IAP2 Canada Member Engagement

Member Engagement Report (June 2, 2011)

The member engagement process has been completed and the report is in! Click Here for the report.

What We're Hearing So Far (April 2011)

Since mid-February, IAP2 Canada past, present, and future members have been talking about what they want THEIR IAP2 Canada to look like. This input will be used by the interim board to propose resolutions at the AGM on June 11^th about the structure and administration of IAP2 Canada. The input will also be given to the incoming Board to help them as they move the organization forward.

You have until May 10^th to post your experiences, thoughts, and opinions on the engagement website, Let’s Talk IAP2, or attend a local event in your area. Tell us if you agree with what’s been said so far and share your hopes and ideas for the future of IAP2 Canada. And remember, the input we get will guide decisions that are made, so make sure your voice is heard!

Organizational Structure and Governance

There should still be Chapters, but more than the 3 that we have. Chapters should represent geographic regions to support regional events and networking.
Every province/region should have a Chapter. We need to maintain a balance of ‘critical mass’ of members and volunteer resources in defining what geographic area makes up a Chapter.
The national board should be made up of one representative from every province/region plus one or two more members-at-large.
It’s important that all provinces/regions are represented on the national board.
The national board should support the development of new Chapters by connecting members/volunteers locally and regionally to support growth.
The national board should be smaller than 17 (size of the interim board). 10-13 members seems appropriate.
Board members should serve 2 or 3 year terms.
It’s important that the national board decides on a decision-making process and be transparent about what that process is.
Licensed IAP2 trainers should not be allowed to serve on the national board as it’s a conflict of interest.
National board activities should be public and transparent (post agendas, minutes, etc. online and invite anyone who wants to attend to do so).
The national organizational structure should be designed to support ‘communities of practice/interest’. This would mean being able to connect with others across the country with similar interests (eg. health, Aboriginal engagement, local government, environment/natural heritage, energy, etc.).
There should be a public Code of Conduct for board members so expectations are clear. There is an existing IAP2 Federation Code of Conduct document that we could use.

Membership Rates and Categories

Strong consensus for a category of corporate membership where there is a discounted membership rate for a certain number of members belonging to the same corporation. However, each individual member, not the corporation, gets a vote.
It’s important to have a student membership category to support new practitioners. There should be a discounted rate for students attending post-secondary and for one year after they graduate.
Life memberships that were obtained through IAP2 previously should be phased out over time and perhaps replaced with a discount for buying a term membership (eg. 3 years at a time).
Support for “ad-ons” to membership that allow access to specialty groups/communities of practice (eg. pay a bit extra to be an IAP2 Canada member AND to be part of the Health practitioners’ community)
Discounted rates for people registered in IAP2 training for that year.
Consider memberships in partnership with other professional organizations (eg. get an IAIA and IAP2 membership for 75% of the price of each membership individually).
Consider a para-professional membership at a discounted rate that would be non-voting for those in related fields.
Honorary memberships should only be given out for significant contribution to IAP2 Canada and should be used sparingly. Criteria for honorary members needs to be defined.

Value for Members

Sharing best practices is important to developing P2 in Canada. It’s important to have criteria for what constitutes a ‘best practice’ and stick to that criteria.
We should consider having a Canadian IAP2 Core Values Award.
It’s important to share both our successes and our failures. We need to make it comfortable to share lessons learned.
Nationally, our focus should be on research, providing a link to the Federation, communicating ‘best practices’, and national networking.
Regional chapters should be responsible for local/regional networking opportunities. These add a lot of value to being part of IAP2; many people have not had these local opportunities.
IAP2 Canada should help connect us to other Affiliates in the world. There is some really innovative a great stuff happening elsewhere in the world that we should know more about.
Connection to communities of practice would be extremely valuable and does not currently exist.
Training is valuable but there should be opportunities to develop professionally beyond the basics. IAP2 Canada should seek to provide these development opportunities.
Networking opportunities are important but are not enough on their own.
Continue to provide IAP2 resources like the Spectrum, Core Values and Code of Ethics.
Increase professionalization of the field. A specific designation would be valuable, as well as a higher standard of what ‘best practices’ are. The Federation is working on a designation and what this would look like for the whole organization.

IAP2’s Role for P2 in Canada

IAP2 Canada should lead a conversation with related organizations and interested groups about the state of the practice in Canada and pro-actively hold conversations with specific sectors to make the standards and practices real.
IAP2 Canada should be the pre-eminent organization for P2 in Canada. Accreditation would go a long way to supporting this, as well as awareness that we exist.
IAP2 Canada should work with post-secondary institutions to “write in” P2 into curriculum for the many professions where we work (eg. curriculum for public relations, communications, public policy, project management, and sustainability).
We should be working more closely with organizations that do similar work, such as International Association of Impact Assessors (IAIA), International Association of Facilitators (IAF), Canadian Centre for Dialogue and Deliberation (C2D2), International Association of Business Communicators (IABC), and the Canadian Institute of Planners (CIP).
IAP2 Canada should espouse Canadian values. These include tolerance, inclusion, consensus building, respect, and being progressive. It’s important to seek to include specific ‘Canadian’ groups such as Aboriginal peoples and Francophones. This should mean translating IAP2 materials into a variety of languages.
The world needs a little more Canada. It may be interesting to look at the Charter of Rights and Freedoms along with the IAP2 Code of Ethics and see if a next generation value piece could be created.