Home Home | About Us | Sitemap | Contact  
  • Info For
  • Professionals
  • Students
  • Educators
  • Media
  • Search
    Powered By Google

SIOP Executive Board Winter Meeting Session 1

January 10, 2014 Omni Hotel Austin, TX

Attending: Tammy Allen, Cris Banks, Allan Church, Milt Hakel, Rodney Lowman, Julie Olson-Buchanan, Fred Oswald, Doug Reynolds, Steven Rogelberg, John Scott, Evan Sinar, Lori Foster Thompson, Deb Whetzel, Mike Zickar

Absent: Kathleen Kappy Lundquist (reported by phone), José Cortina

President Tammy Allen called the meeting to order at 3:20.

President Allen welcomed newly elected board members Fred Oswald (Research and Science Officer) and Evan Sinar (Conferences and Programs Officer). (President Elect designate Steve Kozlowski and Communications Officer Alex Alonso were unable to attend.) President Allen also recognized outgoing members Julie Olson-Buchanan, Steven Rogelberg, and Mike Zickar for their service to SIOP. She also acknowledged the dedicated service of Past President Doug Reynolds.

All members introduced themselves. President Allen explained as a point of order that Fred Oswald and Evan Sinar do not yet have voting privileges.

Dr. Hakel moved to approve September meeting minutes, Mike Zickar seconded.  Minutes approved.

Financial Report: Financial Officer Kathleen Kappy Lundquist (via phone) thanked Administrative Services Director Linda Lentz for preparing the financial reports. She reviewed the report in the briefing book. She explained that assets are up more than $500,000 so SIOP is in good shape financially. In terms of investments, 21% of assets are in cash, the rest in equities and bonds.

Budget items of note include that dues revenue is up and beyond projection. Conference registrations are off to a strong start. Another positive is the financial performance of the LEC. Both registrations and sponsorship income were up. Unrealized gains from investments are substantial, which adds to a positive financial picture. Conference exhibit booth sales and sponsorships are down. The LEC expenses exceeded budget, partly because of the increased number of comped registrants. However, the overall result is still good.

Other expenses included government relations advocacy, which is paid on a quarterly basis. This increased the contract labor line item compared to last year. Overall the results are positive as SIOP. SIOP is currently in a loss position, but not as deep as expected at this point in the year.

Dr. Lowman asked about the reduction in sponsor revenue. Executive Director Dave Nershi explained that the logistics of Hawaii make exhibit and sponsorship sales challenging. Anticipating that, a reduced budget figure was established. We are on track to meet the reduced figure, but reports will show an unfavorable comparison in year-to-date figures compared to last year.

Dr. Rogelberg asked about spending excess revenue to benefit our members. He also suggested that if we do not spend the excess money to benefit members – which should not be hard to do, the money has to go back to the members in the form of lowered dues. It is not appropriate to hold large sums of member money. Dr. Olson-Buchanan offered that we should reevaluate spending after Hawaii. Dr. Lundquist said this was the thinking going in to the Hawaii Conference. Cash was not transferred into the reserve fund so that we would have money available to offset any negative financial impact from the Hawaii conference. Dave Nershi expressed a strong stance against lowering dues and said that a process is in the reserve policy that allows the Executive Board to spend excess funds once reserve requirements are met. At this time the reserve requirements have been met.

Dr. Hakel stated that because of action on visibility and branding there will be great options for use of the dues, perhaps reaching out to other organizations like SHRM. Dr. Heggestad stated that committees ask for money and are denied, but added that the dues increase was expressly not due to Hawaii.

President Allen noted keeping the graduate student travel award as one option for extra funds. Dr. Reynolds offered the idea of going to committees to ask for input and added that some “profits” are actually reflecting unrealized investment gains that may fall.

Dr. Zickar moved and Dr. Heggestad seconded the motion to approve the financial report. Report approved.

Leading Edge Consortium: Dr. Banks reported on the 2014 Leading Edge Consortium, which will be held October 17-18 in Chicago. Committee members (Fred Oswald, Tracy Kantrowitz, Nancy Tippins, Erica Desrosiers, Carl Persing, Ben Dowell, Anna Maria Valerio, and Dave Nershi) worked diligently to come up with a good topic and chose High Value High Potential Employees. As a result of this topic, the committee feels it will be able to attract business executives in addition to practitioners. Mr. Nershi stated that there has been positive feedback to this topic.

In the past, the person selected to chair has been a person well versed in the topic. This year the committee also wanted a person with organizing experience. Elaine Pulakos accepted the chair position. Dr. Pulakos has a 4-person committee (and is looking for 2 more). She is reaching out to 50 I-Os to identify hot topics within the subject area. They plan to begin program creation in the next 3 weeks and logistics in the next 2 weeks. Dr. Pulakos welcomes the Executive Board’s suggestions.

Dr. Olson-Buchanan mentioned the need for an academic on the committee and noted that the LEC now falls under the portfolio of the conferences and programs chair. Mr. Nershi stated that Dr. Pulakos is aware of the research advisor position requirement. Dr. Scott likes the idea of reaching out to business people. In regard to the venue, The InterContinental O’Hare is close to amenities and the airport and could also draw international audience.

When discussing attendance, it was stated that the venue accommodates 275 to 300. Concern was expressed not to let the event get too large for fear of losing interaction. Dr. Banks expressed special thanks to Dr. Tracy Kantrowitz for all her hard work.

Action Item: Board members to send LEC suggestions to Dr. Pulakos.

Practice Journal Update: Dr. Church stated that last fall the Executive Board decided not to start a standalone practice journal at that time. Instead, it was suggested that an issue of IOP be used to help pilot and evaluate the concept and gauge interest. IOP Editor Dr. Murphy wanted specifics of the special issue to be decided. Dr. Church said the initial need is for a topic and a guest editor. The timeline is a concern because practitioners may need more time to return pieces. Dr. Zickar suggested using the LEC topic as the theme of the article.

Dr. Banks suggested that using past topics might be an option because using this year’s topic would require too quick a turnaround time. Board suggested Jeff McHenry as the guest editor and talent management as topic if Dr. McHenry will accept the position. Dr. Zickar recommended using case studies as well as responses, thus presenting less of a debate format. Dr. Rogelberg suggested transcribing LEC presentations to make it easier for presenters to write an article.
Dr. Church says there is a need for writers immediately. Board members expressed options such as LEC committee members, prior LEC chair, practitioner-academic pairing, or a retired practitioner.

There was discussion about broadening the appeal of IOP to practitioners, to broaden the motivation for writers. Questions included: Should we open IOP up to other groups (e.g., SHRM)? Is visibility important? Is IOP the right option? Are we serving the masses or the members?

President Allen expressed enthusiasm for the pilot as a first step for moving forward with the concept.

Action Item: Dr. Church to ask Dr. McHenry as past LEC Chair to serve as Guest Editor of the IOP practice pilot article.

Action Item: Identify potential authors.

Journal RFP Update: SIOP received six proposals for IOP 2015 from the eight publishers solicited: APA, Cambridge, Routledge, Sage, Springer, & Wiley.  Elsevier and Hogrefe declined.

Dr. Church expressed a need to select a publisher by April or so to keep the journal running on schedule. The committee is reviewing proposals and referring to materials developed by Paul Sackett’s during the initial selection of a journal publisher.

Dr. Church has a process but needs clarification of the criteria for the publications board to review against. Dr. Church asked the Executive Board to review the developed criteria and submit changes as necessary. He said publishers had different proposals about print versus online publishing and whether members should be required to  opt in for print versus an opt out option.

Several members offered information about the importance of the reputation of the publisher, the esteem in which the publisher would hold IOP, the possible revenue, customer service, and the importance of print versus article download. Mr. Nershi explained that Wiley did have a clause in place to share revenues but no income was realized. There was also a mention of bundling the book series with the journal to receive better benefit. Mr. Nershi also suggested digital versions for students and international members to reduce expense as well as an opt in for members.

Dr. Rogelberg suggested weighted criteria to help decision making. He added that it might be a good idea to reach out to members editing journals for each publisher to gather input.

Dr. Hakel explained that the publishing industry continues to change and SIOP needs to think more broadly than IOP. SIOP should think about collaborations with other groups. He added that flexibility in the contract is important.
President Allen expressed concern about University subscriptions being cut. Universities often cut entire publishers so a bigger publisher may mean more subscriptions.

Dr. Rogelberg added that impact factor is important for subscriptions and explained why IOP’s impact factor is not high. He added that the ranking body needs to be made aware of which articles are editorials and responses so they are not part of the equation.

Dr. Church asked for recommendations and ranking of the criteria. Dr. Reynolds suggested using 100 points and distribute as needed to weight the criteria more easily.

Action Item: Board members to complete criteria ranking sheets and return ASAP to Dr. Church Action Item: The Publications Board will continue with the publisher selection process.

Big Data Ad Hoc Committee: President Allen asked all to refer to report in briefing book.  A group of SIOP members expressed concern that I-O is missing out on Big Data. In response, President Allen created an ad hoc committee, Chaired by Rick Guzzo, residing within Scientific Affairs. The charter of the committee was to identify threats and opportunities posed by Big Data for SIOP members and to develop a set of recommendations. The committee issued a report for the EB. Rick Guzzo and Scott Tonidandel are willing to continue the subcommittee’s work with guidance from the EB.

There was discussion of SIOP’s role in big data. Big data has stirred some controversy as some see it as a fad. Consensus was that SIOP needs to have some role in big data, either in making recommendations in the use of big data in education and training, translating big data, or establishing ethical frameworks for its use.

Dr. Heggestad wondered if, as clinicians took I-O space, will someone else take I-O space though big data? Mr. Nershi wondered if data scientists are doing just that.

Dr. Banks expressed a need to leverage this opportunity because corporate America is embracing big data so we need to be involved. She added that I-Os should partner with IT.

Dr. Reynolds stated that if SIOP can drive the field with published standards, it would be a good way to get press.

Dr. Rogelberg suggested keeping the ad hoc committee, tasking them to see what SIOP is doing on this topic, to reach out to members for a sense of who is doing something with big data, and to see what SIOP should be doing.

Dr. Whetzel opined that big data is just an extension of data analysis I-Os already do. Others stated that not only are the quantities of data much larger that what is usually available, thus presenting new methodological challenges, the quality of the data is sometimes suspect.

Dr. Koppes Bryan brought up big data and education. She wondered if the education and training curriculum guideline revision should include big data considerations. She likened this to when coaching came to the forefront.

Action Item: Task committee to continue work guided by Executive Board recommendations.

Action Item: Dr. Oswald to discuss particular goals and sharpen focus.

Meeting adjourned at 5:25 PM

SIOP Executive Board Winter Meeting Session 2

January 11, 2014 Omni Hotel Austin, TX

Attending: Tammy Allen, Cris Banks, Allan Church, José Cortina, Milt Hakel, Jerry Hedge, Rodney Lowman, Julie Olson-Buchanan, Fred Oswald, Doug Reynolds, Steven Rogelberg, John Scott, Evan Sinar, Lori Foster Thompson, Deb Whetzel, Mike Zickar

Absent: Kathleen Kappy Lundquist

President Allen called the meeting to order at 8:06 AM.

At 8:15 AM the board moved into executive session to discuss the recommendations of the Fellowship Committee as presented by Fellowship Chair Dr. Jerry Hedge.

At 8:25 AM the board entered regular session. A motion was made by Dr. Jose Cortina and seconded by Dr.  Hakel to approve Part I of the Fellowship recommendations.

At 8:26 AM the board moved into executive session to finish discuss the recommendations of the Fellowship Committee. At 9:22 AM the board resumed regular session. Dr. Julie Olson-Buchanan made a motion to accept the remaining recommendations of Fellowship committee and José Cortina seconded. Motion was passed.

Dr. Zickar moved to require 10 years since PhD for Fellowship. Dr. Lori Foster Thompson seconded the motion. Motion passed.

Dr. Hedge asked if the timetable for Fellow nominations and committee work could be changed as the schedule currently is 6 weeks and includes the Thanksgiving holiday. Mr. Nershi will follow-up with Dr. Hedge to handle this matter. Dr. Reynolds stated that the number of practitioners nominated is an important number that should be published along with results. Dr. Heggestad suggested giving better guidelines to nominators would result in better nominations. Dr. Hedge explained that recent TIP articles don’t include information about nominations broken down by work setting. The board discussed various ideas to improve the number and quality of practitioner Fellow nominations. President Allen suggested getting a group of practitioners together to identify nominees for fellowship. She then thanked Dr. Hedge for his work on fellowship.

Action Item: Dr. Hedge and Mr. Nershi to discuss and amend as necessary the Fellows review and election timetable. Fellowship guidelines to be modified to explicitly state requirement that members must be 10 years post PhD prior to applying for Fellowship.

APA Center for Organizational Excellence: Dr. Reynolds led the discussion. The APA Center for Organizational Excellence elicits various opinions and offers an unclear path for SIOP, said Dr. Reynolds. He reviewed his report, which summarizes actions, concerns, and options.

Dr. Reynolds has been working with the Division 13 past president and they have agreed on a set of potential actions: gather information from APA leadership regarding purpose and vision of COE; establish advisory committee; establish active partnership with COE; allow divisions to choose to be passive partners with COE; or continue to monitor website but take no action.

Dr. Reynolds has worked with the COE director David Ballard to voice concerns, which include the following:

  • What is the role of SIOP in developing/sending content? There is no clarity on what is needed so nothing can be sent.
  • What is the strategy? Why take the psychologically healthy workplace awards and put them under the COE? The expressed goal is to connect more areas and make psychology more a part of workplace but the COE content is about awards. This is not the way SIOP would represent value of psychology in workplace.  David Ballard agreed that the site needs work.
  • What about division involvement? APA was originally going to work with division members directly but Dr. Reynolds suggested to Dr. Ballard that it would be better to work directly with the board instead of operating only through a few SIOP members.

It was suggested to Dr. Ballard that he solicit information from divisions that will guide and support the strategy. Right now it is awards season so, until that is over, not much will happen. Dr. Koppes Bryan expressed concern over Ballard’s lack of ability to connect effectively with the divisions.

Dr. Hakel asked how the impending change in APA structure may affect SIOP’s influence. Dr. Scott explained that the proposed new APA structure could be one representative per division. Right now SIOP has four votes. This new structure is expected to be voted on by the APA representatives in February and then sent out to members for a bylaws vote.

Dr. Cortina stated that APA is getting into SIOP’s realm with the COE. Dr. Hakel said APA has never known what to do with divisions. He suggested a rider to the approval of the new APA budget to change name of COE to something SIOP approves, as well as representatives giving speeches about the COE problem.

Dr. Banks thought the focus on awards may be a point of leverage for SIOP to make the COE into what they want. Dr. Olson-Buchanan suggested an official request to change the website name to Psychologically Healthy Workplace Awards. Mr. Nershi said that option answers many concerns.

Discussion ensued regarding the specifics of SIOP’s issues with the site, the best method to express those issues (letter or meeting), the return on investment for the amount of effort required, and the specific outcomes SIOP would like to see. Also discussed was the concept of SIOP acting alone versus in concert with Division 13 and possible others for a larger voice.

Although no specifics were selected, options suggested included SIOP providing links to its website to be posted on COE, SIOP members providing content, and asking APA for administrative power and the funds to maintain it.

Action Item: Phone conference will be held to plan the presentation at the February APA Council of Representatives meeting.

Action Item: APA reps to speak with Norm Anderson at the February meeting to discuss concerns.

BRANDING: Dr. Reynolds provided a brief recap of the branding effort. The branding task force was last tasked with polishing the new logo and tagline. A number of different fonts were tried in an effort to avoid persons reading our acronym as “slop.” There were no acceptable graphic solutions and, ultimately, it was decided that this was not a major concern.  A small Qualtrics panel survey and review of SIOP member reactions to branding work were conducted. “Science for a smarter workplace” was the top ranked tagline by SIOP members in survey.

In response to the one page ad designed with graphic designers and Stephany Below, the term “solutions orientation” got the most positive response, 84% of those asked noticed tag line, and 70% found the ad appealing. There were no adverse reactions to the term “smarter.” International and ethnic minority segments responded positively to the ad and tagline in line with the overall positive responses of the test panel.

Dr. Whetzel made a motion to proceed with rollout of new logo and tagline, which was seconded by Dr. Olson-Buchanan. Motion passed.

President Allen expressed thanks to Chris Rotolo for his decade of work on this project.

Action Item: New logo and tagline to be unveiled at SIOP Conference 2014.

Elections: Dr. Cortina stated that every year there are some tweaks to election process. He said that filling the ballot was difficult, so should SIOP change system or ballot requirements so as to get the best candidates? After some discussion it was decided to leave the process as is for now. There was discussion that SIOP needs to make the nomination rules more clear, reach out to members to serve, explain the roles of the portfolio chairs more clearly, and help develop existing chairs who may wish to become portfolio officers.

My.SIOP: My.SIOP switched platforms from GoLightly to DotNetNuke on January 6. Profiles were migrated except for pictures and most of the capabilities are working just fine. Dr. Zickar explained some of the new features, including gamification (badges), a section to ask questions, and a section to suggest ideas.

The Electronic Communications Committee will be sending all-member emails this week to get people involved. It was suggested that the Executive Board should be involved in spreading the word.

Mr. Nershi expressed that the groups feature needs work because currently people need to rejoin. He also stated that Dr. Hakel was extremely valuable in the transfer process. Dr. Hakel explained that the new my.SIOP resides in the Administrative Office as opposed to the old version run by outside company. Networking functions are available. The new platform supports ad hoc groups and may affect nominations as people can express interest via my.SIOP.

Dr. Church expressed frustration that emails are missing/wrong in directory, thus making it hard to add to groups. Dr. Hakel and Mr. Nershi explained that the system uses what is entered by members so not much can be done. Dr. Scott reminded everyone that the classic member directory is still available and Dr. Oswald made everyone aware that the default for phone is public so members need to be aware of this.

Thanks to Dr. Oswald for being a contributor to my.SIOP and to Dr. Zack Horn for all his work on the project.

Dr. Rogelberg suggested giving incentives for participation (swag via lottery) and Mr. Nershi said that people seem to be sufficiently motivated by badges.

Dr. Hakel said the new interface is more responsive and would allow people to have siop.org/name websites at some point. President Allen asked about the status of the consultant locator. Mr. Nershi stated that there is no timeline for consultant locator but it is a focus; the Media Resources service is a work-around for now.

Dr. Zickar commented on the redesign of TIP being easier to read. Dr. Reynolds questioned the software as there is a need for more multimedia. Mr. Nershi and Ms. Baker explained the hows and whys of the selection of the software and explained that new platforms will be investigated as needed. Editor Morrie Mullins is on top of the situation.

Action Item: Board members to spread word about my.SIOP.

Action Item: Complete Consultant Locator.

Grassroots Undergraduate Visibility: President Allen noted that the Education and Training committee has been doing great work as part of the initiative to increase the inclusion of I-O in introductory psychology courses. Among their initiatives is a grassroots effort to engage members as visibility advocates to increase awareness of I-O.

A team led by Joe Allen is working on an article that will appear in April TIP that will introduce the initiative and describe best practices and examples of ways that members can volunteer. The team will also have activities at the conference. When President Allen discussed the initiative with the Conference Committee, Dr. Robin Cohen suggested a commitment banner. Other ideas are a call to action to select a visibility to-do item from a list, recognition based on reporting on my.SIOP, and buttons for visibility.

Dr. Lowman wondered if there would be a problem in tracking what has actually been done. He suggested some way to log activities to get a sense of what is going on.

President Allen said my.SIOP might be good option, with Dr. Reynolds adding that members could post presentations that work for others to use.

Action Item: A commitment banner on which members can state their action item to bring awareness of I-O to educational institutions and the community will be displayed at the Hawaii conference. Post Meeting Note: volunteers for this initiative have now been branded as “Bridge Builders.”

Licensing Credentialling and Certification Committee: President Allen noted that the committee members thus are include Mark Nagy (chair), Joan Brannick, and Doug Reynolds. The committee is meeting next week.

LUNCH

SPARC: Mr. Nershi provided an update on the SPARC assignment. At the request of President Allen, SPARC is developing a process for periodic review of our governing documents. These are being organized in the following categories: policies, position and policy statements, administrative guidelines, and committee procedures.

The committee plans to give documents and a report to Executive Board next month to review. There will then be a call with Mort McPhail to discuss, then an electronic vote.

This project is a great way to make sure all information is captured and updated regularly.

Action Item: Schedule the next EB informational call and request the SPARC document be ready for presentation by Dr. McPhail.

President Allen reminded the board that sunset reports are needed for CEMA, LGBT, Membership, Foundation, fellowship, awards, Placement, and JobNet.

Advocacy and Outreach: Dr. Rogelberg provided an update on our advocacy activities. Lewis-Burke has been asset. Their responsiveness and expertise is amazing and Dr. Rogelberg is convinced of value and of their knowledge of I-O. There is a Lewis-Burke team assigned to SIOP: Carla Jacobs is the lead but owner April Burke is involved and sends ideas. They don’t deny any requests.

There was a planning retreat in September, monthly conference call meetings, and a roundtable event on Capitol Hill focused on government furloughs. The GREAT Committee (Government Relations Advocacy Team) with chair Seth Kaplan has done a great job making it work and finding members to take action.

Lewis Burke gives notification of things that are going on in the Capitol and prepares first drafts of response. They have positioned members to be nominated for important committees and guided SIOP as to where SIOP should and should not get involved. They find visibility opportunities on the Hill in every area.

Mr. Nershi explained that the idea of having a contract for a pilot project didn’t work out so SIOP agreed to one contract that encompassed all the work. This started out being paid monthly but is now paid quarterly. The contract is for 2 ½ years with an option for early termination. Dr. Rogelberg said that using a consulting company versus an individual advocate has been effective. Lewis-Burke has great reach and knows the groups in Washington.  They will have a representative in Hawaii and had one at the LEC.

Dr. Oswald will be taking over for Dr. Rogelberg, who was thanked for his service by Dr. Koppes Bryan.

Mr. Nershi said Lewis Burke has done more in the past year than APA and FABBS combined have done in the past decade. Dr. Cortina was impressed that Lewis-Burke took what SIOP didn’t like into consideration, and Dr. Rogelberg liked that there is no pressure but Lewis-Burke still asks what SIOP wants.

Dr. Whetzel inquired as to whether the SIOP membership is aware of the success. President Allen stated that a TIP article (possibly a continuing feature) and Newsbriefs will be used to get the word out.

The presidential trio (Allen, Cortina, and Reynolds), the Research and Science Portfolio Officer (Rogelberg), Chair of the GREAT Committee (Kaplan), and Executive Director Nershi are in regular contact with Lewis-Burke, responding to emails and holding monthly phone calls. The GREAT committee was created most recently to play a major role in the implementation of activities. They also call on members outside of the committee structure to get projects done. President Allen explained that in November 2011 there was an advocacy survey to identify members willing to engage in advocacy activities and that GREAT is currently planning another.

Dr. Rogelberg explained that Lewis Burke helps choose who and what are presented and has done things like reduced a large SIOP whitepaper down to 2 pages for distribution.

Dr. Hakel suggested these activities be made part of my.SIOP to help respond in a timely manner to events on the Hill and that RSS feeds could be used to disseminate information.

Action Item:  Broadcast success of Lewis Burke-SIOP partnership via TIP and Newsbriefs.

APA Representatives: Dr. Lowman explained that the APA Council of Representatives will become a policy making body and things like the budget would be moved to a revised board with fiduciary responsibility. Least fleshed out is what it means to be the policy body. The contentious issue is that Council is too large but no one wants to give up seats.  An option is proportional voting.

Dr. Banks said that everyone getting the same number of votes seems good but Dr. Lowman said the problem is that there are also state votes and 25 other seats on council.

APA recently released report on gun violence. A policy statement is expected in February.

A new APA division has been proposed: Society for Technology and Psychology. Its focus would be technology and innovation in psychology, including collaboration groups within and outside of APA.

United Nations: Dr. Scott noted that SIOP’s UN team has sent out a request for information for a competency modeling project.

Psychology Day was a success in 2013. Dr. Foster Thompson is running it in 2014 and trying to get Maya Shankar as a keynote on the topic of sustainability. Dr. Foster Thompson explained that the UN is moving away from mental health focus.

APS Relations: President Allen met with APS Executive Director Alan Kraut and discussed ways to strengthen the relationship between SIOP and APS. One issue was increasing the number of SIOP members on the APS editorial boards as well as the number that submit to APS journals. Increasing the number of SIOP members on committees was also discussed. Dr. Hakel and Dr. Talya Bauer are two SIOP members currently survey on an APS committee.
Present Allen informed the Board about the APS Minds of Business blog, which presents research on science of the modern workplace. The Editor of the blog is open to SIOP participation. It was discussed that a SIOP liaison could contribute to articles, which are centered on translating research findings, often from APS journal articles. The most recent blog featured an article by SIOP member Tori Culbertson.

Reeshad Dalal is current APS program chair but the incoming chair could potentially take on the liaison role. There is also a possibility of an APS Observer article or series of articles on I-O, which President Allen suggested the APS liaison could play a leading role in developing.

Meetings and Membership: Dr. Olson-Buchanan reported that SIOP is on track to meet its hotel obligation in Hawaii. Conference registration opened a month early and numbers are good. Registration should be above the budgeted figure. Mr. Nershi added that conservative estimates should be exceeded, but we should continue to monitor the situation closely.

Dr. Olson-Buchanan said that because Hawaii is different the committee made some changes to fit the venue, such as starting and ending earlier, and having only one break at convention center. The conservative estimates should pay off but there is concern about attendance at actual sessions.

Dr. Sinar said numbers for everything are above estimates. There is a good diversity in sessions, now we just need to make sure people go to the sessions. There will be shuttle transportation to the convention center and larger rooms than usual to eliminate standing room only situations. The committee is stressing presenter flexibility in the event attendee groups are small. It has been suggested that incentives to stay through afternoon be developed. A Fit Bit competition could also be a fun activity.

Mr. Nershi explained that the exhibit hall, posters, and registration are all in same room, and the plenary is next door. All sessions will be held one floor down.

Dr. Olson-Buchanan said the conference and program chairs and Dave have gone through everything to make sure event runs smoothly. Workshop numbers are OK but there is a push to get first-timers and attendees from the Pacific Rim. Fun run is doing well.

Mr. Nershi requested that board members be ambassadors for the conference and let people know about the Opportunity Toolkit to justify conference attendance.

There are worries about student attendance despite the student travel awards. Mr. Nershi questioned whether reaching out to students should be a priority. Even though SIOP is anticipating student attendance to drop, it may not be entirely negative, he said. There may be fewer students but there are more international registrants, with 8% from the Pacific Rim. In previous years this number was around 2%. The Hawaii Outreach Taskforce will be reactivated to reach out to groups. Dr. Olson-Buchanan said there will be a hooding ceremony with leis at the conference to recognize those missing their own graduation ceremony.

Mr. Nershi explained that the closing reception will have a Hawaiian theme, and he asked if anyone had any ideas for reinforcing session attendance. Options put forth included my.SIOP badges, free drinks on bus back at 3, creative food and beverage breaks, a passport (get stamps for each session), and beer at poster sessions.  It is expected that the theme track on Saturday will be a big draw.

The Board expressed its thanks to Dr. Sinar for all his work.

Action Item: Reactivate HOT committee to reach out to groups.

Membership Issues: Dr. Heggestad noted that at the last meeting the Board discussed issues about membership including requiring APA/APS membership and associate member rights and responsibilities. A task force led by Mo Wang is looking at issues and trying to generate as much data as possible. There will be more to come in April.

After a question from Dr. Lowman regarding member retention, options for tracking these statistics were discussed. Mr. Nershi said that it is difficult to get a true retention rate for a number of reasons, but the Administrative Office is working to achieve this. He noted that the annual renewal cycle leads to membership peaks and valleys, with spikes at submission and registration times.

Dr. Heggestad expressed a need to know how we are doing at converting students to full members.

President Allen suggested using data from the Master’s Consortium to get membership metrics on that segment.

Mo Wang is building on existing reports and adding as needed.

Action Item: Administrative Office the work on better metrics for tracking retention and student conversion to full member.

Education and Training: Dr. Koppes Bryan stated that Guidelines for Curriculum at Master’s and Doctoral Level was last revised in the 1990s.  Stephanie Payne is chairing a subcommittee on revision and talking to those on the previous committee. She is also waiting on results on career survey, which is planned to go out in the next 2 weeks from Sirota.

A recent IOP article served as a call to action for revision of guidelines. The Education and Training Committee submitted a reply article. One question is to what extent SIOP should include soft skills (professional competencies). A new IOP article on the migration of I-Os to business programs is in the works, and Dr. Koppes Bryan and Paul Thayer have sent a commentary. A more defined process and timeline for revision will be available at the next meeting.

Dr. Koppes Bryan asked for Mr. Nershi to investigate whether the revision needs approval from APA. Mr. Nershi said that if the revision is adopted as APA policy then they may have a say but not veto power.

Dr. Koppes Bryan added that APA might not have as much say on master’s curriculum as their focus is on doctoral programs.  Dr. Banks said APA used to have a designation category for programs (not accredited) that would allow graduates to be licensed but this program has been pulled (only 2 schools were designated). Dr. Lowman corrected this to say it was not an APA program but one from the ASPPB and National Register. Dr. Banks asked if SIOP can we come up with a designation. Dr. Koppes Bryan stated that some program directors are looking to SIOP for a stamp of approval for programs that meet the guidelines but others are opposed to this.  This issue may come back to the Board.

Dr. Hakel is a representative to the 5th International Congress on Licensure, Certification, and Credentialing of Psychologists. He explained that the standard degree in Europe is a master’s level so that is something else to consider. A follow up committee will be looking at creating a global framework of competencies.

Other Business: Dr. Reynolds explained that the website to support and reinforce pro-social I-O programs is out there but not fully launched. Under the Resources tab on the SIOP homepage is the link to the pro-social page, where there are four programs summarized. If you know of others, send information to Dr. Reynolds.  Stephany Below will do a Newsbriefs article to launch.

Action Item: Send information as needed for the advancement of the pro-social pages.

Dr. Hakel announced that the international Congress of Applied Psychology is to be held in April in Paris. Deadline for early registration is March 15. Alliance will have five programs in Paris as well as sessions at the SIOP conference.

SIOP Foundation: Dr. Hakel informed the Board that Barbara Owens passed away 1 year ago and the estate gave $100,000 to Foundation. The Foundation was begun because of Bill Owens not wanting to send donation to APA. SIOP originally turned down his $25,000 donation because they did not want trouble of starting Foundation. In 1996 Lee Hakel offered to help create one. Elaine Pulakos was deeply involved and Irv Goldstein was the first Foundation president. Dr. Hakel asked Executive Board members to consider a donation or item in their wills.

Dr. Hakel added that the partnership with SHRM and SHRM foundation is going well. There were four winners of HRM Impact award last year, and 2014 award opens later in January. He urged the Board members to find projects and nominate. It was exciting that HumRRO was involved in two winning projects and one had no connection to SIOP.

Dick Jeanneret made a contribution last year and in February 2015 that donation will be used for a “praxis” conference on assessing leaders of leaders. Nancy Tippins is chair of steering committee and hoping to make this an annual event. Mort McPhail is the chair of a research panel to investigate topics and solicit attendance with the intent of 50 participants, all of whom could give presentations. Dr. Hakel added that this fits well with idea of IOP special issue and that there will be an open call for interest.

President Allen stated that one of the big reasons people move from psychology to business schools is for higher salaries, especially for endowed chairs which are common in business schools. If we are concerned about migration from psychology to business we may want to address ways to increase the number of endowed chairs in psychology departments. For example, DDI has created two endowed chair positions in psychology departments. The Foundation could help promote such an initiative.

Meeting adjourned at 2:19 PM