ESA Renewal Process
Frequently
Asked Questions - General
Why was the Renewal process undertaken?
What happens if we don’t do this?
How will this change benefit me as a member?
When would this take place?
How many volunteers will this take?
What is included in the phrase scientific and professional communications?
What does "program development" mean? What are some examples?
Is certification relevant for all Sections?
The Renewal effort has been a long and thoughtful process. Six years ago, having
emerged from a financial crisis, the Governing Board determined that the Society
should be more nimble and flexible in governance and more focused for future
growth. The Constitution and Bylaws were designed and created at a different
time and for a vastly different ESA – it was clear that they needed an overhaul
to reduce complexity. This effort seeks to remedy that need, but more
importantly it puts focus on why we exist – our core capabilities, while at the
same time maintaining all that is positive and working well within ESA.
Nothing. Like any important opportunity or transformation, if you don’t take the
new opportunity, then nothing happens. If the renewal process doesn’t go
through, we still have our Society. But not taking a step forward has its costs
as well – especially in a world that is changing around us. If Renewal is not
accepted, ESA maintains the same organizational structure. The Governing Board
sincerely hopes, however, that you will embrace these concepts – we have worked
very deliberately to ensure we reinforce what is working well and to design new
ways and approaches for ESA to grow and thrive. On some level, we are asking you
to trust us – if we learn that one or more areas is not working as designed,
we’ll change – that ‘s the beauty of flexibility!
The main benefit of the proposed Renewal process is organizational focus. If
approved, it will make your Society more responsive to your needs through a
decrease in bureaucratic procedures and with empowered Sections. Your voice will
be louder, your opportunities to participate greater, and mechanisms to address
collective needs will have more teeth. In addition, member networks will
facilitate peer-to-peer interaction on a greater scale than currently exists,
and in a non-intrusive way.
The proposed timeline would suggest that the first phase of implementation would be 2007 and 2008.
The Governing Board re-wrote the Bylaws in January of 2007 and – after a review
by the Rules Committee – they will be voted on by the full membership in a
special election this spring.
The proposed renewal will take approximately 120 volunteers with major roles and responsibilities in governance
– this is roughly equivalent to the current structure (around 2% of the total
volunteer pool). The primary change is the depth of expectations related to
Section governance.
Communications is one of the 5 core capabilities that we believe should define ESA going forward -- of course it is a key capability today
-- but we would hope that it continues to improve. The capability itself includes publication of our scientific journals and other periodical publications
(e.g., American Entomologist) as well as special publications such as Thomas Say Monographs, arthropod management tests, handbooks, and the like. Communications also includes our Annual Meeting which is a key venue for exchange of scientific information, network meetings, etc.. The third and emerging area of communications would be our Website and associated cyber-communication methods -- these are very underdeveloped in my opinion and will need to be expanded significantly over time. For the entire Communications Capability, ESA Central would be the primary owner and the Governing Board would dedicate a large portion of its attention to making our journals, meeting, and website "world class" -- today it only receives a very limited focus.
Today, a "program" refers to the Annual Meeting program and "program development" means proposing,
assembling, and delivering symposia -- this is all good and will not change as an "event". However, what we hope to
achieve with empowered Sections that will develop a plan to address key issues/needs throughout all 12 months and not
just at the Annual Meeting. The current situation with Bed Bug is perhaps a good example -- there will be several
symposia in San Diego on this topic -- but can't ESA members put together some plans and multiple tactics between
Annual Meetings? Surely individuals do -- but if a Section had money to use for it's agenda (and we propose they will),
perhaps they can send some reps to Washington to make a case for a research approach, or formulate standard research
methods, or conduct regional training, or ???? I think it will take a while for ESA to accept a role as described,
but if we empower Sections to think big on their collective influence (and remove administrative burden), then
perhaps we can establish a much broader influence within our science and build "programs" that are viewed as authoritative.
The ESA certification programs (BCE and ACE) address the needs of individuals within all aspects of ESA. Because
certification focuses on standards for competency, the standards must be at the
ESA Central level. The Certification Governance (i.e. Certification Board) is
not impacted by this proposal.
Links to other FAQs:
General
Sections
Branches
Networks
ESA-Central
