System Dynamics Society
Minutes of the Policy Council Meeting Summer 2012
St. Gallen, Switzerland
July 2012
In attendance: David Lane (Past President) presiding, Brad Morrison (Secretary), Rogelio Oliva (Executive Editor), Andreas Groessler (VP Meetings), George Richardson (VP Publications), Rod MacDonald (PC Member), Len Malczynski (PC Member), Laura Black (PC Member), Ignacio Martínez-Moyano (PC Member), Etienne Rouwette (VP Member Services), Peter Hovmand (PC Member), Nici Zimmermann (PC Member), Florian Kapmeier (PC Member), Kim Warren (President Elect), Markus Schwaninger (PC Member), David Andersen (VP Finance), Bob Eberlein (VP, E-Presence), Martin Schaffernicht (VP Chapter Activities), David Ford (President), Silvia Ulli-Beer (PC Member), Peter Milling, Lees Stuntz, Jim Thompson, Jim Hines, Roberta Spencer, Sarah Boyar, Graham Russel (Publisher, SDR), Bob Cavana, Edward Anderson, Erik Pruyt, Aldo Zagonel, Erling Moxnes.
I. Welcome and Introductions
David Lane, acting as chair due to the delayed arrival of David Ford, called the meeting to order. On behalf of the Society, he thanked outgoing members and officers for their service: Susan Howick, Birgit Kopainsky, Agata Sawicka, Aldo Zagonel; Past Pres Rogelio Oliva., SDR Editor: Brian Dangerfield.
He welcomed new members for 2012: Rod MacDonald, Lees Stuntz, Silvia Ulli-Beer, Nicole Zimmermann. Pres Elect: Kim Warren, SDR Editor: Rogelio Oliva.
II. Overview of electronic session
a. Review electronic votes between the end of 2012 Winter PC Meeting and the beginning of the 2012 Summer PC Meeting
III. The chair called for additions to the agenda or announcements.
IV. Vice Presidential and Other Reports
a. Chapter Activities: Martin Schaffernicht: Report online. The Japan and Russia reports have been turned in since VP report was posted. We are in a much better state than we have been in before.
Martin thinks that Chapters and SIGs need to work together.
Bob Cavana notes that the Economics chapter is trying to perform as a Chapter and plans to report on Chapter Activities in that form.
We discuss whether there is a way to stimulate activity, perhaps using the capacity development fund to support SIGs.
It is possible to create virtual compilations/issues of a journal that put together different papers published in the SDR along a specific area. We could also do something that would involve collaborating with other journals.
Martin proposes drafting a mission for Chapters and SIGs. This can be done by selecting one or several good examples to use as benchmarks.
b. E-Presence: Robert Eberlein We have a new website with content management system. (Report online)
c. Finance: David Andersen and AVP Navid Ghafarzadegan (Report online)
d. Meetings: Andreas Größler and AVP Enzo Bivona (Report online)
e. Member Services: Etiënne Rouwette (Report online)
f. Publications: George Richardson
George emphasized that Graham's and Rogelio's reports have much value in them. From Graham, we (SDR) have been gradually improving over time. Wiley is doing good things for us. Rogelio's report talks about revisions that are being put into place.
Rogelio would like to put in place a best reviewer award. We agreed that this suggestion should be handled through the Publications Committee. We may also consider listing reviewers for the year, or perhaps for 5 years to preserve anonymity.
g. Ad hoc Committees that report to the President
h. Executive Director: Roberta Spencer: (Report online)
(President David Ford arrived during Standing Committee Reports and presided over the rest of the meeting.)
V. Standing Committee Reports – Presentation, Discussion and Announcements
a. Administrative Committee: Peter Milling:
Peter reported that the Administrative Committee meeting just concluded. The Committee talked about budget, reporting formats, investment policies, and preparation for PC meeting. The Committee began discussing the structure of the PC meeting format. Face to face meeting seems to be important, but maybe a different format could be used for some things, especially reports. The current structure seems to generate lots of work for home office, especially to support reporting by VPs and committees.
b. Awards Committee: (Report online)
Peter Milling reported about committee work to consider how to organize a lifetime achievement award, an award given to a person who has made distinguished contributions and who has not received the Forrester Award – to be given toward the end of a person’s career. The award would be given in a year of the Forrester Award is not given. The Forrester award committee would make this award.
c. Nominating Committee: David Lane (Report online)
There is no activity to report between the winter meeting and the conference. Activity usually happens between the conference and the winter PC meeting.
d. Organization and Bylaws Committee: Brad Morrison (Report online)
e. Publications Committee: George Richardson (Report online)
George Richardson reported that we need to confirm the appointment of another committee member for a three year term (2013-2015).
George moved (Kim Warren seconded) to approve appointment of Susan Howick. Motion passed.
f. Strategy Committee: David Ford (Reports online)
David Ford expressed thanks on behalf of the Society to Kim Warren for his diligent and persistent work.
VI. Call for Additional Items
Lees Stuntz wants explicit K-12 support to be shown in the budget.
VII. Motions/Action Items
a. Approval of Minutes of Winter 2012 David Lane moved (Rogelio Oliva seconded) to approve the minutes of the Winter 2012 meeting. Motion passed.
b. European Default site for 2014 (Andreas Groessler)
Andreas Groessler moved (Bob Eberlein seconded) that the Society adopt Delft University of Technology in Delft, the Netherlands, as the default site for Society conferences to be held every other year starting in 2014. Motion passed.
Andreas Groessler moved (Bob Eberlein seconded) to remove the expected $25,000 expected surplus from the conference budget for the European conference.
Discussion of the motion: The VP Meetings would monitor the finances of the conference. David A. confirmed that our budgeting practice has been to include an expectation of a conference surplus (approx. $25K). However, sometimes we do not achieve this and even sometimes incur a loss. The effect of this suggestion would be to reduce the fees for the European conference by $50, which means not having to make the European conference more expensive, given higher expenses and typically lower sponsorship revenues. Erik Pruyt reminded us that the facilities at Delft are free. With attendance at about 475 attendees, as we had for example in Neijmegen, we would achieve a $25K surplus. David A. explained there are two decoupled budget processes, one for Society and one for Conference. Rogelio suggested that we focus on trying to keep fees at levels similar to the fees for NA conference. George Richardson moved (Ed Anderson seconded) to table the motion. Motion to table passed.
Further Discussion: There is some concern about sponsorship and fundraising at the default sites. The default site model may actually require more workload from home office, but this was not the original intention. George points out that there will be more pressure on the Home Office to raise funds. Rogelio thinks that the apparatus for organizing a conference has changed and that it is necessary to create an apparatus to support the fundraising activity. He suggested that the VP Meetings need to consider the apparatus for decision making and conference planning that best fits with the new default site. Aldo talks about local sponsorship, society sponsorship, registration fees and conference expenses. There were some challenges during the Albuquerque, NM conference looking at costs and income and balancing those two things.
c. Approval of budget
Peter Milling reported that the Administrative Committee recommends the approval of the budget as presented by the VP Finance. Peter Milling moved (Etienne Rouette seconded) that the PC approve the 2013 budget presented by the VP Finance.
Discussion of the motion: The budget shows a structural deficit of about $49K from operations, but the budget breaks even when investment income, conference surplus, and sales are considered.
Lees said that Society has done a post-budget contribution to K-12 education for past several years. David said that Society is in financial position to be able to invest in things that are good for the field, and K-12 education is good for the field. We have done so informally in the past, and it would be great to formalize this position. Kim suggests that this request be channeled to Strengthening the Field Committee. The Strengthening the Field Committee will look at this request and ask for approval to broaden the mandate of the committee for spending the budgeting money.
Etienne would like to make budget for chapters available for SIGs.
David A. reminded us that compensation for the professional office staff is contingent on the Society overall being in the black. Consequently this should be taken this into consideration when budgeting funding for initiatives
Motion to approve the budget passed.
d. Approval of Standing Committee Members appointed by the President
David Ford moved (Markus Schwaninger seconded) to approve these appointments. Motion passed.
e. Canada Chapter Recognition (Report online)
Martin Schaffernicht moved (Etienne Rouwette seconded) to recognize the Canadian Chapter of the Society. The Canadians have put together a group with 13 members in good standing. Motion passed.
f. SPOC – Society Program Oversight Committee (Bob Eberlein) (Report online)
g. Motion for Formalization of Lifetime Achievement Award
Peter Milling moved (Bob Eberlein seconded) that the PC adopt the following motion:
The Policy Council hereby formally recognizes the Lifetime Achievement Award as an official award of the System Dynamics Society, and directs the Jay W. Forrester Award Committee to manage evaluations and granting of the award.
The criteria for this award are:
Discussion of the motion: Markus asks why one person should not be eligible for JWF award and the lifetime achievement award. Peter answers that awards committee discussed this question extensively, but agreed to proposed the motion as stated.
Yaman suggests that JWF award criteria should be applied in a strict way, as an award for a single piece of research and that the JWF award contribution could not be used as part of the lifetime achievement evaluation.
David A asked if there would be a cash stipend. Peter M. said the committee was not recommending a cash award. It was asked why not, if the JWF award would not be awarded in same year. George R. noted that a recipient of this award is not likely to expect a cash stipend.
Rogelio expressed concern about constraint that we could not give out JWF and LTA in same year.
David L. noted the program implication of a timeslot for a talk from the recipient.
Motion passed.
h. David Ford announced that Slate of Candidates to take office on January 1, 2013 is ratified due to no objection:
VIII. Additional Discussion about the Strategy Committee Report
Lees raised the question of when and where we should talk about strategy, and we spent some time on a Strategy Committee Report. David F. suggested that strategy committee tried to get a broad spectrum of people to participate, did not get much participation, and concluded that those who participated should try to keep moving forward. Kim said we got quite strong contribution to first part - what is vision for field, and quite strong contribution in terms of people expressing what success looks like. We got a lot of information about where we think we trying to bring the field by 2018. Kim extracted the implications of those views and possible implications for actions; however, there was very little response to Kim's first pass at trying to distill the ideas. Kim is uncomfortable that the existing set to recommendations is largely his views, so it is not clear about how best to move forward.
Aldo has organized a panel discussion to look at how the development funds provided were used. (Report online)
Aldo suggested that PC meeting should include an opportunity to present and get feedback, questions, etc.
Aldo commented on his experiences as participant who submitted input as part of the process. He said he participated but dropped the ball. He felt the feedback from the first phase was disappointing, that the work he put in had fell through the cracks, that there was not a wealth of information in the first round. He found much difficulty answering the questions in the second round The difficulty with round one is that it is an open ended set of questions. Round 2 really needs numbers or there is no real basis for strategy.
Kim noted that in round one was an open ended question, designed to be the least possible call on people's time. For quantitative questions, we were very much asking for guesses. Typically, answers clustered, but there were some outliers.
Most said over past five years, field has moved very little and desire that over next five years, we should be moving 3-5 times as fast.
For example, most respondents said that over the last 5 years we have moved very little if at all and over the next 5 years we need to move 3 times as fast, publishing 3 times as much, holding 3 times as many activities, achieving employment at 3 times current levels, and conducting 3 times as many executive training activities.
IX. Motion to Adjourn:
David Lane moved (Rogelio Oliva seconded) to adjourn the meeting. Motion passed.
Recorded by Secretary Brad Morrison.