=========================================================================
From: System Dynamics Society < >
Subject: Results of voting: Appointment to Nominating Committee
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 18:38:33 -0400
Dear Policy Council Members and Other Interested Parties:
Below please find the results of Motion #100 -
SUBJECT: Appointment to Nominating Committee Proposed by: David Lane, Seconded by: Rogelio Oliva
Voting open date: 2011.05.23 Voting close date: 2011.06.02
Results: Motion #100 Passed
Yes: 17 No: 0 Abstain: 0 Did Not Vote: 7
Formal Motion: Moved by David C. Lane and seconded by Rogelio Oliva to approve the appointment of Juergen Strohhecker to the Nominating Committee for the term of (8/2011 - 7/2014)
Roberta L. Spencer office@systemdynamics.org
Executive Director phone (518) 442-3865
SYSTEM DYNAMICS SOCIETY fax (518) 442-3398
Milne 300, Rockefeller College
135 Western Avenue
University at Albany, State University of New York
Albany, NY, 12222, U.S.A. http://www.systemdynamics.org/
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: How will we manage the Fund for “Development of Capacity”?
From: Martin Schaffernicht < >
Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2011 16:08:10 -0400
Dear fellow members,
I've tried to articulate some definitions and a "first time" proceeding for the "Development of Capacity" fund: it's not too early to agree upon the way we will do this. Everything is open for your comments and suggestions, so please look at the attached document.
As soon as we decide on this, we can explain the rules to the Chapters and give them the tools for applying.
Best greetings,
Martin
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: How will we manage the Fund for "Development of Capacity"?
From: David Lane < >
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2011 14:10:45 +0100
This is extremely helpful, Martin. Thank you.
I would encourage comment on this initiative which, though small at present, is important in setting a direction and establishing a tone.
Regards,
David. C. Lane
BSc MSc DPhil FORS
London School of Economics and Political Science
Houghton Street, LONDON WC2 2AE, Britain
Tel: (UK)(0)20 - 7955 - 7336Fax: (UK) (0)20-7955-6885
-----Original Message-----
From: List for System Dynamics Society Policy Council Members on behalf of Martin Schaffernicht
Sent: Sat 11/06/2011 21:08
Subject: How will we manage the Fund for "Development of Capacity"?
Dear fellow members,
I've tried to articulate some definitions and a "first time" proceeding for the "Development of Capacity" fund: it's not too early to agree upon the way we will do this. Everything is open for your comments and suggestions, so please look at the attached document. As soon as we decide on this, we can explain the rules to the Chapters and give them the tools for applying.
Best greetings
Martin
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: How will we manage the Fund for “Development of Capacity”?
From: Bob Eberlein < >
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2011 17:22:34 -0400
Hi Martin,
Thanks for putting this together. My first reaction to it was that the descriptions you provide are too academically oriented. On reflection, however, I have come around to your way of thinking. If we want to build capacity, activity in academic institutions is probably the only practical way to see that we are doing this.
I wonder what stage the existing Chapters have reached according to your criteria, and whether some are moving backward. Going through them systematically would probably be useful, perhaps you can suggest a self evaluation during the Chapter meeting at the conference.
One note on the relationship of Chapter members to the Society. If a Chapter member does not read English well, then Society membership has little value for him or her. Thus, even the most splendidly successful Chapter might still have lots of members who are not part of the Society, and would not be likely to come to the international conference. It is our loss not to get to know such people, but as long as they are doing good work their contribution to the field is important.
Bob Eberlein
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: How will we manage the Fund for “Development of Capacity”?
From: Martin Schaffernicht < >
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2011 18:33:37 -0400
Hi Bob,
thanks, I think that if you also believe the educational channel to be a priority development motor, that adds to the idea's plausibility.
And you raise two good points here.
First, indeed I plan to assess the Chapters' level of development. I'm designing a report form that I'll suggest to the Chapters for their yearly reporting, and the information they provide in this form will allow to have an opinion of their level of development. Of course, I see this as a dialog between Chapters and VP, I would not like to evaluate them unilaterally.
And second, yes, I had not thought about the fact that many people are not firm in English. I should have considered this, since I always defend theneed for SD-material in local languages, so thanks for making me see a blind spot!
Best greetings,
martin
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Fund for Chapter Capacity
From: Martin Schaffernicht < >
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2011 21:17:22 -0400
Dear fellow members of the Policy Council.
with the comments received, I've developed a "Fund for Capacity Development Application Form" together with some explanations concerning the Fund (re-worked from the document I sent a couple of days ago). I would strongly like to send this out to the Chapters together with the "Annual Chapter Report Form" which I've developed as part of our initiative to improve communication between the PC and the Chapters. The idea is that I want to invite Chapters to put together their report on time, and the report should allow us to understand the level of development of the Chapters and their respective areas. So, in my view, the report and the Fund application should be both explained to the Chapters (and for this I've tried to write down a rather detailed letter). Now, I'm a bit in a hurry for the Reports, but I feel that some things and rules have to be decided for the Fund: mainly, under which legal circumstances would the granted money be transferred?
Please, have a look at the attached documents; you can download them in a singe step, the ZIP contains 4 files.
- "Fund for Capacity Development rules and procedure.doc": explanations concerning the Fund;
- "Fund for Chapter Capacity Application Form.doc": the application form;
- "Annual Chapter Report Form.doc": the form for the yearly chapter report;
- "Dear Chapter presidents (summer 2011).doc": the letter explaining our "chapter - support" initiative.
If you think I'd better take the "Fund" aspects out of the letter and just occupy myself with the reporting, please let me know. I know the VP Chapters is not part of the "Strengthening the Field Committee (SFC)”, but since VP Chapters has to set up communication with Chapters and (hopefully) receive de applications, I still believe we should send the two things together.
Looking forward to read your opinions,
Martin Schaffernicht
VP Chapters
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Antwort: Re: Fund for Chapter Capacity
From: Markus Schwaninger < >
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 15:44:05 +0200
Dear colleagues
We do not know if and how this funding approach will work. Whatever we put in practice here should - for the time being - be subject to a temporary limitation. I suggest a probation period of 2 years, with an ensuing evaluation, and decision on how to continue.
Best,
Markus Schwaninger.
Prof. Dr. Markus Schwaninger
Institute of Management (IfB)
University of St. Gallen
Dufourstr. 40a, 4. Stock
CH-9000 St. Gallen, Switzerland
E-mail:
Tel.: ++41 71 224 23 82
http://www.ifb.unisg.ch/
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Fund for Chapter Capacity
From: Rogelio Oliva < >
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:17:38 -0500
I did not see this until after I send the message from a few minutes ago.
The chapter report form and the letter to the chapter presidents look great, but my view is to hold back the 'rules and procedures' and to expand the application form a bit to include a formal budget for the event.
Rogelio
Rogelio Oliva
Associate Professor
Mays Business School | Wehner 301C - 4217
Texas A&M University | College Station, TX 77843-4217
Ph 979-862-3744 | Fx 979-845-5653 |
http://iops.tamu.edu/faculty/roliva/
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Fund for Chapter Capacity
From: Andreas Größler < >
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 16:27:14 +0200
Hello Martin,
thanks for your efforts. My suggestion would be to send out the report query as soon as possible together with the letter explaining the funds idea in general form. After some more discussion and checking of the (legal, monetary, etc.) issues we could send this out in a separate mailing in autumn. OK?
Best,
Andreas
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Fund for Chapter Capacity
From: Martin Schaffernicht < >
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 11:10:00 -0400
Hi all,
thanks for your comments and suggestions! I will adapt the fund application form following Rogelio's suggestions and not talk about rules and procedures (beyond explaining that criteria and rules will emerge from our discussion) in the communication with chapters.
Only one point: surely I have expressed myself in an unclear manner if you got the impression that a Chapter would have to be developed in order to be selected. What I do mean is that we have to see at which level the Chapter finds itself "now" and estimate how much the proposed activity would help it to move forward. Therefore, a newly beginning Chapter (or one that has had to struggle) would have quite good chances to get selected.
However, it's not necessary to resolve this right now, we can discuss it in Washington.
Best,
Martin
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Fund for Chapter Capacity
From: Kim Warren < >
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 17:33:07 +0100
Thanks Martin for what has clearly been a lot of thought and work to put these proposals together. In addition to agreeing with most comments from others, could I just restate that our challenge is often less about building capacity, and more about creating awareness and demand. I don't think this changes the fundamentals of what these documents cover, but perhaps adjusts the language in some places.
Kim
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Fund for Chapter Capacity
From: Aldo Santos < >
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 13:09:25 -0400
Kim's point is an interesting one. In assessing the state of the field in different parts of the world, it would be interesting to investigate whether there is a lack of demand or a lack of qualified supply, or both. The way that I have been thinking about this initiative to build capacity is NOT to bring to the field more practitioners, but rather to enhance the expertise and skill set of the people who are already involved in it. If those who are already doing SD work become better qualified, we may be able to assume that they will attract more demand for SD via the recognition of the good work that is being done --also, some may be in the position to recruit and train new persons as well. Thus, indirectly, the initiative focused on the quality of the existing capacity may have a positive influence on building demand and also increasing the size of the groups. Finally, all of this has the potential to increase membership at the SDS level as well.
Although I worry about the burden that is placed upon the chapter representatives in supplying information to the Society, I think it is important to assess the status of the existing chapters. I believe the proposals can be evaluated on their own merit --and compared with other proposals-- as Rogelio points out. However, it's important also to approve a proposal that aligns well with the status and needs of the chapter membership which it targets --or to recommend adjustments that make it more suitable to a particular setting/group. I don't know that the best approach to understanding the status of a chapter is to rely on the chapter to provide the information (self assessment). Perhaps an external assessment would be more suitable. But, we would need to identify measures to look at in order to carry out an independent assessment.
Although I see the benefit of allowing instructors to use materials they've already developed, to minimize preparation time and draw upon their wealth of experience, I think the Society should be concerned with the transformation of these inputs into a coherent package that forms a curriculum divided into stages 1 to 3 (basic, intermediate, and advanced). In the proposal that we are trying to put together focusing on the Brazilian Chapter, we hope to be able to collect and hand off to the Society this material, to serve as input for an overall plan, and as subsidy for others who wish to use it.
Aldo
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Fund for Chapter Capacity
From: David Lane < >
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 18:39:20 +0100
Martin,
I think that this is, indeed, the best way to go. We need also to accept a degree of 'learning as we go' - as Rogelio said, we need to see some proposals.
But thank you again for all of the thought and time that you have put into get this going. I appreciate it very much.
Regards,
David Lane
D. C. Lane BSc MSc DPhil FORS
London School of Economics and Political Science
Houghton Street, LONDON WC2 2AE, Britain
Tel: (UK)(0)20 - 7955 - 7336
Fax: (UK) (0)20-7955-6885
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Fund for Chapter Capacity
From: Aldo Zagonel < >
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 15:56:53 -0400
Martin,
I have two suggestions for the annual reports:
1) That you encourage the Chapters to, if they desire, submit their reports as conference posters;
The chapters are invited and encouraged to present at a special poster session. It would perhaps save them time and effort to prepare a poster that they can show at the special session while at the same time fulfilling their formal obligation to give the society an annual report. Another advantage to putting the report into this format is making it more interesting to read into.
2) That you provide them with samples that in your judgment report well on chapter activities (in both document and poster forms).
If I remember correctly, there's a wide discrepancy in the way the chapters submit their reports and produce their posters, including in volume. While some of this variety may be actually healthy, I suspect seeing a good example would encourage chapters to submit better reports and posters.
In evaluating what should go into the reports and posters, I would bias in favor of making the reports (posters!) informative, appealing and interesting, as opposed to mechanical and formal. I say this because I think there would be more value to making these reports/posters interesting to a larger audience, than giving the VP Chapters (and the PC) raw data that is required from them. Hopefully this would downplay the hierarchical relationship between the chapters and the Society and induce cross fertilization between the chapters.
In my experience as Assistant to Ginny as VP, I found disappointing the results obtained from this requirement. Many chapters seem to neglect it while others do not put great effort into it. Hardly anyone reports everything that is required in the bylaws and constitutions (e.g., finances). I guess I would be comfortable with a decision to make the reporting requirement simpler and easier to fulfill, as well as more likely to produce fruitful interactions at the conference, at the expense of some of the information that might be collected from a more structured and comprehensive "form" that must be filled out.
In any case, I would strongly support strict enforcement of this requirement at the risk of disenfranchising the chapters that neglect their obligation to report (and their opportunity to contribute to the special session!).
Aldo
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Fund for Chapter Capacity
From: "Ford, David" < >
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 22:04:02 +0000
SD PC People,
I think Martin's work is a very good start and I thank him for his efforts. Here are my three comments on the body of the description and a few things to consider while developing the application.
1) The Committee: I question whether the President is needed or should be on this committee. This is not due to any questioning of the potential of the current or future presidents to contribute, but based on a comment by our past president about the role of the president (Rogelio, correct me if I mis-interpret). A short paraphrasing is that he found the president to be on many committees or the final decision-maker on many issues that could just as well or better be made by other trusted leaders of the Society and the president would have adequate opportunity for input when the matters came before the PC. Such a decentralization helps open a potential bottleneck at the presidents office and allows more opportunities for him or her to focus on new initiatives...all the while maintaining adequate control and influence. I am open to other approaches, but suggest that we use a dedicated committee for this operation.
2) In Defining Development we refer to founding members. Older chapters may (now or in the future) have passed leadership on to others, so we may want a bit different wording here.
3) Last page...It is not clear to me who the SDS is contracting with (a chapter, one or more persons?). We will need a legal document developed and approved.
Considerations for the development of the application.
Require supporting information for the description of level of development of SD in area and Chapter
Identify the responsible persons in the Chapter with regard to the proposal and effort
Request/require indicators of amount of interest within the chapter members (beyond the proposers)
Identify loction to be provided
Require a cost estimate/funding request and division of funding between the SDS and the Chapter.
I repeat my hearty support of this work.
Thanks to Martin
I look forward to the continued discussion and progress
Dave Ford
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Fund for Chapter Capacity
From: Martin Schaffernicht < >
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 21:49:23 -0400
Dear fellow PC members,
thanks for all your comments and thoughts. It has become clear to me that the "fund" needs to be communicated in a very simple description and a simplified application form, leaving the rules and procedures out.
Also, I like Aldo's idea to use Chapter posters as alternative for reports - however I'll have to think it over, since I am afraid the VP chapters would not be able to put together a thorough report before the conference/meeting.
Still, I believe it would be a way to actually get some information.
I've thought about the question if I'd have a good example of a Chapter report - I guess I don't: some Chapters have sent in really good reports or updates (since I started as VP), but back then we were not yet talking about chapter development and things like the fund.
I'd also like to stress that I will kindly ask the Chapters to give this information; in my opinion this is more a mutual responibility than a hierarchical affair. Still, I'd rather face the fact to have some incomplete reports (and not to have a report from each chapter) and go talk with them during the conference (oh dear, what did I maneouvre myself into?)
As for the attempt at defining chapter development, of course that will require some more dialog. I admit that there is no obvious response to the question how to facilitate the development of SD and of the Chapters. Indeed, I agree that quality should come before quantity; but then again, if SD develops in a local area (and if a Chapter develops), we should find traces of it in a growing quantity of people, projects and products, shouldn't we? The thing is not to tell the Chapters to go and increase the quantity of stuff, but to let them know that the Society is interested in them doing the things that will ultimately lead to such growth (which may be as slow as it has to). I believe we have to tell the Chapters what we are up to; if I do not explain this, how could they understand that giving all the information is indeed important. Therefore, I'm afraid there is not enough time left before the conference.
So I guess I'll spend a little time reflecting on which parts of the report form to simplify (or to make more flexible) and how to make it easier to report by having an informative Chapter poster. I'll need one day to update the forms and other documents, so I plan to send the renewed versinos tomorrow night or on thursday.
Best greetings,
Martin
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: How will we manage the Fund for “Development of Capacity”?
From: Rogelio Oliva < >
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:12:26 -0500
Martin,
Thank you for getting the ball rolling on this. This is a very good start.
My main concern with the document is that it is focuses on assessing chapter development as opposed to 'goodness of the proposal.' I could make the argument that a young chapter full of enthusiastic people could put together a much better event than a mature chapter that probably already has a large number of local experts. Also, an event organized by a chapter could be designed to impact chapter members as well as non-members. As such, I believe the main criteria for assessing proposal should be the expected impact of capacity development, e.g., a) How many people will participate in the training, b) What is the level of the course, introductory to SD vs. advanced/specialized topics? and not so much the status of the chapter or the amount of new materials generated.
The reason I don't like the focus on the 'development of new material' is that it introduces a higher bar for the creation of the workshops. It would be a lot easier for an expert (e.g., a past president) to agree to participate in one of these events, if he (yes, all past presidents are male) does not have to worry about the preparation of new material.
As originally stated when we put the motion out, I think we need to see some proposals first. Once we have a few on the table we can argue about what the benefits of one over the other are, or we can assess the impact of different proposals after they are executed. Then, and only then, would I suggest putting more constraints into the proposals. Our current problem is not that we have too many proposals. The problem is that chapters have not put one together!! -- I know of a single one on the works by the new Brazilian chapter. In my view what we should be doing now is helping chapters put proposal together, not creating additional barriers for them. Once we have oversubscription to the funds, or that we realize that the current format could be improved, we can begin to tweak the guidelines for the proposal. For now, I wold say that we just need to get the momentum going.
In terms of the application, I believe it should address the following items:
Proposing chapter:
Description of the event:
Description of participants: Expected participants
Proposed instructor(s)
Overall budget of the event
Amount solicited from the society
Other funding sources
Some criteria that I can already see coming through is that we expect the chapter/participants/sponsors to carry a significant part of the overall budget of the event, ie. the society money should be only to complement the proposal and make it a bit more affordable to the participants. No event will have more than, say 50% of the annual budget for this activity. But again, I don't think we need to put those constraints out. Let's see what we get and then we can decide. If a chapter submits a proposal and it is not funded, we can explain why and give suggestions on how to make it a better proposal for next year.
Rogelio
Rogelio Oliva
Associate Professor
Mays Business School | Wehner 301C - 4217
Texas A&M University | College Station, TX 77843-4217
Ph 979-862-3744 | Fx 979-845-5653 |
http://iops.tamu.edu/faculty/roliva/
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: How will we manage the Fund for "Development of Capacity"?
From: "Andersen, David F" < >
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 17:25:52 -0400
I think that a major criteria should be the ability of the proposal to be launched without a ton of support from the home office. My fear is that over time we will be creating another (complicated) event to be managed by our already over-worked home office staff. What about a rider that says that the fund becomes dormant in the case there is not enough energy out there to make use of the funds (put another way, the environment starts to stipulate that the Society provide lots of staff to support capacity development).
David Andersen
VP Finance (who is worried about home office work load)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Fund for Chapter Capacity
From: Kim Warren < >
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 09:18:58 +0100
Can I beg to differ on the first item below - we have for 50 years followed a belief that "just do good work and demand will come". The evidence is against us. Good work has been done on some scale for many organisations across many application sectors, and not resulted in any uptake by organisations with similar needs [healthcare seems to be a promising exception]. If that continues to be the case, then putting more effort alone into training people to be great SDers will simply result in more skilled people with no demand for their skills. The missing phrase in our slogan is "Just do good work - and shout about it - then [maybe] people will come". Hence the thought that the purpose of this fund is mis-named, or at least incomplete - unless we would consider a separate fund for "Demand Development", i.e. marketing.
Kim
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Fund for Chapter Capacity
From: Rogelio Oliva < >
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 04:55:50 -0500
Hello,
While I'm not opposed to the exploration of of 'demand creation' initiatives, I do want to make clear that the original intent for this money was to 'build capacity' within the SD community as a way to address what was perceived as one of the main drawbacks of moving the conference into default locations. In retrospect I now believe that this is a very good idea and that we should have been doing this for a while.
My preference is that we give this money/initiative a chance to work towards its intended purpose and that we don't bundle additional goals to it.
Rogelio
Rogelio Oliva
Associate Professor
Mays Business School | Wehner 301C - 4217
Texas A&M University | College Station, TX 77843-4217
Ph 979-862-3744 | Fx 979-845-5653 |
http://iops.tamu.edu/faculty/roliva/
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Fund for Chapter Capacity
From: David Lane < >
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 11:38:54 +0100
I too think that we should focus on the one goal at present. I utterly take Kim's point regarding the need to shout about good work. But for the purposes of this initiative I would rather get clarity on the one goal. If that starts working fine then other needs can be addressed - by this or by another initiative.
David
D. C. Lane BSc MSc DPhil FORS
London School of Economics and Political Science
Houghton Street, LONDON WC2 2AE, Britain
Tel: (UK)(0)20 - 7955 - 7336
Fax: (UK) (0)20-7955-6885
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Fund for Chapter Capacity
From: "Ford, David" < >
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 11:26:52 +0000
I concur with David Lane and Rogelio Oliva on the purpose of the current initiative and the need to focus for now on that one goal.
Dave Ford
David N. Ford, Ph.D., P.E.
Associate Professor and holder of the
Parsons Career Development Professorship
Zachry Department of Civil Engineering
Texas A&M university
LEED Green Associate
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Fund for Chapter Capacity
From: Kim Warren < >
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 14:24:28 +0100
Focus sounds good, and the dialogue makes a good case for some solid skill-building - in between, at the bottom end, 'lite' training which leaves people short of usable skills, and at the other end of the scale full
MSc/PhD training which takes for ever, costs a fortune, and produces people who might do nothing else but SD thereafter. This mid-scope skill building could even indirectly help the demand problem if it gives people enough skill to deploy SD competently as part of their otherwise mainstream jobs.
To be clear though - this means that a Chapter proposing, say, a mini-conference on "The value of SD in the XXX sector" with speakers who can describe successful work to an audience of executives from that sector would not be eligible for funding from this pot?
Kim
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Fund for Chapter Capacity
From: Lees Stuntz < >
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 11:38:17 -0400
At the Winter Policy Council meeting, an Ad Hoc Committee was formed to define the structure, purpose, and mission for education, outreach and public understanding. EOPU. It seems to me what Kim introduced (and I think rightly so) into this Chapter discussion is part of the task for that Ad Hoc Committee. This Ad Hoc committee should be addressing is just what Kim is talking about, and what Jay talked about at the Winter meeting. From the minutes below:
Jay stated the SDS should have a role in outreach to help the general population to understand system dynamics. For example, simple things ought to be able to be packaged into new media so that we reach the public and communicate that dynamics matter. David L said that Oxford has a Chair for the Public Understanding of Science. Rogelio said there are there are two tasks in the Articles of Incorporation that we do not support: educational programs and outreach - and both are critically important. Jay noted that public outreach is not to bring people into the Society, but to get the public to grasp the nature of dynamics.
We need to create an awareness of SD in the greater society. Hence EOPU.
Perhaps we should let that committee (still limping along) try to tease out at least this bit of the complicated and interrelated puzzle to feed back into the Chapter/funding discussion as we go along.
Take care,
Lees
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Fund for Chapter Capacity
From: David Lane < >
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 09:55:04 +0100
Again, thank you for all of your work on this, Martin.
Thank you also to everyone who contributed their ideas and reflections.
David
D. C. Lane BSc MSc DPhil FORS
London School of Economics and Political Science
Houghton Street, LONDON WC2 2AE, Britain
Tel: (UK)(0)20 - 7955 - 7336
Fax: (UK) (0)20-7955-6885
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Fund for Chapter Capacity
From: Rouwette, E.A.J.A. (Etiënne) < >
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 14:06:49 +0200
Dear colleagues,
Thanks Martin for taking up this initiative to both improve contact with the Chapters and install a fund for Chapter development. I think this is a great idea. In fact I think it is so great that I would like to propose to extend it to SIGs as well. I have two arguments for this.
First, at the Korea conference, Martin and I were in a meeting with Chapter and SIG respresentatives were the idea of a budget was discussed (in relation to the fixed conference locations and improving the contact between Chapters/ SIGs and the Society). I think the participants in this meeting did not see major differences between Chapters and SIGs and assumed both could benefit from such a fund. Second, the contact between SIGs and Society resembles that between Chapters and Society in many respects. I agree to Martin's idea that improving the contact is a two way process - instead of only asking for more frequent and improved reports, in addition we could indicate how from our side we aim to improve Society support for Chapters / SIGs (and the fund is an excellent way of doing that).
Making the fund available for SIGs would require the forms to be adapted. References to a region would change to references to a topic area but I think the general setup would be the same . I could work on this with Martin.
Regardless of our decision on this, I volunteer to assist Martin with the talks with Chapter respresentatives in Washington if that is helpful.
Thanks & looking forward to meeting in Washington,
Etiënne Rouwette
VP Member services
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Fund for Chapter Capacity
From: David Lane < >
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 13:24:24 +0100
Very helpful. Thank you.
David
D. C. Lane BSc MSc DPhil FORS
London School of Economics and Political Science
Houghton Street, LONDON WC2 2AE, Britain
Tel: (UK)(0)20 - 7955 - 7336Fax: (UK) (0)20-7955-6885
------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Fund for Chapter Capacity
From: Aldo Zagonel < >
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 08:25:02 -0400
I see the value of what Etienne is proposing but I disagree with including the SIGs in this policy.
The policy is intended to compensate for the decision to adopt fixed conference sites, not to serve as seed money to stimulate good activities in general. I think it should remain as is, a fund to help chapters --particularly those regional chapters outside of the main hubs of activity.
Aldo
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Fund for Chapter Capacity
From: "Richard G. Dudley" < >
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 10:58:31 -0400
As a follow-up to Aldo’s comment I am just curious if the proposed initiative would apply to the Economics Chapter which is more clearly a super-SIG rather than a chapter.
Richard
Richard G. Dudley
Adjunct Associate Professor
Cornell International Institute for
Food, Agriculture, and Development
http://earth01.net/RGDudley/
cell phone: 607-379-9999
Skype: rgdudley
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: How will we manage the Fund for "Development of Capacity"?
From: Kim Warren < >
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 07:41:07 +0100
Good point David - I had assumed that these would be Chapter initiatives, and that Home Office would not be expected to contribute any work at all. Martin - is that correct?
Kim
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: How will we manage the Fund for "Development of Capacity"?
From: David Lane < >
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 09:54:09 +0100
Yes, the idea that this would not be another call on Home Office time was implicit. We should make it explicit.
David
D. C. Lane BSc MSc DPhil FORS
London School of Economics and Political Science
Houghton Street, LONDON WC2 2AE, Britain
Tel: (UK)(0)20 - 7955 - 7336
Fax: (UK) (0)20-7955-6885
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Fund for Chapter Capacity
From: Martin Schaffernicht < >
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 17:41:03 -0400
Hi Richard,
well, since the Economics Chapter is a "chapter", there would be little fundament for rejecting a proposal.
Best,
Martin
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: How will we manage the Fund for "Development of Capacity"?
From: "Andersen, David F" < >
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 15:51:08 -0400
I think that we should make it explicit. Maybe write in a prohibition against the Home Office getting involved. I don't know if that is a serious suggestion, but something along those lines should be in place...
David Andersen
VP Finance
And concerned about the Home Office getting overwhelmed...
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: How will we manage the Fund for "Development of Capacity"?
From: David Lane < >
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 21:14:39 +0100
I stand with my VP Finance ...
D. C. Lane BSc MSc DPhil FORS
London School of Economics and Political Science
Houghton Street, LONDON WC2 2AE, Britain
Tel: (UK)(0)20 - 7955 - 7336
Fax: (UK) (0)20-7955-6885
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: How will we manage the Fund for "Development of Capacity"?
From:"Ford, David" < >
Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2011 00:04:56 +0000
Me too. No "unfunded mandates" for the Home Office.
Dave Ford
David N. Ford, Ph.D., P.E.
Associate Professor and holder of the
Parsons Career Development Professorship
Zachry Department of Civil Engineering
Texas A&M university
LEED Green Associate
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Motion to merge Security SIG and the Inter- and Intra-national Conflict (IINC) SIG
From: Rouwette, E.A.J.A. (Etiënne) < >
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 17:14:26 +0200
Hello all,
On a different note - I just put up the motion on merging the Security SIG and the Inter- and Intra-national Conflict (IINC) SIG. Please see below for the final text. We now have a week for discussion, after which voting is open for a week.
This motion concerns the Security SIG and the Inter- and Intra-national Conflict (IINC) SIG and proposes:
1. that the two SIGs (Security and IINC) be merged;
2. that all members of the Security and IINC SIGs automatically become member of the new SIG;
3. that the name of the new combined SIG be henceforth the “Conflict, Defense, and Security” (CDS) Special Interest Group.
Thank you,
Etiënne Rouwette
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: VP Chapters
From: Martin Schaffernicht < >
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 11:07:57 -0400
Dear fellow members of the PC,
I've sent out my call for the chapter reports (no more time to wait) with the new report form. As for the "fund", I've just informed the Chapters of the existence, without mentioning specific rules or proceedings; however, a very simplified application form has gone to the Chapters (attached), because I really prefer receiving these projects in a relatively standardized way (that sounds as if there would be many of them ... guilty of optimism).As for figuring out who would give the money to whom and how the Chapter will be accountable, that's something we ought to do before the conference.
Best greetings,
Martin
Attachment) Fund for Development of Capacity Application Form
Chapter identification
Chapter:
Year: 2011
Entity or individual responsible for the fund (who represents the Chapter):
Description of the proposed activity
Dates:
Invited experts (aided by the fund):
Addressed audience:
Description:
Total cost:
Amount needed from the Society:
Description of impacts
Describe the impact on current dynamicists’ skills as far as workshops and training are concerned. Describe the reach of what the workshop or training receivers will do with their enhanced skills.
=========================================================================