 |
 |
Error during command authentication.
Error - unable to initiate communication with LISTSERV (errno=10061, phase=CONNECT, target=127.0.0.1:2306). The server is probably not started.
At last year's membership meeting I raised the issue of the Society's
structure. The Executive Board reviewed our committees at its mid-year
board meeting, and decided to restructure or eliminate all of our ad hoc
committees, recognizing that either their purpose was ongoing and should be
the charge of a standing committee, or that they had accomplished their
goals or that these goals would be better met by creating task forces with
specific charges and deadlines. This resulted in a more efficient array of
committees. Now I'd like to turn the discussion to our organization into
Divisions, Sections and Round Tables (DSRT's). Why should we discuss the
DSRT structure now? First, to respond to the Strategic Plan:
"Goal IV - To strengthen and increase the effectiveness of the Society's
activities and operations,
A. Provide an efficient organizational structure that is responsive to the
membership."
Second, while not specifically mentioned in the Strategic Plan, we should
also examine the effect of the current DSRT structure on conference
planning, especially on the number of meeting rooms required. The number of
meeting rooms we require is the major factor limited where and when we can
hold the conference. If we had fewer groups guaranteed meetings we would
have more flexibility in conference scheduling, both within the conference,
and in the type of hotel (and therefore city) that can host the conference.
For example, we have hotel meeting rooms reserved for 71 slots during the
Baltimore conference, and still do not have enough space to accommodate
every group that wants to meet or worthy session that was proposed. There
are not many hotels that are interested in hosting our conference, given our
comparatively small size combined with a requirement for many meeting rooms.
Finally, the mission statements of the DSRT's have not been updated since
the requirement that conference sessions be sponsored by DSRT's was
eliminated; our sponsorship model now is purely financial. Even though this
discussion will be slow, deliberative, and structured so as to involve as
much input from members as possible, I am confident that the results of the
discussion, whatever they may be, will lead to a healthier Society.
I would like to begin the process by asking all moderators of DSRT's to
schedule some time during their business meetings to discuss the role and
goals of their own DSRT. I will also make this discussion the main agenda
item at the annual membership meeting. In order to help the discussion I
have prepared the following discussion paper, which I hope will help raise
the questions that need to be addressed and give further background to the
issue. The board will look forward to hearing your views during the coming
year.
What is the purpose of the DSRT's?
They are no longer required for sponsoring conference sessions, but they can
still help by giving their imprimatur to proposals, providing a venue for
discussing proposed subjects, and to help avoid duplication among proposals.
The conference program chair and conference planning committee also fulfill
these functions. The program chair in particular has come to play a more
active role in shaping individual sessions.
While one intention was that DSRT's would foster communication among groups
between conferences mailings were infrequent (as was any activity in most
cases). Use of ARLIS-L and e-mail fulfill the need for communication without
requiring any organization structure, e.g. ARLIS-L by the use of subject
lines can effectively communicate about an issue of interest only to a
particular group within ARLIS/NA. DSRT's do currently have a role in
selecting editors to provide columns for Update, but these editors could
just as well be selected or appointed by the Update editor or the
Publications Committee.
DSRT's define groups of members with expertise in particular areas, but
their membership is self-selected and not necessarily inclusive. In theory,
the Executive Board can go to the DSRT's for advice, or to ask for nominees
or volunteers for committees or task forces, but, in practice, the executive
board usually relies on existing committees or on its own knowledge of
members' strengths and interests.
One requirement of DSRT's is that they hold a business meeting and elect
officers. ("Select" may be a better word than "elect" since there are very
few contested elections for DSRT officers.) Running a meeting and leading a
group may be good experience, but that may not be enough of a reason to
perpetuate these groups. Service in these positions may be a good way to
cultivate future leaders, but experience at the chapter, committee, or
conference planning levels may be more valuable.
The business meetings may be a good way for new members to find others who
share their interests, but they are more likely to fulfill this function if
they are organized, with and agenda, and specific topics to discuss. At
that point they take on the nature of discussion groups, rather than serving
as an integral part of the organizational structure. If primary rationale
of the DSRT's is to provide the opportunity to meet with other members who
share the same interests and to discuss topics of shared interest, perhaps
the DSRT's should simply be replaced with discussion groups. That
proposition, "eliminate all DSRT's and replace them with discussion groups"
leads to a new set of questions.
1. Should every such group be formally established?
2. Should there be any criteria for the formation of a group?
Number of members? Attendance records?
3. Should every such group be guaranteed a meeting at every
conference?
4. If each group is not guaranteed a meeting, who determines
which groups get one? The conference program chair? The conference
planning committee? The EB?
5. How effective is the use of the self-scheduled room to set
up this type of meeting? Would a greater amount of free time during the
conference make this option more attractive?
6. Should these meetings be required to have a theme, topic,
agenda, or speakers to be approved?
7. Who runs the meetings? Are the leaders self-selected?
8. Who would be responsible for proposing the meeting?
9. Would this approach actually create more groups than we have
now?
Since this is such a complex topic I suggest that we do not try to discuss
in on ARLIS-L. Please consider these questions so that we can have a
productive discussion during the conference. If you are unable to attend
the conference, please feel free to send your comments to me or to any other
board member or DSRT moderator. I look forward to hearing from you, and
seeing you in Baltimore.
Daniel
#####################################
Daniel Starr, President
ARLIS/NA
Manager of Bibliographic Operations
Thomas J. Watson Library
The Metropolitan Museum of Art
1000 Fifth Avenue
New York, NY 10028-0198
212-650-2582
212-570-3847 (fax)
[log in to unmask]
__________________________________________________________________
Mail submissions to [log in to unmask]
For information about joining ARLIS/NA see:
http://www.arlisna.org//membership.html
Send administrative matters (file requests, subscription requests, etc)
to [log in to unmask]
ARLIS-L Archives and subscription maintenance:
http://lsv.uky.edu/archives/arlis-l.html
Questions may be addressed to list owner (Kerri Scannell) at: [log in to unmask]