Difference between revisions of "ESIP Partnership March Telecon (1:30PM EDT)"
(Created page with "''Back to'' '''Partnership''' -- The following applications have been posted for review by the Partnership Committee <br> Telecon: Monday March 20 1:30 - 2:30PM EDT <br ...") |
|||
Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
==Meeting Minutes / Other Notes== | ==Meeting Minutes / Other Notes== | ||
− | Present: Danie, Nancy, Bob, | + | Present: Danie, Nancy, Bob, Annie B. |
− | + | Review of Partnership Committee role for ESIP.<br /> | |
+ | |||
+ | '''[[Partnership_Applications| Membership applications]] review'''<br /> | ||
+ | :''Questions wrt applications:'' <br /> | ||
+ | :Do we encourage one application for an entire organization (i.e., EPA) or do we encourage individual labs/divisions/departments to become members? There may be pros and cons to smaller divisional representation with respect to travel authorization to ESIP meetings, and competitive perspectives on voting representation. <br /> | ||
+ | :*How do we decide if a single voting rep is sufficiently representing the entire organization or a smaller subset? Entire organizational membership is a more welcoming situation for inclusiveness, however the broader organization membership may result in dilution of the benefits of ESIP participation to the individual department/division/lab. <br /> | ||
+ | :*Can we get clarification (from ESIP) on how these reps relate to the broader organization? Is there interest in seeing a voting rep:organizational size ratio determined? Or, Possibly edit current application text to include language to indicate that membership of a large organization implies inclusiveness to all organizational members (across departments/divisions/labs)? | ||
+ | |||
+ | Perhaps develop a survey for voting reps (targeting larger organizations) - any issues as a single voting rep of a large organization- such a survey could establish demographics and identify any issues related to voting representation. Danie will investigate with Erin, Bruce, etc. | ||
+ | |||
+ | NOTE: Problem reviewing applications- insufficient permissions, members could not view all applications.- Danie fixed, but members didn't have opportunity to review the applications. Push until next meeting with ongoing review of applications until then. | ||
+ | |||
+ | '''Other Topics'''<br /> | ||
+ | *Meeting timing - can we meet on any other Monday of month? As it stands, this meeting overlaps DSC telecon - second Monday each month would work well (next Monday April 10 @10:30PT/1:30ET) - Danie will check with Viv on new timing and communicate decision to Annie who will change in the ESIP calendar. | ||
+ | |||
+ | '''Actions''' <br /> | ||
+ | *All: Review apps, jot down any concerns, identify any incomplete applications,etc. Send notes to Danie who will post on Partnership wiki. Final review/discussion of concerns at next meeting. | ||
+ | *Danie: Investigate partnership survey with Erin, Bruce, etc. | ||
+ | *Danie will check with Viv on new meeting time and communicate to Annie. |
Latest revision as of 13:56, March 20, 2017
Back to Partnership -- The following applications have been posted for review by the Partnership Committee
Telecon: Monday March 20 1:30 - 2:30PM EDT
Call In Details:
Please join from your computer, tablet or smartphone.
https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/168308485
You can also dial in using your phone.
United States +1 (646) 749-3131
Access Code: 168-308-485
Agenda
- Membership application review
- Time line: conduct follow-up as necessary for due date 31 March; Assembly review in April; vote in May; announcement at Summer Meeting. (Danie will confirm this timeline)
- Update on other actions for Partnership
Meeting Minutes / Other Notes
Present: Danie, Nancy, Bob, Annie B.
Review of Partnership Committee role for ESIP.
Membership applications review
- Questions wrt applications:
- Do we encourage one application for an entire organization (i.e., EPA) or do we encourage individual labs/divisions/departments to become members? There may be pros and cons to smaller divisional representation with respect to travel authorization to ESIP meetings, and competitive perspectives on voting representation.
- How do we decide if a single voting rep is sufficiently representing the entire organization or a smaller subset? Entire organizational membership is a more welcoming situation for inclusiveness, however the broader organization membership may result in dilution of the benefits of ESIP participation to the individual department/division/lab.
- Can we get clarification (from ESIP) on how these reps relate to the broader organization? Is there interest in seeing a voting rep:organizational size ratio determined? Or, Possibly edit current application text to include language to indicate that membership of a large organization implies inclusiveness to all organizational members (across departments/divisions/labs)?
- How do we decide if a single voting rep is sufficiently representing the entire organization or a smaller subset? Entire organizational membership is a more welcoming situation for inclusiveness, however the broader organization membership may result in dilution of the benefits of ESIP participation to the individual department/division/lab.
Perhaps develop a survey for voting reps (targeting larger organizations) - any issues as a single voting rep of a large organization- such a survey could establish demographics and identify any issues related to voting representation. Danie will investigate with Erin, Bruce, etc.
NOTE: Problem reviewing applications- insufficient permissions, members could not view all applications.- Danie fixed, but members didn't have opportunity to review the applications. Push until next meeting with ongoing review of applications until then.
Other Topics
- Meeting timing - can we meet on any other Monday of month? As it stands, this meeting overlaps DSC telecon - second Monday each month would work well (next Monday April 10 @10:30PT/1:30ET) - Danie will check with Viv on new timing and communicate decision to Annie who will change in the ESIP calendar.
Actions
- All: Review apps, jot down any concerns, identify any incomplete applications,etc. Send notes to Danie who will post on Partnership wiki. Final review/discussion of concerns at next meeting.
- Danie: Investigate partnership survey with Erin, Bruce, etc.
- Danie will check with Viv on new meeting time and communicate to Annie.