Informal Members' Council
Report of informal Council of Members meeting
Summary and recommendations to central management by informal Council of Members
Date: 21 September in The Hague
Present: Johan Riezebos, Dick Kroon, William Buil, Peter Hoogkamer, Marc Lambriks, Job Kruiswijk, Gijs Breedveld, Jan Wind, Jos Meijer, Peter Florijn, Ernst Mak, Agnes van Uitert
Agenda:
1. Structure members' council and members' council committee.
See annex for discussion papers and current "members' council manual".
2. Results steering day 2016
See annex for report and recommendations.
3. Engineers throne speech 2016
See appendix
4. WVTTK
* item William
At Dick Kroon's request, the subject 'structure members' council and lrc' will be added to the topic 'improving the organisation by clearing compromises KIVI-NIRIA merger'. He will explain this with his proposal.
William Buil asked whether the issue of the discontinuation of international cooperation programmes of the Limburg Section could be placed on the agenda. It was decided to include this under the item WVTTK/Round Question.
1.Structure of the Members' Council and Members' Council Committee (LRC)
As a kick-off, it was pointed out that the effectiveness of the members' council and council committee (LRC) is low and that there are and were doubts about the usefulness and existence of the LRC; nevertheless, we will continue with a proposal from Dick Kroon last August. A number of other proposals have also been sent in with ideas to make the LR and LRC function better. The proposals will be explained and discussed by the submitter.
Proposal by Dick Kroon/Region East and Gelderland: One shared representative to LR.
- Position and interests of both regions are generally in line with each other.
- Not in conflict with regulations
- Regulations even allow for two different votes.
Improve efficiency of LR meetings by fewer representatives with better preparation. Current composition is too much of a 'Polish country day'. Therefore also broaden this proposal (see below).
During the discussion, it emerged that the proposal in principle does not require any rule changes. A section can now also authorise a member council member of another section. The member councillor then gets two votes. There are no reasons why this cannot be possible for a longer period.
Actions:
- Letter from involved Regions to HB/LR on shared representation
- Start and evaluate
Widening proposal (Dick Kroon): Improve the KIVI organisational structure by cleaning up compromises from the KIVI-NIRIA merger
- Departments, regions and circles overlap and were maintained from both organisations during the merger.
- After ten years, sensitivities are gone and the organisational structure can be improved.Ó
Number of departments greatly increased by the merger, which also greatly increased the number of LR members. This leads to 'tunnel vision', creating a majority of less prepared/informed members who 'blindly' vote along with proposals.
The discussion notes that this should be approached cautiously, despite the elapsed ten years, there are still sensitivities and chances of losing involved/active members in case of forced merging regions.
It is also noted that restructuring is a much bigger project, although there is a relationship with the LR problems.
In member council-initiated project on modernisation of governance structure initiated by the HB, which Paul Vermeulen pulled on behalf of the HB, this could be included as a main point of discussion. The LRC will take up with the HB whether this project will be restarted. However, the results of the integrity investigation will probably be awaited first.
Action: LRC to contact HB about continuation of project modernisation governance structure.
Proposal Gijs: 'do something nice together' by using portfolio division HB
- Legal and statutory role of LR means that as a member you can only say y/n or dismiss
- No/ difficult to give more (substantive) contribution in LR context.
- Alternative: address HB member on subject based on portfolio division
Start 'community' together with him/her to engage substantively with subject. And thus strengthen the connection between KIVI and society.
- kivi niria 3.0 actually the only document that was introduced in this way
-> discuss advice from such a group in advance and adopt it in informal consultations
=> LR can dicuss remaining issues afterwards
Actions:
Proposal Jan: expand LRC in line with HB portfolios
- Link LRC members to HB members based on portfolios (further concretisation of idea Gijs)
- Just as the Finance Committee is linked to treasurer
- Gather people from KIVI around themes/topics.
This could be recruiting for LR and LRC and gives people the opportunity to expand their network, but it is noted that many people are also needed to staff committee(s). However, this would work better that asking for volunteers untargeted (low response in current calls).
An alternative approach would be to create thematic groups, without directly linking to HB member. Such expert groups could even include non-members. It is noted that this could lead to too much 'freedom happy' and a linking pin with LR remains necessary. Previous experiences with policy committee are not entirely positive.
Advice/actions: LRC will submit this concept to the HB
2.Governance Day
3 September the 2016 Steering Day took place, of which a report, including four recommendations, has been sent out. First, the experiences of the day itself are discussed. The day was perceived positively by those who attended, with an open atmosphere and an approachable chairman ('a breath of fresh air'). It is noted that the chairman did not want to go into certain specific issues, but on the other hand, it is countered that this is logical for someone who has just taken office. It was noted, however, that the handling of the invitation and agenda was below par: the announcement was on the site far too late.
Action: LRC links this back to HB.
The four recommendations and the report of the Steering Day can be found on the Kivi website: https://www.kivi.nl/activiteiten/activiteit/besturendag-2016
Recommendation 1 states that KIVI should make more contact with potential partners. The meeting questioned what is meant by 'KIVI' here. The (specialist) departments, the Buro, the HB? It should be ensured that the departments are not left out of this; the LR and the HB should continue to radiate that departments are the heart of the association.
Action: LRC will put this on the agenda with the HB.
Recommendation 2 says that connections should be made between professional disciplines and society. Actually, this amounts to the same thing as recommendation .4 (see there).
Recommendation 3 calls for more 'technical heroes' to be honoured. The question is raised whether this includes 'little heroes' such as our honorary members, members of merit and KIVI token holders? This idea could be supported by an 'Engineer of the Month' column in 'The Engineer' .
It is noted that interest in engineering is growing and KIVI has a good reputation in this in the media, which could be better propagated. The HB should organise that every (professional) department has a contact person for the media. In case of questions from the media, the Buro can put forward these contact persons. To stimulate commitment from the departments, a 'reward/incentive' for a contact person could be media training. The question is raised whether contact persons fit within the statutes, as they list the president and vice-president as the only ones allowed to speak on behalf of KIVI. It is not clear to what extent a member may speak to the media 'on behalf of' or 'as a member'.
Action: LRC will present both these points to the HB as concrete proposals for elaboration of the recommendation from the steering committee meeting.
Recommendation 4 says that KIVI should crawl into the capillaries of society. LR could ask the HB to develop concrete policies based on the four recommendations. It was noted that new president called for ideas and initiatives. Let us (LR) respond positively to that!
It is also noted that, for the first time, we now have a president who performs this function in addition to a full-time job. On one occasion, therefore, the director did the honours and this is likely to happen more often? The question is raised why director instead of vice-president is taking on this task? It is noted that it is still too early and that first impressions of director are positive. LR does need to evaluate in due course whether this is working.
3.Engineering Throne Speech
The 2016 Engineering Throne Speech was delivered on 14 September and it was subsequently published (the text can be found here ). The content is viewed positively, with some minor comments. There is a call for positive feedback from the LR to the HB/President.
Action: LR/LRC provides positive feedback on content and distribution of Engineering Throne Speech.
WVTTK/Round question
Dick Kroon: Call to start straightening out compromises and non-optimal constructions from KIV-NIRIA merger. After some discussion on this, action is formulated to draw HB's attention to this.
Action: LRC will ask whether Paul Vermeulen's project to modernise the board will be taken up again
William Buil: Draws attention to issue in Region Limburg where funding of projects for international contacts from The Hague has stopped. LRC will raise this with the HB.
Dick Kroon (PMR via email): There is a good book available for (new) LR members explaining how associations work in the Netherlands (and KIVI has maximum complex structure): Title: Architecture of Associations, Building blocks for organisational development by Frans Huizenga and Peter Tack; VM Publishers
Description
Informal Members' Council for position development and consultation.
Topics:
1. Results steering day on 3 September
2. Structure and future members' council and members' council committee
Location
Organiser
Members' Council
Name and contact details for information
Jan Wind