Eric's
idea is truly worth considering. We need to decide if the idea is one we want to
embrace. The rest is executional.
Ross
makes good points but if we decide to adopt Eric's idea then the rest can be
fixed.
Representing your own chapter is a lot different that
representing a whole region. Regional reps have to visit the various chapters.
That task would disappear.
The
local chapter could help with funds for the travel of their rep to board
meetings. The money is there. Most chapters have travel funds to help
someone go the national conference. Reconsidering the use of chapter
funds would fall to the chapter.
I'm
sure others will have other points but we need to consider the theory.
It's
really a good one, Eric.
Emily
Roth
From: ART LIBRARIES
SOCIETY DISCUSSION LIST [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Day,
Ross Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2006 11:52 AM To:[log in to unmask] Subject: Re: [ARLIS-L] ARLIS/NA-Local Chapter
communications
Eric,
What an intriguing proposition. It would reduce the number of reporting
layers from the membership to the Board. One wonders whether communications
between the Society and its membership are sufficiently strong that appointing
a liaison/go between between the Board and the membership is
redundant.
It is worth keeping in mind, however, that Board appointments come with
(at least at this point) an enormous commitment of time and energy on the part
of each Board member. Far from merely representing the regional constituency,
regional representatives are assigned a number of additional ongoing and
ad-hoc Society responsibilities. It's true that increasing the size of the
Board would lessen the individual burden on each Board member.
Yet one of the
'financial' responsibilities is attending the twice yearly Board
meetings, a responsibility which often falls on the Board member's institution
or, far too often, on the Board member herself/himself (with limited financial
assistance from the Society). This has sometimes proven an impediment in
finding members to serve on the Board. It would certainly be no less so with
an expanded Board.
I have long advocated rethinking the role of regional representatives
in the Board structure, perhaps in favor of at-large representatives with
fixed duties and responsibilities. This would have the advantage of clarifying
in advance for potential candidates their obligations during their term. (I
haven't crunched the numbers, so I can't speak to the question of whether the
regions as they now exist proportionately represent the overall
membership.)
RD
-----Original Message----- From: ART LIBRARIES SOCIETY
DISCUSSION LIST [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Eric
Wolf Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2006 10:32 AM To:[log in to unmask] Subject: [ARLIS-L] ARLIS/NA-Local Chapter
communications
Dear ARLIS/NA Board and
Membership,
First of all, I would like to
thank the Board for sending out the survey and giving us a chance to give
some feedback.All in all, I
think the organization continues to do a great job, many
thanks.
As I filled out the survey, a
thought occurred to me which might improve communication between the local
chapters and ARLIS North America.This would involve changing the structure of regional board
representation. Rather than
maintaining the current system of regional reps, what if each local chapter
elected its own representative to the ARLIS/NA Executive Board. While this would increase the number
of representatives, it would give each chapter its own representative, and
these representatives would be known to all members of the local chapter she
or he represented. She or he
would also be available to the local membership (not merely the board
members through formal correspondences) at local meetings and events. This would provide a much easier
conduit for information to go back and forth between the local and NA
organizations and would help make local members feel they have more
representation at the NA level. This representative would effectively
serve on both boards and would represent the interest of both the larger
organization and the unique needs and perspectives of a specific chapter,
rather than a geographic region with competing chapters and interests.While I realize such a change would
require a by-laws change, I feel it is worth consideration.
Further thoughts or input from
other members is welcome!
__________________________________________________________________
Mail submissions to [log in to unmask] For information about joining
ARLIS/NA see: http://www.arlisna.org/join.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 (Judy Dyki) at:
[log in to unmask]
__________________________________________________________________
Mail submissions to [log in to unmask] For information about joining ARLIS/NA
see: http://www.arlisna.org/join.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 (Judy Dyki) at: [log in to unmask]
__________________________________________________________________
Mail submissions to [log in to unmask]
For information about joining ARLIS/NA see:
http://www.arlisna.org/join.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 (Judy Dyki) at: [log in to unmask]
