a governing body last summer seem to be cause for concern still. I have not seen any response.
Would someone please speak to what the plans are to address the concerns still outstanding for Athens (including increased room cost for attendees and lack of committed financial sponsorship, to name to I remember off the top of my head)?
Thanks,
Deb
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 10:06:41 -0500
From: Bob Eberlein <
Subject: Re: Status of Motions
In-Reply-To: <029301c874f4$fde3b4e0$
Hi Everyone,
Just a follow up on Jim's reminder that there are now 5 motions open for voting:
103: Revise Duties of Award Committee
105: Hold the 2010 international conference in Korea
106: Slate of Candidates to take office in 2009
107: Appointments to Awards Committee
108: Accept the International and Intra-national Conflict SIG
Voting on all of these closes on February 29. Most only have one or two votes. To vote please log on at:
http://www.systemdynamics.org/cgi-bin/sdsweb
Click on the "Policy Council Menu" button, then click on the individual motions to vote.
Discussion can continue while motions are open and you can change your vote up until the time voting closes.
Judging from the closed motions (all carried):
100: Disband Non-operational Ad Hoc Committees Y:21/N:0/A:0/NV:4
101: Approval of Summer Policy Council Minutes Y:21/N:0/A:0/NV:4
102: Increase Budget for Journal Support Y:20/N:0/A:0/NV:5
you have the hang of it but if there are questions please let me know.
Also any comments on the overall way this e-meeting has operated are welcome (either to the list or sent privately). I am pretty pleased with the pace and content of discussion but am always happy to hear from more people.
Bob Eberlein
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 17:08:25 -0500
From: James Lyneis <
Subject: Motion #107 Appointments to Awards Committee
Dear Policy Council,
I did not intend for the first sentence to be part of Motion. While those were the criteria I used for selecting the committee, I did not intend them to be cast in a concrete policy. Other Presidents and Policy Council's may want to consider other committee structures as the situation warrants. My motion reads:
As specified by Society Policies, as President I nominate the following six people to serve on the Society's Awards Committee, to take affect immediately: David Andersen, Andy Ford, David Lane, Erling Moxnes, Khalid Saeed, and Kim Warren.
Sorry for the mix-up.
Jim
James M Lyneis
PO Box 121
Weston, VT 05161
(802) 824-4219
NextPart_000_0144_01C87575.89580690
Dear Policy Council,
I did not intend for the first sentence to be part of Motion 107. While those were the criteria I used for selecting the committee, I did not intend them to be cast in a concrete policy. Other Presidents and Policy Council’s may want to consider other committee structures as the situation warrants. My motion reads:
As specified by Society Policies, as President I nominate the following six people to serve on the Society’s Awards Committee, to take affect immediately: David Andersen, Andy Ford, David Lane, Erling Moxnes, Khalid Saeed, and Kim Warren.
Jim
James M Lyneis PO Box 121 Weston, VT 05161 (802) 824-4219
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 17:51:28 -0500
From: Bob Eberlein <
Subject: Re: Motion #107 Appointments to Awards Committee
In-Reply-To: <014701c8759f$72c1ea20$
Hi Everyone,
I fixed up Jim's motion on the voting page to read as he desired. A side effect of this is that if you already voted, your vote was lost. So if you already voted, please vote again. Sorry for the confusion but I guess it makes sense to match the motion to the vote.
bob Eberlein
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 21:41:39 -0800
From: Deborah Campbell <
Subject: Re: Athens 2008 -- risk management?
In-Reply-To: <
Thanks Andreas, for the update. I am especially concerned about the progress on sponsorship, as we were promised at least some committed sponsorship by Dec 31, 2007 -- and to date have none.
Deb
-----Original Message-----
From: List for System Dynamics Society Policy Council Members
On Behalf Of Andreas Größler
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 12:26 AM
To:
Subject: Re: Athens 2008 -- risk management?
Hello Deb,
as far as I understand, the situation is the following (and I would ask Roberta to add or correct, if wrong):
- room cost for attendees: room prices are fixed at an rather high level, admittedly. I don't think there is any chance to re-negotiate this, but when Roberta is in Athens in April, she will check for second option hotels nearby. The Greek team has signalled that there is no other appropriate hotel available, which could be used as a conference hotel.
- sponsorship: this will be one of the main topics of Roberta's talks in Athens next month. The Greek team still seems to be optimistic about this, claiming that it is quite usual that you can find sponsorship just now, that the new year has started... However, I don't know about any new and substantial sponsorship confirmation.
- exchange rates: again, rather unfortunate for people from the US when it comes to hotel room rates, but nothing that can be done (at least, registration fees and flights can be paid in USD).
- communication with local team: has been slightly difficult in the past, but it seems that the situation has improved recently, with Brian and Nikos doing their best to strengthen communication channels.
Best,
Andreas
Deborah Campbell schrieb:
Hi all,
I sent an email a week or so ago, asking for an update on our risk management plans for Athens, since the same concerns we had as a governing body last summer seem to be cause for concern still. I have not seen any response.
Would someone please speak to what the plans are to address the concerns still outstanding for Athens (including increased room cost for attendees and lack of committed financial sponsorship, to name two I remember off the top of my head)?
Thanks,
Deb
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 07:23:39 -0500
From: Bob Eberlein <
Subject: Supplements to discussions: Why rotate the presidency and ISD Conference site ?
Forwarded from Qifan Wang 2008-2-24 16:00 Peking time
Hello Everyone,
Supplements to discussions: Why rotate the presidency and ISD Conference site ?
Turning to the new period, the problem in Diversity/difference and disequilibrium in geography, gender etc. in SD Society (maybe initiated and raised by Deb C. in a report to PC in 2005) has attracted attention.
A series of questions came up! How to gradually work out these problems? How to get better choices of leadership structures in society? How to gradually remove large gap between the numbers of members and academic levels of SD in developed countries and developing countries? Why rotate the presidency and ISD Conference site ? What are the criteria/ strategies for President election and Conference site selection?
1) I supposed that combining Ginny (February 15, 2008), Deb (February 16, 2008) and Graham?s opinions had already implied and mostly formed the ?whole criteria/ strategies for President election and Conference site selection ?, my suggestion: ?One of criteria/ strategies for Conference site selection and President election ? (excerpted from The Next 50 Years of System Dynamics, posted at the 2007 PC winter eMeetings, January 11, 2007) is a derivative criterion/ strategy, i.e. a cycle system, is only a concrete criterion belonging to the whole.
2) This idea actually stemmed from the history of our society. In fact, there were following International SD Conference held in Asia Pacific region: SIME (USST now), Shanghai, 1987, chaired by Qifan Wang; AIT, Bangkok, 1991, chaired by Khalid Saeed; Tokyo, 1995, chaired by Toshiro Shimada; 1995; Istanbul, 1997, chaired by Yaman Barlars; Wellington, 1999, chaired by ??. There were Presidents from Asia: 1995 Khalid Saeed, 1998 Yaman Barlars, 2001 Ali N. Mashayekhi and 2007 Qifan Wang as well. I believe that the president candidate's pool is big enough around Asia, LA, Australia & Africa?for the Nominating Committee to select; and the 2007 Nominating Committee is the best one so far, has already done some important criteria and accumulated plenty experiences and candidates? information for nominating work.
3) Consciously rotating the presidency and ISD Conference would be radically favorable to the people around these backward areas and to improve the geographical problem, accelerate SD?s development for our society in a long term.
4) It's no doubt, the paramount criterion for every presidential election must always be the "best person for the job" (February 16, 2008, Graham). If the Nominating Committee can?t select a right candidate for the president in some years, it just can be skipped over and waited for next turn. Therefore, in this case, we might make a revision to add a little ?soft/ flexible? to the criterion.
Qifan Wang
Past President
Professor, Fudan and Tongji Universities
Dean, Development Institute of Tongji University
President, Shanghai Association of MIT Alumni
Tel: 021-65984562(o); Email: ;
<mailto:qfwang1701@163.com
<hr>==
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 18:41:54 +0200
Reply-To: List for System Dynamics Society Policy Council Members
<
Sender: List for System Dynamics Society Policy Council Members
<
From: Yaman Barlas <
Subject: Re: Athens 2008 -- risk management?
In-Reply-To: <004201c875de$c36ed7f0$0301000a@fortuna
Hi all,
This recent Athens2008 risk issue and the 2010 conference site selection discussion are closely related; I guess I will repeat what I have said many times in various PC meetings: in choosing a conference site/bid, a very clear and explicit requirement must be: the conference plan, budget, hotel, contracts, sponsorships must constitute a low-risk, low-adventure, low-uncertainty package. In comparing the bids, this must be a critical criterion. We must start looking at other things like geographic diversity and niceties only after this criterion is met. If there is no bid meeting the above criterion, then the conference should be held in a SAFE place that we have alrady used, that we are pretty sure will not put us in trouble. I get the feeling that we keep 'mentioning' this criterion in PC meetings each year and then we do NOT quite apply it?
best wishes
Yaman Barlas
Quoting Deborah Campbell < >:
Thanks Andreas, for the update. I am especially concerned about the
progress on sponsorship, as we were promised at least some committed
sponsorship by Dec 31, 2007 -- and to date have none.
Deb
-----Original Message-----
From: List for System Dynamics Society Policy Council Members
[mailto:SDS-PC@listserv.albany.edu] On Behalf Of Andreas Größler
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 12:26 AM
To:
Subject: Re: Athens 2008 -- risk management?
Hello Deb,
as far as I understand, the situation is the following (and I would ask Roberta to add or correct, if wrong):
- room cost for attendees: room prices are fixed at an rather high level, admittedly. I don't think there is any chance to re-negotiate this, but when Roberta is in Athens in April, she will check for second option hotels nearby. The Greek team has signalled that there is no other appropriate hotel available, which could be used as a conference hotel.
- sponsorship: this will be one of the main topics of Roberta's talks in Athens next month. The Greek team still seems to be optimistic about this, claiming that it is quite usual that you can find sponsorship just now, that the new year has started... However, I don't know about any new and substantial sponsorship confirmation.
- exchange rates: again, rather unfortunate for people from the US when it comes to hotel room rates, but nothing that can be done (at least, registration fees and flights can be paid in USD).
- communication with local team: has been slightly difficult in the past, but it seems that the situation has improved recently, with Brian and Nikos doing their best to strengthen communication channels.
Best,
Andreas
Deborah Campbell schrieb:
Hi all,
I sent an email a week or so ago, asking for an update on our risk management plans for Athens, since the same concerns we had as a governing body last summer seem to be cause for concern still. I have not seen any response.
Would someone please speak to what the plans are to address the concerns still outstanding for Athens (including increased room cost for attendees and lack of committed financial sponsorship, to name two I remember off the top of my head)?
Thanks,
Deb
<hr>==
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 10:39:34 -0800
Reply-To: List for System Dynamics Society Policy Council Members
<
Sender: List for System Dynamics Society Policy Council Members
<
From: Deborah Campbell <
Subject: Re: Athens 2008 -- risk management?
In-Reply-To: <
MIME-Version: 1.0
I have a slightly different take on our past discussions regarding financial "safety" requirements for a conference site.
It is my experience that we have agreed in the past -- within the context of a definitive strategy -- to occasionally choose conference sites that are not as financially profitable ("safe") if we have an over-riding objective for choosing that site (geographical outreach for increased membership from that locale, chapter development, etc.) AND any financial risk could be covered based on the success of conferences prior to it and after it. Since we often make money on conferences (and we are a non-profit organization), it was my understanding that many of us thought it made sense to use some of these proceeds to occasionally support less profitable conference locations to meet other Society objectives.
As we do not yet have this definitive strategy, it continues to be difficult for us to evaluate conference site selection one site at a time.
Thus, the importance of developing a site selection strategy with a 5-10 year horizon. It seems to me that only by looking at the full picture of conference opportunity and profitability over this longer time horizon can we clearly evaluate the financial criteria for a particular site.
Best,
Deb
-----Original Message-----
From: [mailto:ybarlas@boun.edu.tr]
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 8:42 AM
To: List for System Dynamics Society Policy Council Members; Deborah
Campbell
Cc:
Subject: Re: Athens 2008 -- risk management?
Hi all,
This recent Athens2008 risk issue and the 2010 conference site selection discussion are closely related; I guess I will repeat what I have said many times in various PC meetings: in choosing a conference site/bid, a very clear and explicit requirement must be: the conference plan, budget, hotel, contracts, sponsorships must constitute a low-risk, low-adventure, low-uncertainty package. In comparing the bids, this must be a critical criterion. We must start looking at other things like geographic diversity and niceties only after this criterion is met. If there is no bid meeting the above criterion, then the conference should be held in a SAFE place that we have alrady used, that we are pretty sure will not put us in trouble. I get the feeling that we keep 'mentioning' this criterion in PC meetings each year and then we do NOT quite apply it?
best wishes
Yaman Barlas
Quoting Deborah Campbell < >:
Thanks Andreas, for the update. I am especially concerned about the
progress on sponsorship, as we were promised at least some committed
sponsorship by Dec 31, 2007 -- and to date have none.
Deb
-----Original Message-----
From: List for System Dynamics Society Policy Council Members
[mailto:SDS-PC@listserv.albany.edu] On Behalf Of Andreas Größler
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 12:26 AM
To:
Subject: Re: Athens 2008 -- risk management?
Hello Deb,
as far as I understand, the situation is the following (and I would ask Roberta to add or correct, if wrong):
- room cost for attendees: room prices are fixed at an rather high
level, admittedly. I don't think there is any chance to re-negotiate
this, but when Roberta is in Athens in April, she will check for second option hotels nearby. The Greek team has signalled that there is no other appropriate hotel available, which could be used as a conference hotel.
- sponsorship: this will be one of the main topics of Roberta's talks in Athens next month. The Greek team still seems to be optimistic about this, claiming that it is quite usual that you can find sponsorship just now, that the new year has started... However, I don't know about any new and substantial sponsorship confirmation.
- exchange rates: again, rather unfortunate for people from the US when it comes to hotel room rates, but nothing that can be done (at least, registration fees and flights can be paid in USD).
- communication with local team: has been slightly difficult in the past, but it seems that the situation has improved recently, with Brian and Nikos doing their best to strengthen communication channels.
Best,
Andreas
Deborah Campbell schrieb:
Hi all,
I sent an email a week or so ago, asking for an update on our risk management plans for Athens, since the same concerns we had as a governing body last summer seem to be cause for concern still. I have not seen any response.
Would someone please speak to what the plans are to address the concerns still outstanding for Athens (including increased room cost for attendees and lack of committed financial sponsorship, to name two I remember off the top of my head)?
Thanks,
Deb
<hr>==
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 14:41:16 -0500
Reply-To:
Sender: List for System Dynamics Society Policy Council Members
<
From: Jim Thompson <
Organization: University of Strathclyde
Subject: Re: Athens 2008 -- risk management?
In-Reply-To: <002001c878a6$ef29fdf0$0301000a@fortuna
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Having just gone off the PC, I don't vote but have a suggestion on this issue: Poll the membership. Survey results would help PC to estimate member participation.
A survey could name countries and ask whether an urban or ex-urban location would be preferred. The survey could ask about an acceptable level of conference fees and other issues, such as full-fee participant underwriting of fees to encourage student participation.
Given that nearly all Society members have access to the Internet, it would seem pretty easy to conduct a survey every year or two. (I'd be willing to help.)
Whether the Conference can earn a surplus, the PC and officers should view the results of all activities and determine whether we are, as a Society, self-supporting through our own endeavours. If cash and invested balances ever exceed a prudent reserve, there will be opportunity to reduce dues or fees for future activities.
JT
-----Original Message-----
From: List for System Dynamics Society Policy Council Members
[mailto:SDS-PC@listserv.albany.edu] On Behalf Of Deborah Campbell
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 1:40 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Athens 2008 -- risk management?
I have a slightly different take on our past discussions regarding financial "safety" requirements for a conference site.
It is my experience that we have agreed in the past -- within the context of a definitive strategy -- to occasionally choose conference sites that are not as financially profitable ("safe") if we have an over-riding objective for choosing that site (geographical outreach for increased membership from that locale, chapter development, etc.) AND any financial risk could be covered based on the success of conferences prior to it and after it. Since we often make money on conferences (and we are a non-profit organization), it was my understanding that many of us thought it made sense to use some of these proceeds to occasionally support less profitable conference locations to meet other Society objectives.
As we do not yet have this definitive strategy, it continues to be difficult for us to evaluate conference site selection one site at a time.
Thus, the importance of developing a site selection strategy with a 5-10 year horizon. It seems to me that only by looking at the full picture of conference opportunity and profitability over this longer time horizon can we clearly evaluate the financial criteria for a particular site.
Best,
Deb
-----Original Message-----
From: [mailto:ybarlas@boun.edu.tr]
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 8:42 AM
To: List for System Dynamics Society Policy Council Members; Deborah
Campbell
Cc:
Subject: Re: Athens 2008 -- risk management?
Hi all,
This recent Athens2008 risk issue and the 2010 conference site selection discussion are closely related; I guess I will repeat what I have said many times in various PC meetings: in choosing a conference site/bid, a very clear and explicit requirement must be: the conference plan, budget, hotel, contracts, sponsorships must constitute a low-risk, low-adventure, low-uncertainty package. In comparing the bids, this must be a critical criterion. We must start looking at other things like geographic diversity and niceties only after this criterion is met. If there is no bid meeting the above criterion, then the conference should be held in a SAFE place that we have alrady used, that we are pretty sure will not put us in trouble. I get the feeling that we keep 'mentioning' this criterion in PC meetings each year and then we do NOT quite apply it?
best wishes
Yaman Barlas
Quoting Deborah Campbell < >:
Thanks Andreas, for the update. I am especially concerned about the progress on sponsorship, as we were promised at least some committed sponsorship by Dec 31, 2007 -- and to date have none.
Deb
-----Original Message-----
From: List for System Dynamics Society Policy Council Members
[mailto:SDS-PC@listserv.albany.edu] On Behalf Of Andreas Größler
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 12:26 AM
To:
Subject: Re: Athens 2008 -- risk management?
Hello Deb,
as far as I understand, the situation is the following (and I would ask Roberta to add or correct, if wrong):
- room cost for attendees: room prices are fixed at an rather high level, admittedly. I don't think there is any chance to re-negotiate this, but when Roberta is in Athens in April, she will check for second option hotels nearby. The Greek team has signalled that there is no other appropriate hotel available, which could be used as a conference hotel.
- sponsorship: this will be one of the main topics of Roberta's talks in Athens next month. The Greek team still seems to be optimistic about this, claiming that it is quite usual that you can find sponsorship just now, that the new year has started... However, I don't know about any new and substantial sponsorship confirmation.
- exchange rates: again, rather unfortunate for people from the US when it comes to hotel room rates, but nothing that can be done (at least, registration fees and flights can be paid in USD).
- communication with local team: has been slightly difficult in the past, but it seems that the situation has improved recently, with Brian and Nikos doing their best to strengthen communication channels.
Best,
Andreas
Deborah Campbell schrieb:
Hi all,
I sent an email a week or so ago, asking for an update on our risk management plans for Athens, since the same concerns we had as a governing body last summer seem to be cause for concern still. I have not seen any response.
Would someone please speak to what the plans are to address the concerns still outstanding for Athens (including increased room cost for attendees and lack of committed financial sponsorship, to name two I remember off the top of my head)?
Thanks,
Deb