I-CHRIE Executive Committee Meeting

I-CHRIE Board Meeting

July 29, 2008

Waverly Renaissance Atlanta

Members in Attendance: Nick Hadgis; Peter Jones; Mokie Steiskal; Pat Moreo; Lea Dopson; Kathy McCarty; Randy Goldberg; Richard Ghiselli; Eliza Ching-Yick Tse; Chris Roberts; Cliff Withem; ; Ron Carpenter; Ray Schmidgall; Cynthia Deale; Carl Winston;

Absent: Vikneswaran Nair; Lee Atchison.

Also in attendance were the following incoming Board Members: Bill Sammenfink John Self; Joy Horng; Dennis Reynolds

President Hadgis called to order at 0830h.

He asked all present to introduce themselves.

Secretary Moreo called the roll.

Nick Hadgis moved to approve the January minutes. Ray seconded. The motion passed unanimously.

Secretary’sReport

Pat suggested that the Bylaws changes proposed should also include the actual creation of the new North American federations.

President’s Report

Peter noted that the work needed for this meeting has been completed by him.
Peter explained how this conference would be used for the board and the membership to consider the many changes which are currently proposed. He went through the details of how the information would be shared at the conference including the Deans and Directors and the General Meeting.
A vote will ultimately be taken from the membership after the conference.
Chris asked about the name change, but Peter said this was on the table.
Peter suggested that the Bylaws Committee will, after this conference, make the final proposed changes in the Bylaws.
Pat asked if we would have enough time to discuss this adequately in the General Membership meeting where Peter will do his power point.
Ron asked how the people not at the conference could be involved. Peter suggested that this would happen electronically as well as by representation on this board.

Executive Vice President’s Report

Kathy called our attention to the changes in the way the office is operating with Kevin responsible for the day to day operations.
There was some discussion of the use of Linkedin, but that there is some difficulty with it since they are not currently taking any new non profit members.
Emails are going from CHRIE twice per week.

Immediate Past President’s Report

Nick reported on the nominating committee which used voting on demand. The process went well.
Kathy noted about 28% of the members vote.
Nick also made the awards report. Nick noted that the criteria must be adhered to in making awards. Not all awards are given every year.
Nick suggests that the international aspects of CHRIE are important and noted that this part of CHRIE is becoming more important. He raised the question of perhaps a growing need for accreditation as we move forward in growing CHRIE internationally.
Nick congratulated the new board members
Peter noted that the next V.P. will be from a 4 year school. Nick will pass the files along.

The group took a break at 0915h and reconvened at 0932

Vice President’s Report

Vision 2015. Mokie outlined the 4 major directions for CHRIE: education, research, networking and industry. She noted that this is not very different from what was outlined in CHRIE’s historical records for what its original purpose was at founding.
The vision from the last strategic plan has not changed.
The new 2008-2015 plan itself has 5 major goals and she walked the group through the new plan. She discussed progress for implementing parts of the plan.
Mokie noted that the full plan is on the web. This Board now needs to discuss and approve the new plan or change it and approve it.
Peter noted that a main purpose of the plan is to get the Federations involved in delivering on the 4 main goals.
Carl questioned how we staff and provide for these goals.
Kathy noted that these 4 directors would be like project managers and would have to delegate much of it to their counterparts in the Federations via the committees.
Carl questioned if there would be sufficient participation to make this work.
Kathy noted that she, in a more strategic role, would be able to work with these directors.
Peter asked about the 4 major areas in the plan and is there agreement on these areas?
Bill S. raised an example issue of membership which he notes is not specifically addressed in the listing of these 4 areas, since there would not be a director of membership.
Peter suggested that we might want to have elections for 2 years at a time. The president could then be any board member who could be elected president. Some members noted that this could be difficult and that the president needs the time in progression to get ready to assume office.
Mokie said membership could be under goal 3 in networking product and services.
Ron noted that membership is crucial and that it needs measurables attached to it.
Peter noted that this is a 7 year plan and that the budget on an annual basis can be more specific in terms of setting targets.
Nick noted that specified operational objectives need to be specified in the plan as another layer and can be modified each year.
Richard raised the issue of the various categories of CHRIE including 4 year, 2 year, high school, and other areas. We are letting the desire to change the structure (change chapters) “drive the bus” instead of having our specific goals propel us.
Pat suggested that Rich is correct and we need to say clearly if we are going to provide for the high schools by adding this as a level to the plan. Pat also suggested that the bylaws changes need to be done at one time including the federation changes and the other structural changes as proposed in the strategic plan.
Nick raised the question of should we just have one North American Federation rather than having separate North American federations?
Peter noted that the rationale for 4 North American federations was to give balance in membership numbers with the European and Asian Federations.
Marianna noted that the proposed plan would change CHRIE into a product basked organization rather than a service based organization. Should something like the conference be a separate project rather than in one of the 4 proposed directors. She suggested we consider structuring CHRIE as a matrix with the people responsible in one axis and the specific projects along the other axis.
Peter noted that the current 19 committees are primarily project based, appointed by the president and reporting to a board member. The proposed that in the new structure, the members of equivalent committees would actually be elected because of the structure change because of the federal involvement.
Peter noted that we could add under 1.c. in the plan wording referring to 4 year, 2 year and high school.
Bill raised the question of how we are going to implement this. Also, what is the time line we are looking at for an ultimate member vote on the bylaws changes to implement the strategic plan?
Peter noted that Bill as new V.P. could come up with the operationalization of the strategic plan. Nick noted that this is the level of the proposed plan which is missing.
Lea commented that revenues and costs need to flow from the assumptions in the strategic plan.
Nick noted that the time line needs to indicate when we want a complete strategic plan. We also need a time line for the individual operational objectives and they could vary and need to be evaluated.
Bill asked Peter what his thought was on the actual time line and when the plan would be finished an ultimately implemented. Peter said that alignment of goals and operationalization will be important. He noted that timing will depend upon membership discussions etc. Peter would like to have the Bylaws vote in October or November and then begin implementation over the following 18 months.
Pat noted that we need to have steps to make this consideration happen w/ the membership at this current conference.
Peter responded that the Board will then on this Saturday make further decisions about the strategic plan and the subsequent bylaws changes.
Kathy noted that we need more specifics on when and how on implementation.
Carl suggested that we cannot now provide micro managed details for each future goal and leave it to responsible individuals in the future.
Bill said we need to have specifics for Kathy and the rest us to work on presenting these ideas to the membership. He also noted that we need to come up with specifics that we are going to try to offer to the membership
Kathy noted that we need a specific list of what we are going to offer to the members in new products and services adding value to membership.
Peter answered that the big picture is that we need to realign our resources around the 4 major goals which will deliver products and services.
Pat asked who and when will all this happen? Peter noted that it will be the Bylaws committee and the new V.P. to get this done.
Lea raised the question of accountability for strategic implementation, especially if there are changes, such as responsibility in the web site being split up.
Kathy again said we need to offer specifics to the members.
Chris noted that we need to have someone who is going to track progress on various projects and people.
Peter noted that we can reject the new strategic plan, or we can accept it as proposed, or we can change it and then adopt. Peter asked people at the table who have not commented to do so.
Ron said we need to list the objectives.
Cynthia said we need approve a plan.
Randy said we need to move forward – there is not enough time to do otherwise.
Dennis suggested that we start with the structure.
John noted that membership is crucial and that we need to consider a fifth director, focusing on membership. People want a reason for joining.
Eliza agreed that we need a membership focus and that we need to articulate what CHRIE does for membership.
Cliff is concerned about the membership.
Ray noted that we must convince the deans and directors to pay for members’ dues. He also raises the question of what a strong Central U.S. Federation would look like and how this would play out, for example, in financing CHRIE.
Peter suggests that we take a series of votes on the proposed strategic plan today after the break. If we do accept it, we can propose amendments at the Saturday morning board meeting. [The group took a 7 minute break].
Peter noted that after discussion w/ some members that there be only one vote to accept or not on the plan and there could be amended
MOTION: Mokie made a motion to accept the strategic plan as presented. Carl seconded. Peter called for discussion of the motion.
Nick asked to amend the motion so that mission sentenceis amended to say: … that ….”provides its members…” Ray seconded the motion to amend. Mokie accepted the amendment.
Richard is concerned about member categories. Rich moved that we amend the motion by adding under “Strategy and Structure” that the specific membership groups include 4 year, 2 year, high school and industry.” Mokie accepted the amendment.
Ron moved that the motion be amended to add that at the end of the plan document the CEO will develop measurable and quantifiable operational targets for the strategic plan that will be approved by the board and reviewed semiannually. This will be called “measurement of achievement.” Mokie accepted the amendment.
Lea moved to amend the motion by removing “member services” from the list of current board positions to be eliminated and to add that director of member services remain in the Bylaws. Mokie accepted the amendment.
Peter moved to remove Appendix I. Mokie accepted the amendment.
Ray moved to amend by eliminating “Future Fund” as a board position. Mokie accepted amendment.
Richard moved that we amend to add a revised Appendix summarizing the strategic plan. Mokie accepted.
Pat called he question. Peter took the vote and it passed unanimously.
Mokie presented the report she wrote on how to move forward with the contract considerations surrounding Kathy’s move away from Richmond.
Peter asked Pat to present his conversation concerning use of a management company wherein we were advised that we were too small to do that satisfactorily.
Carl questioned if we should go into executive session. Peter said that we did not need to.
Pat asked Kathy to describe how the move has worked and what the vision is of how this would be implemented. Kathy commented that this supports the plan to have her do more strategic work and fundraising. They transitioned her out of the office and to Connecticut. Kevin has assumed daily operational tasks. Kathy notes that she and the office have been building to this point to have her do more strategic work. Kevin runs the staff meetings and the office. Kathy and Kevin communicate through SKYPE.
Ron raised the question of having the CEO and the operation of a small organization separate from each other by a plane ride. In a small organization such as ours, it does not make sense for her to be separated by the office. He commented that the EuroCHRIE members are concerned about this. Kathy responded that part of why it works is that she and Kevin have a long standing working relationship. Kathy says we have a great deal. She suggests that changing either her or Kevin will cause a problem.
Peter recapped the progression of events leading to Kathy’s move and its execution. There is an offer to consider for her to have a 2 year contract rather than a 3 year contract when her current contact ends in December of this year.
Nick raised the issue of should we take over the conference management function in house again. Kathy commented that it’s a question of economics of what we could get for the same money.
Ron reiterated the notion of a separate CEO from the rest of the organization does not make sense. He asks what we would want in a CEO if we were starting from scratch. We need a growth oriented CEO and not an administrator. He disagrees with a distance CEO, but if we are going to do it, we need some details of how it’s going to be implemented. Ron thinks this CEO should be holding the CHRIE flag out there representing us to education and industry.
Pat suggested that if we keep Kathy, we need to be prepared to be certain that the CHRIE membership understands why we want to keep Kathy even though she has moved and we could have the ability to hire a new CEO in Richmond.
Bill suggested that the 2 year time period will be a good test to see if this is going to work.
Peter reminded us that the Bylaws dictate that he and the VP make the actual contract decision with the CEO. He and Mokie are going to renew the contract with Kathy for 2 years.

Peter adjourned the meeting for lunch at 1245h.

The meeting reconvened at 1320h.

Treasurer’s Report

Lea led the group through the Treasurer’s report.
She especially noted the increase in membership dues.
Costs are well under control.
Peter asked about the timing of new members and the conference noting that we would pick up more as a result of conference registration.
Rich raised the question of how much surplus do we want from the conference, and how do we translate that to member benefits.
Ray moved and Ron seconded to accept the Treasurer’s report. It passed unanimously.

Director of Conferences Report

The number registrants is near 500 and is increased by 10% from last year.
Carl reminded us about going to the new attendees session.
He led us through the speakers. MPI’s speaker will be important for us for future relationships especially. Peter noted that each of the speakers is related to our 2015 workshop forces driving change.
Carl thanked Kevin for all they help he gave in organizing the conference.
Carl proposed that we shorten the conference. We could end after the awards dinner on Friday night. He is suggesting creating simultaneous pedagogy, research and administrator tracks with some convergence points (like the keynotes). It would enable us to address each constituent group in a better way.
There was discussion of several options including starting on Thursday and finishing on Saturday night so that there is a Saturday night stayover to which some airlines are returning.
The next conference is in San Francisco, thenProvidence and then Denver.
Carl suggested that he and his committee try to start seeing how this could work in a new conference schedule.
Mokie suggested that we might want to schedule the CareerAcademy over the course of the conference using the tracks.
Bill suggested that if the CareerAcademy were folded into the conference rather than just one day, we might lose some people.
Carl will try to see if we can begin with next year by ending in San Francisco at noon on Saturday. He is discussing this with the hotel.