In mid-summer, after conferring with several colleagues, I announced on the Open Line and members' e-mail lists that the Association will launch a new online discussion forum soon after Labor Day. Brainstommg@apsa.org is the e-mail address for the new list.
This online discussion will have a facilitator (each elected councilor-at-large, in turn) who will introduce a clearly defined topic: a challenge to the APsaA, a question of organizational policy, a political dilemma, a quandary about strategy, and the like. To frame the topic, the facilitator will briefly outline some background for the query — historical perspective, studies undertaken, statistics — as a springboard for our discussion.
All members of the Association are invited to contribute, discuss, question, challenge, and be creative and imaginative — in short, to brainstorm. When the discussion about the topic on the table seems to be cooling, the facilitator will summarize the main points raised. Then, together with the participants, he will come up with next steps, e.g., an ad hoc group to follow up, a suggested policy or procedure statement, or retiring the whole idea.
One of the problems I see with the current Open Line format is that when a creative idea is introduced, there are a few responses, but the idea soon gets lost in the diverse contributions and political discussion. This seems like a wasted opportunity for us to creatively address some of the ideas posted and to better define and confront some of the challenges to the Association.
A motto will be printed with every message: “All ideas are valued. Focus and civility will be helpful.” This slogan is meant to capture and convey the spirit of the brainstorming effort. Indeed, we hope for a wide range of ideas and opinions. The facilitators (and the participants) will have the responsibility of reminding contributors when their postings are far off the topic or may be insulting to other members in the group and thus could undermine the effort for full and creative discussion. (We hope this happens rarely and offline.) Challenging an idea is valuable; attacking a colleague is counterproductive and unacceptable.
I have asked the eight nationally elected councilors-at-large to serve in turn as the list's facilitator. Each of the councilors may invite a co-facilitator to assist, someone who has a particular interest in or expertise about the topic. The entire membership will be invited to suggest topics or questions for . A panel from the councilors-at-large and the Steering and Executive committees will select the issues to be put on the table.
The first topic to be addressed in September will be “The strategic marketing research — Implications, and how can we best address some of the findings?” Leon Hoffman will be the facilitator; Glenn Good, who has been intimately involved with this marketing research, will be the co-facilitator. This is a discussion that we must have!
In brainstorming about , a number of people strongly recommended that rather than facilitators guiding the discussion, we have moderators, who would have the additional function of screening out irrelevant or offensive postings. I have elected not to have moderators. I trust all will respect the charge: “All ideas are valued. Focus and civility will be helpful.”
The Association needs full, thoughtful, and creative discussion of the many challenges that now confront us externally and internally. With enthusiasm and high expectations, the brainstorming begins.
Certification Corrections
On page 11 of TAP 36/2, the box outlining statistics on applications for certification and certifications includes a major error. The box states that there were twenty-six first-time applicants for certification between December 1996 and December 2001. The correct number is 128.
On page 12, an editor's note quotes Michael Singer regarding “the four-year period 1992–96 and the four-year period 1997–2001.” Singer's statistics were gathered for the five-year periods May 1991 through May 1996 and December 1996 through December 2001, which may well account for the statistical discrepancies noted.
TAP apologizes for the errors.