 home > groups > aliawest > meetings > NPC 2001 delegate's report |
|||
ALIA WA ForumALIA National Policy Congress 2001CohesionWA Forum Delegate's ReportSixty-seven representatives from seventy-two Groups across Australia travelled to Canberra for the two day ALIA National Policy Congress (NPC), facilitated by Ian McCullum and opened by president Alan Bundy. Our purpose was to review progress made since NCP 2000 and to determine what still needs to be done in setting the policy direction ALIA is to take into the future, and I was at the NPC to represent WA Forum. National office staff and Directors were easily identified by their attractive black ALIA polo shirts. I was told that the shirts allow staff and Directors to stand out from ordinary members at conferences and the NPC. They certainly did, which was helpful, but I could not help wondering why such shirts and other merchandise are not made available to members for revenue raising and promotional opportunities in light of the fact that we are now urged to make a profit on events we organise for ALIA. Naturally, as one would expect at a talkfest, there were many speakers and topics of discussion. Here is an outline of the proceedings and my thoughts. ALIA executive director, Jennifer Nicholson outlined the projects being undertaken by National Office. These include:
Ten Group representatives gave their views in five-minute presentations on the achievements, challenges and key professional issues for the professional association. Subjects included many interests and issues affecting members, yet several issues were repeatedly raised, including the ALIA restructure and self-nominating groups as achievements; member services and communication as current challenges; and CPD, conferences and corporate credit cards for Groups as key professional issues. The ALIA 2002 Planning address by Jennifer Nicholson covered key areas of activity anticipated for the coming year. These are:
In this address, Jennifer floated the idea of a new vision statement for ALIA being "Inform, innovate, inspire". This phrase struck a chord with many of the delegates. I like it better as a motto. More than half a day was devoted to a long and torturous discussion on conferences. Many delegates were concerned that the Board of Directors had adopted a cavalier attitude to section conferences and a great deal of anger was expressed. Reading the mood of the delegates, Ian McCullum encouraged a thorough airing of the subject after an address by Alan Bundy who gave the Board's position and how and why the decision was reached. It was revealed that the Board undertook some research, much of it anecdotal, and made their decision based on the following:
In addition, the discussion revealed that the Board expects that Groups formed in the new ALIA structure would wish to hold professional development events, which would place an untenable burden on ALIA if the section conferences of the old structure remained unchanged. Groups can hold workshops and seminars, and can seek local sponsorship for them, but they cannot have 'conferences' with the associated big-ticket sponsorship and trade exhibitions. This means for instance, that the WA Local Studies Group will no longer hold a "Local Studies Section Conference" but can hold a "Local Studies Group Seminar" if it so wishes. Once all of this had been explained to the delegates, it became clear that the Board of Directors had done their job, perhaps not in a way members expected, but with the interests of the Association in mind. The Board had made a tough and it seemed, unpopular decision, but in doing so it showed the leadership that members have a right to expect from it. What the Board fell down on was how it communicated that decision to Groups and members. This is an illuminating point. The conference discussion revealed that those Groups with access to a Director have a better understanding of Board deliberations and decisions than those Groups without such access. The better-informed Groups have Directors attending their meetings and giving up to date information on Board deliberations. They also have the ability to influence Board decisions by information flowing back to the Board via the Directors. All of the WA based Groups have no such luxury, and are entirely dependent on official communication and information channels. These are the very same channels that failed to adequately communicate the Board's decision on conferences, which led to the confusion and anger expressed by the delegates at NPC. It seems incongruous to me that a professional association of information specialists which purports to be concerned with information access has a problem in providing good information access across its structure and to all of its members. Now that the conference discussion has brought the information access issue to a head National Office and the Board of Directors have made an undertaking to improve communications with Groups and members. However, it is my opinion that it is in the best interests of WA based Groups and members to have a WA based director on the Board who will provide the same level of information access, communication and influence our colleagues enjoy. For a while there on day two it looked as if the conference discussion was going to dominate proceedings once again, but a request to move on was so well received that the matter was promptly dropped. The time left to us was devoted to brief discussions on several topics. The first and most important of these is a requirement for improved communications between the Board, National Office, Groups and members. It would be fair to say that the Board and National Office were very surprised by the feelings expressed the previous day. So it was reassuring to see that the first subject of day two was an undertaking by the Board and National Office to take immediate steps to address the communication issue. Recommendations of the NPC were next. The delegates formulated the following recommendations to the Board:
It is important to note that these are recommendations not instructions, and that the Board is under no obligation to act on them. The recent engagement of Jacqui Kempton and the emphasis on education and CPD by the 10 Group representatives are evidence that education and professional development is at the forefront of everyone's minds. We heard that there is an acknowledgment of the growing importance of CPD to members, yet a relatively low take up of the CPD Scheme so far. It is also acknowledged that there is a need for career long education for the knowledge age, and in response to this is the Library and Information Science Education for the Knowledge Age (LISEKA) is investigating. Imogen Garner from WA is involved in LISEKA, which expects to complete consultations by August 2002. More information on LISEKA is available on the ALIA website. I don't envy Jacqui her task. A successful CPD strategy that delivers cost-effective CPD to members in two professional streams across Australia is not going to be easily achieved. We heard that National Office and the Board are concerned about falling membership. Falling membership is important from the perspective of Association revenue and influence. The discussion covered:
Jennifer Nicholson drew our attention to ALIA awards that is closely linked to recognition in the membership discussion. In keeping with the new ALIA structure National Office feels that there is a need for a new awards framework. Identifying and promoting existing awards is still ongoing, however this is what has been developed so far:
Jennifer did mention that sponsor suggestions on awards are also being taken into account. So long as there is not a 'Pura Cup' type of award I can't see any objection to sponsor input. The general principles of the new awards framework are to:
There may be more general principles but I didn't finish taking down the entire list, as we were a bit pushed for time at this stage. Finally, Alan Bundy spoke briefly on the Core Value Statement. The interim new vision statement did not meet with universal approval, but there was little time left to fully discuss the issue. A show of hands on an interim new vision statement 'Inform, innovate, inspire' drew 38 votes for and 10 votes against. In conclusion, I think the most important thing that came from the NPC was the airing of issues of concern to the membership and the opportunity for robust discussion. I think it was important that the Board and National Office saw how strongly people feel about some issues. It was also important for delegates to see that if a tough decision is called for the Board will show some leadership and make the tough decisions. It was heartening to see that many Groups share our interests and concerns, but it was distressing to see just how isolated WA members and Groups are despite huge advancements in technology since the Eucla Telegraph Station. I urge all ALIA members in WA to become more active in ALIA, and to communicate their needs and desires to the Board and National Office. You can do that through the WA Forum and other ALIA Groups that have been formed to serve and represent you. You can do that by voting for a WA-based nominee for the Board of Directors. More importantly, you can do that by becoming active in ALIA and making the changes happen. I urge this because at the NPC I saw that ALIA is as strong or weak and as good or bad as its membership allows it to be.
Eilishia Bardoe |
|
