[NCUC-DISCUSS] A note from the Executive Committee - On Transparency and NomCom Selection Process

[farzaneh badii]

Dear NCUC members,


Thanks to everyone for having engaged in a robust discussion on this latest
nomination. Since the question of transparency has been raised, we thought
it best to respond regarding our thought process, and the road ahead.

As many on this list have noted, transparency is of the utmost importance
in these processes. The community needs to be confident that the process
was fair, honest and accountable. We take this responsibility seriously. As
others have also noted, there are competing considerations that need to be
carefully balanced as part of these processes. These include the ability of
the EC to openly and honestly express their views about candidates,
discussing their weaknesses as well as their strengths. It is also worth
noting that often the candidates for these positions are our respected
colleagues. The process requires that EC members be able to discuss their
preferences frankly, without worrying that their remarks will lead to
personal animosity down the line. Another important consideration is that
we want to structure the process in a way that encourages candidates to
run. Having our assessments of their strengths and weaknesses made public
could be an unpleasant experience for potential candidates, discouraging
them from seeking positions.

These considerations were much less of an issue in this case, as we were
fortunate enough to have two outstanding candidates, either of whom would
have made an excellent NomCom rep - but they are principles of general
importance. So how should these considerations be balanced against our
fundamental responsibility to execute a transparent and accountable
process, and one which inspires confidence among the membership of the NCUC?

Ultimately, the path forward depends on you - the community. For those who
have raised calls for more transparency - your timing could not be better.
We are currently in the midst of a consultation on our revised operating
procedures, which includes protocols on this very issue. We agree that
there needs to be more clarification on how these processes are handled
next time, and we invite you all to weigh in, either here or, preferably,
in the draft consultation document, available at: https://docs.google.com/do
cument/d/1uolqcYivX_KVOgPdjl3wB_aBkHyLcFkvzNsNU47BRQY/edit#h
eading=h.1x7lfonwlklh
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1uolqcYivX_KVOgPdjl3wB_aBkHyLcFkvzNsNU47BRQY/edit#heading=h.1x7lfonwlklh>

So tell us - how can we improve things?


NCUC Executive Committee

Renata Acquino Ribeiro
David Cake
Farzaneh Badii
Michael Karanikolas
Tatiana Tropina
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20170801/b57c0c07/attachment.html>