IAP2 Canada What We Heard Final 2011 Canada... · 2011. 6. 3. · IAP2CANADA% WhatWeHeard% The IAP2 Canada Engagement Process Final Report % Written%by%Anne%Harding% % On%Behalf%IAP2%Canada%Interim%Board&%Member%Engagement%Process

I A P 2 C A N A D A

What We Heard The IAP2 Canada Engagement Process Final Report

Written by Anne Harding

On Behalf IAP2 Canada Interim Board & Member Engagement Process Committee

June 2011

What We Heard June 2011 2

Introduction

The IAP2 Canada engagement process took place between February and May of 2011 in order to gather input from past, current, and future IAP2 members about the future of the organization. This report reflects a summary of the input that was received as well as recommendations for the incoming IAP2 Canada Board of Directors to consider as they develop the Canadian Affiliate of IAP2. The engagement process gathered input from members and non-members from across the country on five main themes:

While a number of engagement opportunities were offered, such as face-to-face meetings in five cities, webinars, and an online survey, the majority of feedback was received through the engagement website Let’s Talk IAP2, which was generously provided by SustaiNet Software Solutions and Engagement HQ. This site had a total of 3,400 visits and 525 document downloads from users across the country and 78 registered users who “signed up to have their say.” While the site is no longer active for comments, the archive will be available for read-only viewing until early 2012. Visit http://letstalkiap2.com to have a look. This report will provide highlights of common input that was received through the various engagement opportunities on the five themes listed above. Recommendations for the incoming IAP2 Canada Board of Directors and IAP2 in general will be given along the way for their consideration as they make decisions about the new organization. The long form input (survey report and local event summaries) is included at the end of this report. Many thanks to those who took time out of their busy schedules to consider the future of IAP2 Canada and provide input to this process. Your feedback will be invaluable to the incoming Board as they move forward with the development and growth of the Canadian Affiliate of IAP2!

Administrative Items such as governance,organizational structure and bylaw changes

Key Objectives & Purpose of IAP2 Canada

How IAP2 Canada will provide value for its members

What will make IAP2 Canada a truly Canadian organization

How IAP2 Canada will promote and advance the practice of public participation


Engagement By the Numbers

Administration, Governance & By-‐laws

The engagement process committee made the commitment to use input about these topics to recommend changes to the bylaws and administration for the interim board to bring forward at the AGM. The following reflects the decisions that were made as a result of the feedback from this process.

Regional Chapters & IAP2 Canada The input received was loud and clear about wanting “more chapters, not less.” This was one of the most discussed topics on Let’s Talk IAP2 with 18 individual comments and 321 views. It also received a lot of attention in local events as people from across the country showed a desire to have more local and regional events to support networking, professional development opportunities, and to build relationships to further their practice. At the outset of this process, it was not clear whether there would continue to be regional chapters of IAP2 in Canada given the creation of the national affiliate. As a result of what we heard, the interim Board is making the following motion at the AGM in June:

Online Engagement 1,033 different people visited the site 3,602 times in 3 monts

78 registered users 20 commenters 154 people downloaded documents

9 provinces 29 cities

Regional Engagement 12 opportunities 81 participants

9 cities

Survey & Webinars 6 opportunities

32 participants

11 cities 6 provinces


If this resolution is passed at the AGM, the incoming Board will have the huge task of defining the relationship between regional chapters and IAP2 Canada. Some suggestions about what this might look like from the survey include:

Communities of Practice The IAP2 Canada Affiliate Application committed to developing Communities of Practice as part of the added service offering of the organization to its members. The input from the engagement process was very clear about the desire for members to be able to build networks both locally and by field of practice/interest. As a result of what we heard, the interim Board is making the following motion at the AGM:

IAP2 Canada will work with the existing chapters who provide services and value to their members and will collaboratively develop a statement of mutual expectations

for, inter alia, member services, organizational structure and an appropriate financial basis for operations, and further, will, together with the then-existing chapters, periodically review that statement for relevance and effectiveness.

Further, IAP2 Canada will actively support the development of new and existing regional chapters to provide relevant member services to the membership.

“IAP2 Canada should encourage the formation of chapters in

areas where there are a significant number of members. This may be regionally at first,

but could eventually be provincially or by City. Part of the membership fees paid to

IAP2 Canada could be passed on to the chapters based on their

membership numbers.”

“IAP2 CDA should be

setting direction,

strategy and priorities

nationally and delivering

services across the country.”

“My only suggestion related to chapters is that there be accountability - to abide by code of ethics, conflict of interest, code of conduct and to hold a minimum number of events and to communicate a minimum

number of times with local people.”

“Help out local chapters in an administrative capacity

(memberships, documents, tools,

templates).”

“There should be a clear indication from IAP2 Canada of the intention for regional chapters where there aren't already. I wasn't even aware there were regional chapters of the organization, otherwise I would have pursued one locally, for Manitoba, much, much sooner.”

The incoming Board will investigate with the broad membership and research with other IAP2 affiliates to begin developing Communities of Practice

to support members’ professional development. financial basis for operations, and further, will, together with the then-existing chapters, periodically review that statement for relevance and effectiveness.



If the incoming Board of Directors receives the mandate from members to actively pursue the development of Communities of Practice (CoP), they will need to determine how much energy to put behind this and what it will look like for members. Some suggestions for specific CoP’s that appeared in a number of places throughout the engagement process are:

Membership Categories When the interim Board incorporated IAP2 Canada with Industry Canada, it was required to present bylaws, which included membership categories. At the time, the interim Board didn’t feel that they had the mandate to add or remove membership categories so left them the same as they had been in IAP2 International. Based on what we heard in this process, the interim Board is proposing the following bylaw changes to membership categories:

P2 in Governance

P2 in Natural Resources

P2 with Indigenous People

P2 in Healthcare

P2 and Environment

P2 and Social Media

P2 and Education

Adding the category of Student Memberships to build the practice, encourage mentoring, and provide opportunities for student involvement at a reduced fee.

Removing the Lifetime Membership option for future members while grandfathering in the small number of Canadian members who have already been given this designation by

IAP2 International. financial basis for operations, and further, will, together with the then-existing chapters, periodically review that statement for relevance and effectiveness.


Adding the formal category of Organization (Group) Memberships which will be held by individuals within a common organization (previously, this existed only through the fee

structure and was not in the bylaws


Governance Questions IAP2 Canada is a new organization with a lot of options in front of us in terms of how we structure ourselves to be able to operate, make decisions and deliver the services you need. The answers to these questions are far from being figured out and as decisions are made, they will need to be flexible to the organization’s evolving needs. The engagement process asked for input on some specific governance issues, such as number of board members, as well as broader thoughts about representation and potential conflicts of interest.

Size of the Board The interim Board was created with 17 members because that was the number of people that volunteered to be on the Board through the Creation Team survey in which members voted to create a Canadian affiliate of IAP2. You told us that 17 is too large for a Board to be effective, and that 3 directors are not enough for a national board. Based on the interim board’s 6 months in operation, we agree. As a result of your input on Board size, the interim Board is proposing the following at the AGM to amend the bylaws:

IAP2 Federation Representative(s) You also told us that it’s important for IAP2 Canada to have a direct connection with the IAP2 Federation Board. IAP2 Canada is allowed to have two representatives on the Federation Board. In our current bylaws, this (these) representatives are not required to be IAP2 Canada Board members. You told us loud and clear that you think there should be a formal link between these organizations and that the IAP2 Federation Representative should hold a seat at the IAP2 Canada table. As a result of your input, the interim Board is proposing the following change to the bylaws at the AGM:

Conflicts of Interest and Transparency During the engagement process, the question of whether IAP2 Licensed Trainers should be allowed to sit on the IAP2 Canada Board of Directors was raised. This question was mainly driven by the fact that Trainers have the potential to earn (or lose) revenue as a result of decisions that may be made by the IAP2 Canada Board, which puts them in a potential conflict of interest position.

Change the minimum number of Directors from 3 to 5

Change the maximum number of Directors from 17 to 13

IAP2 Federation representatives will be officers of the organization, and at least one of the appointments will be Directors of IAP2 Canada. The organization may appoint

up to two representatives as the Board sees fit to appoint.


The other side of the coin that was also brought up throughout the process is that Trainers are “some of the more experienced P2 practitioners,” “ambassadors for the organization,” and “have their fingers on the pulse of needs of emerging P2 practitioners.” While no single recommendation emerged from the engagement process for how to address the specific issue of having Trainers sit on the IAP2 Canada Board, it is clear that the incoming Board will need to address this concern through further consultation with members and Trainers.

RECOMMENDATION #1: THROUGH ADDITIONAL CONSULTATION WITH AFFECTED STAKEHOLDERS, DEVELOP A CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY FOR IAP2 CANADA BOARD MEMBERS WITH A SPECIFIC DECISION ABOUT THE

APPROPRIATE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN IAP2 LICENSED TRAINERS AND THE IAP2 CANADA BOARD OF DIRECTORS. It was also clearly stated through input from a number of sources that IAP2 Canada needs to be a transparent organization that abides by the IAP2 Code of Ethics and Core Values. For many stakeholders, this means making IAP2 Canada Board meeting agendas and meeting minutes available to all members, allowing any members to attend Board meetings whenever they want, having clearly defined decision-making processes, and frequent communications with IAP2 Canada members.

RECOMMENDATION #2: COMPLETE THE GOVERNANCE FRAMEWORK DOCUMENT THAT WAS STARTED BY THE

INTERIM BOARD AND THOUGHTFULLY ADDRESS HOW IAP2 CANADA WILL OPERATE IN A WAY THAT IS

TRANSPARENT AND ACCOUNTABLE TO MEMBERS WITH A FOUNDATION IN THE IAP2 CORE VALUES AND CODE OF ETHICS

Representation on the IAP2 Canada Board of Directors There was a lot of discussion throughout the process on appropriate representation on the IAP2 Canada Board. Specifically, discussions focused on having the Board of Directors reflect the diversity of our country so that various points of view, needs, concerns, and expectations are heard and meaningfully addressed. Many stakeholders from certain parts of the country (Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, and Atlantic Canada) felt especially strong about wanting to be represented in the new IAP2 Canada. They indicated that they had not felt included in the organization previously, with the most often cited reason being that they did not belong to a regional chapter or that their regional chapter was not providing the value that they were seeking. One suggestion that emerged from the engagement process to address this issue is to have specific positions on the IAP2 Canada Board of Directors that are designated for representatives of specific groups (such as provinces, regions, or chapters). There was a general agreement from stakeholders throughout the process that representation is important, but there was not a clear consensus about how this would be achieved in a practical way. Some comments about this from the survey include:


RECOMMENDATION #3: THROUGH ADDITIONAL CONSULTATION WITH AFFECTED STAKEHOLDERS, THE IAP2 CANADA BOARD SHOULD DEVELOP A POLICY AND IMPLEMENTATION PLAN TO ADDRESS CONCERNS ABOUT

APPROPRIATE GEOGRAPHIC REPRESENTATION ON THE IAP2 CANADA BOARD OF DIRECTORS.

Key Purpose & Objectives

The goal statement for IAP2 Canada in our Letters Patent document for Industry Canada is the following:

“IAP2 Canada will be the national organization that helps to deliver the positive potential of public participation in Canada."

It will be the responsibility of the incoming Board to help drive the organization toward this goal, which seemed to resonate with stakeholders during the engagement process. Some additional thoughts about key objectives and purpose of the organization are:

“I agree with attempting to have regional representation but am unsure that the seat should be left vacant if no one is found for the position. So I guess I want a regionally-diverse board, but do not want to see us end up with only a few people on the board because the regional positions can’t be filled.”

“Depending on how things proceed with IAP2 at a more regional level, my instinct is a geographic regional representative framework is more helpful/realistic vs. chapter or provincial reps.”

“I actually think there SHOULD be representation on the Board for established Chapters, and perhaps to allow for geographic representation for areas where there are no/no Chapters (ie Quebec, Maritimes) - but I don't agree the seats be left vacant if they can't be filled. This could be procedural nightmare.”

“I think some clarity on IAP2 at a regional/chapter level would be helpful before determining how board representation should be

handled on a regional basis. Failing to find directors to fill

positions, I believe the positions should remain vacant. I think

this indicates an intention to be a truly representative

organization.”

“Its important that specific interests are represented at the Board level. However, it is the responsibility of the interested

group to bring forward an appropriate representative.”


• “I very much agree with [the goal statement], and think it means advocacy and a proactive agenda focused on setting truly best practices and standards for the field and practice. It means engaging participants, proponents and practitioners in identifying the state of the practice and creating opportunities for growth. It means working with existing organizations to set that standard.”

• “IAP2 Canada, as the national organization should focus on: 1) Research; 2) Linking to IAP2 International; 3) Best Practices communication; and 4) National networking. Chapters should focus on implementing the research, best practices, etc. through training and networking opportunities.”

• Creating collaborative partnerships with similar organizations will be key to successfully meeting our objectives. The following organizations were suggested a number of times throughout the process:

RECOMMENDATION #4: THE IAP2 CANADA BOARD SHOULD REVIEW THE LETTERS PATENT AND KEY OBJECTIVES DOCUMENT AND, WITH CONTINUED INPUT FROM MEMBERS, DEVELOP A FRAMEWORK FOR HOW

THE ORGANIZATION WILL MEET THESE KEY OBJECTIVES.

Value for Members Throughout the engagement process past, current, and future members were keen to discuss what they wanted from IAP2 Canada in terms of member services and value. The meeting notes and verbatim comments at the end of this report provide additional insight into what these services mean to people and how they would like to see them implemented. Below is a summary of high priority value-adding services that stakeholders want to see from IAP2 Canada:

IAIA • International Association of Impact Assessors

CFAR • Circle for Aboriginal Relations

Centre for Public Involvement • University of Alberta

Civic Camp

C2D2 • Canadian Community for Dialogue and Deliberation

IABC • International Association for Business Communicators

CIP and AfYiliates • Canadian Institute of Planners

IAF • International Association of Facilitators


Service Sample Description Networking and Events “Formal and informal; face to face and on line - the evidence is this

only works if it is purposeful” “I would benefit from having more of these events Nationally/Regionally so that I can network and learn from a more diverse group of practitioners and industry members.”

Best Practices and Research “Best practices development and communication is fundamental to the success of IAP2. This provides the practical link between theory and practice.” “…regular updates on research, latest thinking and links to helpful resources for day to day practice.”

Link to International Organization

“I'd like news, tidbits, research and information about what is happening internationally and then nationally…I'd like to know what International or the other Affiliates are doing too.”

Communities of Practice “We should encourage more communities of practice to become more engaged.” “Creating and growing communities of practice is crucial.”

More and Better Communication

“I want to know what’s happening in my local region, as well as my country and internationally…the IAP2 Canada newsletter and website should be a hub for this information.”

Advancing the Practice/ Professional Development Opportunities

“I find some of your resources are invaluable tools in creating awareness and understanding of public participation principles and practices.” “The organization often focuses its energy on training - like the IAP2 Certificate program… it is a solid, foundational, best practices approach to public engagement, and it works well for beginner and even intermediate practitioners. It does not serve the needs of advanced practitioners.” “Where is the advanced research and training? Where are the conversations or opportunities to talk about really cutting edge design, innovation, process?”

Accreditation/ Professional Credibility

“The recognition of professional college or accreditation with second tier training courses and a body able to advocate for the constant improvement of government regulatory directions and support improvements across the field needs to be apart of the mandate of the new board.”

RECOMMENDATION #5: THE IAP2 CANADA BOARD SHOULD FURTHER ENGAGE MEMBERS TO UNDERSTAND

THE GAPS AND PRIORITIES FOR THE ABOVE MEMBER SERVICES AND DEVELOP A PLAN TO CLOSE THE GAPS AND

INCREASE VALUE FOR MEMBERS.

IAP2 Canada as a Canadian Organization Now that IAP2 Canada is the country’s official affiliate of the IAP2 Federation, we wanted to know what should be done to incorporate aspects of the unique Canadian P2 context into IAP2 Canada’s operations. Here are some representative thoughts we heard about how IAP2 Canada should be truly Canadian. Additional input can be found in long form feedback at the end of the report.


I firmly believe if IAP2 Canada is to be an organization that has willingness to engage will ALL diverse, hard to reach populations we will be willing to make Aboriginal Engagement/Best Practice with Aboriginal Populations/Cross Cultural

Training a core component of any training we conduct. Perhaps we should consider an Aboriginal Committee to discuss/explore what this might look like?

IAP2 should develop and espouse Canadian values. Values I see as important to Canadians include: 1) Inclusion, 2)

Tolerance, 3) Consensus building, 4) Respect and 5) Progressive.

Recognizing regional differences is also important. For example, Alberta is focused on energy production, BC on natural resources, Ontario on economics, Quebec on cultural matters and Atlantic Canada on economic transitioning.

…what makes engagement unique in the Canadian context: our history of peace-‐keeping and our role (until recently) on the international stage in supporting people in conflict; our connection with the land and the isolating nature of our

extreme weather and geography; our multiculturalism; in general, our politics of inclusion (although not so much in the last few years; the role and history of our aboriginal peoples; our resources based economy; bilingualism.

As an organization more efforts will need to be made to support the French language groups. I also think efforts need to be made to have the spectrum and other materials in a multitude of Native Languages similar to NWMO conclusion of

their phase 1, after all they are the only ones with the government having to consult.

IAP2 Canada members are across the country and all of us will never be able to physically be in the same place at the same time due to geographic and financial constraints. IAP2 Canada needs to recognize the geographic challenges and

create unique ways for everyone in the country to be meaningfully involved, regardless of physical location.

RECOMMENDATION #6: THE IAP2 CANADA BOARD SHOULD FURTHER ENGAGE MEMBERS TO DETERMINE

HOW IT WILL ADDRESS ELEMENTS OF THE UNIQUELY CANADIAN CONTEXT OF THE ORGANIZATION, SUCH AS GEOGRAPHIC DISPARITY, ABORIGINAL ENGAGEMENT, AND SUPPORT OF FRENCH LANGUAGE GROUPS.

Advancing the Practice of P2 in Canada As noted above, IAP2 Canada’s goal statement is to “…be the national organization that helps to deliver the positive potential of public participation in Canada." We asked stakeholders what they thought it meant to advance the practice of P2 in Canada in working toward this goal. We received a lot of great ideas for ways that the incoming Board can increase awareness of the organization and further advocate for high quality, transparent, and ethical P2 in our country. All of these initiatives will take dedicated resources behind them, as well as time for relationship building and execution. As we look to the future of the organization, here are some ideas about how IAP2 Canada can advance the practice of P2.


Initiative Sample Description Strategic Collaboration with Peer Organizations

“I'd like to see IAP2 Canada LEAD a conversation, with others, that examines and puts forward the state of the practice in the nation and then pro-actively hold conversations with specific sectors, governments FCM, etc about how to make the standards and practices real.”

Research “IAP2 Canada could work with research organizations (for example the centre for public involvement) to do research on Canadian practice.”

Curriculum Integration “…the 'idea' of P2 needs to be written into Mass Comms or Public Relations curriculums. Just as media relations or labour relations all fall under the PR umbrella, I see a natural fit for P2 as a specialized discipline.”

Increase Profile of Profession

“Why not attend post secondary career fairs to let students know that P2 exists and how to get into it?” “Partner with HR organizations or seek out HR departments to get ‘IAP2 Certification’ written into job descriptions.”

Canadian Core Values Award

“We should honour truly best practices from Canada as well as recognize and share where best practices could have helped (i.e. lessons learned from train-wrecks).”

Advocacy Strategy “I think that it is important to have a comprehensive and strategic approach to advancing the practice. This strategy should be supported by a program, which is directed by an IAP2 Canada director, with the title of advocacy, for example.”

RECOMMENDATION #7: THE IAP2 CANADA BOARD SHOULD REVIEW THE PROPOSED INITIATIVES AND, WITH

FURTHER INPUT FROM MEMBERS, DEVELOP A STRATEGY AND RELATED PROGRAM FOR ADVANCING THE

PRACTICE OF P2 IN CANADA.

Conclusion Over the last four months, IAP2 Canada stakeholders have been doing a lot of talking about what the organization means to them and the direction they would like to see us take in the future. Now the rubber needs to hit the road. It’s time for the incoming IAP2 Canada Board of Directors to listen to members and create the national organization that helps to deliver the positive potential of public participation in Canada. They can’t do it alone and will certainly be seeking help from members across the country. We look forward to building on the momentum of this process and continuing to engage members in growing IAP2 Canada!


I A P 2 C A N A D A

What Was Said

Verbatim Comments, Survey Results and Meeting Notes

The IAP2 Canada Engagement Process Final Report


IAP2 Canada Survey Responses

This survey was open from May 5-13, 2011 through the engagement process website (Let’s Talk IAP2) Respondents: 27

Intro IAP2 Canada is now the official Canadian affiliate of the Federation of IAP2! As the Interim Board works to put together the necessary infrastructure, we need to hear from you about what YOUR IAP2 Canada looks like. Since February, an engagement process has been happening to find out what you think IAP2 Canada should do and be. This survey is based on the feedback we’ve heard so far on important issues such as the organizational structure, purpose, and value of IAP2 Canada. Your input in this survey will guide the future direction for the incoming IAP2 Canada Board of Directors. Input will be accepted until May 12th at which point recommendations from the process will be used to develop motions and proposed bylaw amendments at the AGM, which will take place on June 11th in Toronto.

Process This survey is designed to hear what IAP2 Canada stakeholders think about the future of the organization and will result in decisions that are made about bylaw amendments and changes to the current interim structure. It will take 10-15 minutes to complete and is important for us to know where you stand on these issues. Thank you so much for taking the time to complete this survey and for your interest in the future of IAP2 Canada!

Membership IAP2 Canada will collect membership fees to fund operations and provide member services. These membership categories and corresponding fees need to be established for the new organization. Currently, we have members in the following categories: Full Members (may be part of a Corporate/Group or Individuals), Life Members (who have paid a larger fee and been approved as members for their lifetimes), and Honorary Members (who have made an outstanding contribution to IAP2 and do not pay membership fees).

Which of the following membership categories would you like to see offered by IAP2 Canada? Please check all that apply. Please tell us what you would like those categories’ fee structure to be, as well as what voting rights those members should have. _ Full Members 27 yes _ Corporate Members 21 yes _ Life Members 11 yes _ Honorary Members 15 yes _ Student Members 25 yes _ Para-professional/Associate Members 14 yes


_Other (specify):

• Trial Membership - I think that everyone who completes the IAP2 certificate program should receive a six month trial membership as a way of indoctrinating them into the association.

• members from other countries (i.e., may be a member of another IAP2 organization in another country) that want to keep abreast of current/best practice in Canada.

• I think all memberships should be paid, and annual fees are much better for cash flow than something collected once in a lifetime. Honourary membership is a difficult category to manage and very subjective. I would assume anyone making an outstanding commitment to IAP2 is deeply committed to the field and would be more than willing to be a paid member, unless I understand this category incorrectly. Regardless, I think other ways to honour outstanding commitments could be discussed rather than an unpaid membership.

• I am unsure what is meant by "Corporate Member" and "Para-professional/Associate Members"

• Full members could/should have different categories - single membership, then categories of "corporate membership" (e.g., 1-5, 6-25, 26-100, over 100...) with staged membership fees

• I think it is the individual – the practicing professional, and not the organization that should belong to IAP2 Canada. The individual is the member and has the right to vote on Association matters. There should be “group discounts” for groups of individual members from the same organization. However, it would be the individuals and not the organization that would be the members. We should have an honourary non-voting category for members who have provided service to the organization / profession over a long period of time or who might help us make in-roads into another organization. A student membership category – for those enrolled full-time in related post-secondary study, would encourage young people to get involved. A non-voting Associate membership category could be used for corporate entities. Not exactly sure how this would work. Perhaps the organization would receive recognition as being associated with IAP2, but the corporate entity would not be a full member.

Governance Structure The creation of the governance structure for IAP2 Canada should reflect member needs, values and interests. There are many ways the governance structure could be created. We have listed some that have been suggested below, and look to you to tell us your thoughts about how you see IAP2 Canada operating, making decisions and delivering the services you need. Specifically, the input from this survey will guide recommendations that are made by the interim board about changes to the bylaws and IAP2 structure at the upcoming AGM.

What should the minimum number of Directors be for the board of IAP2 Canada? _ 3 1 yes _ 5 11 yes _ 7 10 yes _ 9 5 yes


What should the maximum number of Directors be for the board of IAP2 Canada? _ 9 1 yes _ 11 8 yes _ 13 9 yes _ 15 6 yes _ 17 3 yes

What should the term be for IAP2 Canada Directors? _ one year _ two years 20 yes _ three years 7 yes _ four years The IAP2 Canada board currently has 5 defined Officer positions (President, Vice-President, Secretary, Treasurer, and Past-President (ex-officio director)), as well as a position designated for a representative of each of the 3 existing Chapters (BC, Wild Rose, and St. Lawrence). The rest of the positions are Directors-at-Large.

Should IAP2 Canada board elections choose people for specific positions (ie. Treasurer, President, Director-‐at-‐Large) or to the should people be elected to board in general with positions being chosen by the board? _ Specific positions 12 yes OR _ Board in general 16 yes

Do you agree with the currently defined Officer positions? _ Yes 18 yes _ No 10 no Comments:

• No. I think there should be an ex-officio trainer on the Executive voted by members at large. Training is IAP2's biggest revenue stream, and one of the best ways to connect with members. I think the international rep should also be an officer position.

• Yes and there should be director positions to oversee core programmes: membership, events, professional development, communication, advocacy, research, partnerships

• I believe in electing a President and moreso Regional positions (to represent local chapters). We need to ensure adequate representation across our vast country so that everyone is represented. The other positions can be decided by the Board. As for the positions mentioned, they are adequate for now. (We may have to re-evaluate in the future as we grow)

• This is fine. I think the directors should have portfolios wiht defined responsibilities. • I think you could have more defined positions. Here are a few suggestions:

Communications Coordinator (incl. social media), Member Services/Engagement, Event Coordinator, Partnerships Coordinator.

• Yes - simple and flexible. • Yes. Ideally I would like to see more chapters developed in the future, leading to more

chapters represented on the board. • I don't think you need the Past-President position, nor the ex-officio.


• No, I don't think the past-president should be an officer because we're not guaranteed to have one.

• it is better to let the directors choose between themselves who is going to do what. • not sure what the ex-officio director really means. I like the past president position for

continuity • On the previous question - I think staggered terms are best for board members. I

would also be open to an initial term of 1-2 years, with option to renew for additional 2 year terms up to a maximum.

• Yes, I think so but still not totally familiar with the org. Are there standing committees? If yes, the chair/head of each committee should sit on the Executive Council.

• No - I think you need a membership officer, an education officer as well. • I agree with the defined Officer positions to start with. The IAP2 Canada may add or

eliminate positions after a certain period of time following full implementation of the IAP2 Canada.

• I agree with the currently defined Officer positions. Having board members elected to the board in general and then letting the board sort out who is best able to fill the executive positions is a more functional process. It also allows the board to backfill a position if a member's term is cut short for whatever reason.

• Fairly standard - if it works, then it is fine. Could leave more room for flexibility in case a hole in board makeup leads to procedural slow-ups and/or a need for special elections... e.g., Board members could select positions from among them once elected.

• I think that people should be specifically elected to the defined officer positions so that people with the required skills are in the proper positions - except, of course, that of past president. I also agree that each official chapter should have a voting representative. I would caution against letting the Board become too large - it terrifically increases the complexity of decision-making.

• The board should consider having officers to represent students and other demographic groups.

• 5 defined Officer positions are traditional and expected. They give a sense of who is taking the lead and who is responsible for document (Secretary) and budget (Treasurer).

• Yes, this is standard and works well • Yes the currently defined positions are necessary. Other positions should include:

membership; communications; technology; professional development. Should IAP2 Canada create positions specifically for representatives of the following groups, and failing to find Directors to fill those positions, leave them vacant? Chapter Representatives? _ Yes 20 yes _ No 7 no Provincial/Territorial Representatives? _ Yes 12 yes _ No 15 no Geographic regional Representatives? _ Yes 18 yes _ No 8 no


Comments: • There is no tell us more box with this question, but I wanted to add a comment. I

agree with attempting to have regional representation but am unsure that the seat should be left vacant if no one is found for the position. So I guess I want a regionally-diverse board, but do not want to see us end up with only a few people on the board because the regional positions can’t be filled.

• I answered no to dedicated representation because of how this was worded. I actually think there SHOULD be representation on the Board for established Chapters, and perhaps to allow for geographic representation for areas where there are no/no Chapters (ie Quebec, Maritimes) - but I don't agree the seats be left vacant if they can't be filled. This could be procedural nightmare.

• I find the initial question as worded above somewhat confusing. I would like to have a better understanding of the current IAP2 membership and their location before answering this question (e.g., where they all lie when plotted on a map).

• RE: regional representation, Depending on how things proceed with IAP2 at a more regional level, my instinct is a geographic regional representative framework is more helpful/realistic vs. chapter or provincial reps. Additionally, I don't have a sense of how IAP2 Canada plans on organizing chapters. Is the intention that there is one chapter per province or might there be several in places such as Ontario and Quebec? In Manitoba (where I practice) we've discussed a regional 'chapter' that includes Saskatchewan and NW Ontario, for example. I think some clarity on IAP2 at a regional/chapter level woud be helpful before determining how board representation should be handled on a regional basis. Failing to find directors to fill positions, I believe the positions should remain vacant. I think this indicates an intention to be a truly representative organization.

• Its important that specific interests are represented at the Board level. However, it is the responsibility of the interested group to bring forward an appropriate representative.

• Regional representation may not be critical in early phase of the organization but is worth "striving for" (e.g., could be one of the criteria given to the nominating committee for canvassing of candidates).

Should licensed IAP2 Trainers be allowed to serve as a Director in a voting capacity? _ Yes 19 yes _ No 8 no Comments:

• Trainers are often some of the more experienced P2 practitioners and can bring a wealth of expertise to the board. In addition they are great ambassadors for IAP2 and have the opportunity to come in contact with more P2 practitioners than other board members might. If IAP2 Canada is looking at offering training as a member service / revenue generator, trainers can provide knowledgeable advice on various aspects of training delivery. Trainers are licensed by IAP2 Federation and not by IAP2 Canada so do not have an employer – employee relationship with IAP2 Canada. There are concerns with regard to conflict of interest for all board members, not just trainers. If a trainer becomes a board member he or she should agree not to put his/her name forward in response to any request for trainers (if payment is involved) during his/her term in office.

• I strongly believe there should be a place on the Board for a trainer or 2, but that place should be non-voting, but executive in its advisory capacity, and elected by the


membership. Trainers are ambassadors for the organization, come in contact with more practitioners over the course of the year than anyone else, and are frequently deeply connected to what is happening in the field.

• Trainers are amongst the most knowledgeable and active IAP2 champions; they need to be able to influence strategic directions of the association. There needs to be clear conflict of interest guidelines.

• As long as there is a balance. There cannot be an overwhelming majority of trainers on the board. However, to eliminate them completely is also wrong, as they have a large stake in the organization.

• I recognize (now) that this is a tricky subject. the bottom line for me is that it would could put individuals in a conflict of interest situation which I'm not certain can be overcome.

• They are a member- they are allowed to be elible as a director and vote. • As for Directors who are trainers - well, the conflict of interests is pretty evident since a

lot of Board decisions would intersect with revenue generation through training workshops...

• These are the folks that are most dedicated to the practice and should have decision-making authority. They more than anyone else would have their 'finger on the pulse' of needs of emerging P2 practitioners.

• This is a conflict of interest because they make money as a result of the board's decisions. There should be a position on the board, though, for a Training Community representative that is non-voting because it's important for the board to be plugged into the training community and vice-versa.

• They have a good understanding of the perceptions of professionals towards public participation. therefore, they can bring that réality to the board.

• I'm not sure why being a licensed trainer would be a problem. • RE: licensed IAP2 Trainers being allowed to serve as directors. I don't have a problem

with this in theory, but certainly the board should not be dominated by trainers to avoid the potential perception of board members being able to profit financially from decisions made on behalf of members.

• If there had been a Don't Know option in this case, I would have selected it. I believe as an expert questionnaire designer that more of these questions should have the DK option.

• I think the trainers have a vested self interest so I don't think they should have a voting position.

• I am not sure what are the implications associated with this or if there are any possible conflict of interests. Should there be, then I would click No.

• Vested interest raises concerns. • Trainers would be knowledgeable about the organization and the profession - but

should not be in a position of conflict re training requirements (procedures/policies could be instituted to address this).

• Yes, with conditions. I do not believe that licensed trainers should hold the Training Director position, if there is one. Nor should any trainer be allowed to vote on a decision item that has a direct impact on their business as a trainer. Both of these situations are a conflict of interest.

• I see no issue with this. • Yes, but should be excluded from voting where there is a clear conflict of interest. I

think restricting IAP2 trainers from serving asw directors reduces the pool of potential enthusiastic and dedicated director by too much. IAP2 Trainers have a vested interest in seeing IAP2 flourish, and thus could be the best directors. Non-IAP2 trainers may actually have an interest in seeing the organization fail.


• I don't see any problem with this • Although I see potential conflict of interest, perhaps an operating policy needs to be in

place that would address that issue. • Yes, their knowledge and experience should be beneficial • I don't see why the question is being asked. If a trainer has been elected by the

membership to the board why would they not be allowed the same rights as other elected members? All members of the board should have similar limitations and should be precluded from voting if a conflict of interest arises.

• Too much room for conflict of interest whether real or perceived. Currently, Canada holds two positions on the IAP2 Federation (International) Board. Should the IAP2 Canada designated representative(s) to the Federation Board be required to hold a position on the board? _ Yes 24 yes _ No 3 no Comments:

• The Federation Reps are the conduit between the Federation and IAP2 Canada (both the members and the board) and, as such, have an important role in keeping the board informed and engaged in Federation activities. In order to represent IAP2 Canada at the Federation level, the reps need to fully understand what is going on at the affiliate level. I think this is best achieved by having the reps sit on the IAP2 Canada board.

• The Int'l Board plays a different role than IAP2 CDA, however, that individual should know and understand what the canadian organization is focusing on, what is important or identified as a priority. In addition, members should elect that rep so that they are selecting someone to represent them at the international level, who they believe can play that role.

• These are very busy people. There should be an open seat for them at the table. We need a link to the international board.

• In future I would see the President and potentially one other member being our IAP2 rep. As for now, it would be great to have those board members help establish IAP2 Canada with their experiences.

• Not necessarily, but they should have a close working relationship. • I would say at least one of them should hold a position on the IAP2 Canada Board. • If this role were a member of the board, they should not be in an officer position,

rather this should be an additional officer position created whose purpose is to serve the function of representing IAP2 Canada at the Federation Board. This role would act as an advocate for IAP2 Canada at an international level and serve as a conduit of information flowing in both directions (to and from the international board).

• How else would they know what is going on at the affliate level? • Same as trainers - it's important to have them plugged into the board and vice versa.

Whether it's a voting position or not doesn't matter to me. • From a practical viewpoint, Board responsibilities are large enough without adding

more portfolios that demand more time on a volunteer position. Also, I believe we need to have functions that can engage our members. I think we need to be flexible on this.

• Well Yes for at least one of them and they could be interchangeable. • This would provide consistency as well as sharing of best practices with the board. • I believe this would provide a link with the Federation for news, feedbacks, etc.


• It is important that these representatives be represented in both boards to facilitate ongoing communications. Since there are 2 international positions maybe they could share the responsibilities of a single position at the national level.

• Would make sense re knowledge of the national scene to make sure it is a Canadian Board member - especially if it is seen as a "perk" rather than an "obligation" (in terms of time and responsibilities). Might be an incentive to be on the (Canadian) Board...?

• But not necessarily as a voting member. • I think having a position on the Canadian Board ensures they are up to speed on all the

issues and can represent the views well. • All elected members should be actively involved at the Canadian board level by either

holding one of the defined positions or leading a committee initiative/project. The IAP2 Canada engagement process has been loud and clear about wanting “more chapters, not fewer.” What do you think the relationship should be between IAP2 Canada and established, developing, and future IAP2 regional chapters?

• IAP2 Canada should encourage the formation of chapters in areas where there are a significant number of members. This may be regionally at first, but could eventually be provincially or by City. Part of the membership fees paid to IAP2 Canada could be passed on to the chapters based on their membership numbers. In turn, the Chapters should have a seat on the IAP2 Canada Board – this would help with the co-ordination of activities and the sharing of ideas. The Chapters would not report to or be governed by IAP2 Canada – Chapters would be independent legal entities affiliated with the national organization. IAP2 Canada and the Chapters would all operate using the IAP2 Core Values and Code of Ethics. Some operating principles and delineation of roles and responsibilities could be developed over time.

• In my view chapters are groups of people who get together with a goal of delivering services and programs in a local area. IAP2 CDA should be setting direction, strategy and priorities nationally and delivering services across the country. There should be geographic link to the IAP2 CDA Board, but local members in "chapters' should be focused on local services. There doesn't need to be a direct connect between the 2 but there should be far more info sharing than there is now. I'd leave the chapters to do their business, make sure there is geographic diversity on the Board (not chapter representation) and let chapter members focus on local needs. Requiring chapter members to be on the Board also spreads volunteer resources too thin, and results of more of the same people involved, rather than leveraging different people in different ways. Separating the functions and roles would allow for more diversity in perspective, more effective volunteer energy and better growth of the organization. This is the structure in A'Asia and it functions well. My only suggestion related to chapters is that there be accountability - to abide by code of ethics, conflict of interest, code of conduct and to hold a minimum number of events and to communicate a minimum number of times with local people. Otherwise they are just people holding positions who say they represent IAP2 but who may not supporting the organization or the practice

• We need more chapters. These are the program delivery vehicles. • Haha see Winnipeg notes! In general advisory, support and coordination. National

conference. Coordinate training. • There should be close ties, information sharing, support one national website with

links to chapters.


• Help out local chapters in an adminstrative capacity (memberships, documents, tools, templates)

• A bit like Canadian federalism... a nice division of areas of responsibility and for the Chapters, a voice in the federation.

• IAP2 Canada knows who its membership is and needs to get out and support those members who are active and encourage and support additional chapter formation.

• Chapters should continue to support offer regionally-based training, networking and other regional events to create a "community" of P2 people. Otherwise, limit overlap as much as possible.

• IAP2 Canada should provide some amount of the funds they get from membership fees to established chapters. There should be clarity around what is and isn't a chapter and chapters should be relevant to their members. If a chapter isn't able to serve a group (eg. St. Lawrence isn't able to effectively serve Atlantic Canada) and there isn't an established chapter to serve that group (eg. Atlantic Canada), those members shouldn't be part of a chapter. At that point, IAP2 Canada should undertake to support the development of a chapter that would meet their needs by providing communications, networking and some financial support for chapter creation.

• support for the developing chapter, information transfer to all regional chapters, organizing events to further everyone's training

• There needs to be close support and (two-way) funding connections. • IAP2 Canada providing a basic framework for regional chapters, i.e. this is what would

be expected of regional chapter from IAP2 Canada; this is what regional chapter can expect of IAP2 Canada. Each region will have different challenges and needs and regional chapters should have the flexibility to address those as they see fit. However, there should be some formal ties and expectations to maintain professional standards and organizational consistency across the country. There should be a clear indication from IAP2 Canada of the intention for regional chapters where there aren't already. I wasn't even aware there were regional chapters of the organization, otherwise I would have pursued one locally, for Manitoba, much, much sooner.

• That has to be worked out carefully. • I agree there should be more than fewer - the question is not clear however. • I think regional chapters should be independent in their operations. The coordination

of all regional chapters and alignment with the Federation should be handled by IAP2 Canada.

• Distributed. The regional chapters should have great autonomy. • I think that IAP2 Canada can encourage and support new chapters to develop but those

chapters also need to be strong enough to stand on their own. The impetus for development should be bottom up not top down.

• As supportive as possible - recognizing that starting up chapters is time and energy intensive.

• IAP2 Canada should clearly lay out the conditions for chapters to become official - whatever that may be. Then offer support, coaching, and administrative resources for things that are common to all, and maintain the IAP2 Canada website and Canadian registrations.

• IAP2 Canada should work to support the development of regional chapters. • IAP2 should support new chapters by providing templates, contacts, seed funding and

admin support untill they are established. Shared web tools would be good too (website CMS, mailing list, extranet, wiki, etc). One shared online contact database/listing/mailing list of practioners could be ideal, i.e. joining the local chapter automatically adds me to national list. We don't want to have to maintain multiple logins and profiles if happen to join multiple chapters.


• The national chapter should support and facilitate connections between regional chapters.

• Need to give that more thought. • The president of the chapters should have a position on the Board. The Board should

lend expertise where applicable. • Chapters would be focused on their own defined region while IAP2 Canada would have

a national focus. • ??

What services do you expect to receive from a regional chapter versus the national organization?

• I don't expect anything from a regional chapter - maybe the occasional activity or communication might be nice. I expect regular communication and information from IAP2 CDA including info on trends, projects, innovations at the national and international level. I'd like to hear regularly about what the rest of the IAP2 family is doing, about their events, activities and conferences as well as call for sessions, call for trainers from international etc. I'd like to hear about all the training in the country (IAP2 and not IAP2) so I can make my own choices about how to be involved. I'd like to receive info on new research in the field, call for proposals in the field etc. I'd really like to see some transparency in decision-making at the national level - agendas, minutes, opportunities to participate in Board meetings. I have not seen anything related to this since the interim board was established in November. I'd appreciate receiving information on what the International Board is doing - the international website says you can get the agendas and minutes of their board meetings from your affiliate. I've made the request 3 times and not received anything.

• professional development and networking • Training and networking opportunities. • networking events • Local events, local networking, over-all local focus on issues that are pertinent to that

region. • REgional chapter: training, networking, events, regional advocacy, linkages to other P2

stakeholders etc. National: relations to the International IAP2, national advocacy, national events linking all regions, overall standards/guidelines for certification, training etc

• Regional chapter - local/regional networking events; coordinate local/regional training opportunities; share relevant local/regional information. National organization - national conference event (every 2-3 years); website/information portal for best practices, current news on P2, community of practice, feature chapter "pages" (to eliminate the need for chapters to develop their own sites)

• regional - training, networking, regionally relevant case study analysis. national - annual conference event, overall administration of membership

• I expect face to face networking and professional development opportunities from my local chapter, especially on topics that are relevant to my region. I expect a national organization to tell me about best practices in P2, advocate for quality P2 to governments and corporations, and tell me about what the international organization is doing.

• services in french, training to maintain and further my education in the field, case studies

• more localized seminars/meetings • Regional: -networking, sharing experiences -regular communication to members -

luncheons, lunch 'n learns, and other less formal sharing, professional development


opportunities -regional capacity to offer iap2 training, potential regional training coordinator (volunteer) that liases with national to offer or coordinate training locally on a more frequent basis. Local training is a key issue for the Manitoba region. -regional awards National: -run committee-based “communities of interest” nationally (e.g. natural resources, health care, etc.). Would allow for cross-sharing of information. -Annual National conference -Mentoring -Sharing information, successes, lessons learned -Share sector-based information -National co-ordination of efforts -Build credibility for IAP2 – get association name recognized -Create a shared understanding of P2 practices (ie. education for groups with influence in P2 fields such as Federation of Canadian Municipalities, Health Canada, Industry Assocations, etc) awards -regular communication to members re: organizational items, education/advocacy efforts, new training, conferences, best practices, etc

• Again, requires considerable deliberation touching on things such as the size of the chapter and their potential for growth. An argument, nonetheless could be made for having all services flowing from the national org in order to be efficient and effective.

• From a regional chapter I expect communications, education and professional development. I expect the national chapter to provide an annual conference for learning.

• Pretty much everything in terms of regional events, activities, training, meetings, etc. • Regional related content and events. • I would expect to see support through information sharing, training activities, job

boards and local events at the regional level. At the national level I would expect to see the development of national and international policies and inititives pertaining to training, professional/social responsibility and professional certification.

• Social/connection/training at a local level - as many opportunities as is possible within resource constraints. National supports regions with "back office" services (if needed and resources permit) and aggregated resources (e.g., training packages, national trainer standards, information/communications promoting PP, web and social media support) again as resources permit. There will always be a tension between national and regional needs versus resources - a structure that supports dialogue and resolution of conflicts (established in advance of conflicts arising) is always helpful...

• I expect local opportunities to interact with and learn from other members on topics pertinent to the practice. This is not limited to training. I also expect a local chapter/regional website. I expect the local chapter to keep me informed of happenings, innovation and opportunities to engage with other affiliates and at the international level. I expect the local chapter to identify and develop formal relationships with other related organizations (e.g. planners) so that we can broaden our local practice and knowledge.

• Regional chapters should provide networking and professional development opportunities. National organizations are better suited to host national or regional conferences, while acting as a conduit between the regional chapters and the international organization.

• Chapter organizes local training, get togethers, pushes local governments (municipal and provincial). Fed organizes national events in partnership with local chapters (don't let local chapter burn out). Push provincial and federal government. Organize internation cooperation and visits to and from Canada.

• Professional development, research, advocacy, networking • Need to give that more thought. • ERgional chapters should have more grassroots knowledge about what is going on

locally and should be able to supply their members information about local goings on.


• Regular events that encourage local members to get together. Small PD events. A regional symposium every 2-3 years.

• ?? • IAP2 Canada could work on broader issues such as research, advocacy and

professional standards, while the Chapters could focus more on professional development and regional best practices. IAP2 Canada could maintain the main website and manage membership, while the Chapters could work on member recruitment at the local level. IAP2 Canada could host a national conference in conjunction with a local Chapter, rotating locations each time. The local chapter would provide networking opportunities and face-to-face PD, while IAP2 Canada could provide some web-based activities and perhaps an national awards program.

Services The member engagement process leading to the decision by the IAP2 International Board to create a Federation of Affiliates provided a large amount of input on topics and sectors of particular interest to members. Similarly, the IAP2 Canada engagement process so far has indicated great support and desire for Communities of Practice within our national organization. With which of the following Communities of Practice would you like to associate? Please check all that apply. _P2 in Government 17 yes _P2 in natural resources 13 yes _P2 with indigenous peoples 19 yes _P2 and social media 14 yes _P2 in health care 12 yes _P2 and environment 20 yes _P2 and education 12 yes _P2 in international development 9 yes _P2 in disaster recovery 6 yes _Other 4 yes

• How about P2 in outrage or high emotion? Its what I do and I'd be happy to host it and share and learn with others.

• community development • P2 in planning and design (municipal infrastructure, urban design, community

planning) • Food including development of a national food policy and strengthening our local food

system. This links with two critical issues: health and the environment. • Urban planning, local development, environmental assessment. • P2 and digital. The "social media" term is a bit restrictive. Digital is a slightly more

encompassing term and can include practices that "social media" doesn't (ie. Online polling, or even surveys like this one!)

• P2 in urban development, P2 and dialogue and deliveration, P2 and youth engagement (ages 15 - 25)

• Municipal government • P2 and consultants

If IAP2 Canada establishes Communities of Practice, do you think specific membership fees and categories should be established for these? _Yes 11 yes _No 16 no


Comments: • Not sure what is meant by “specific membership fees and categories”. I agree with

having an additional fee for belonging to a community of practice but I don’t think we need a special membership category – in other words all individuals who are full members could join a community of practice, but this would not be a different classification of membership. Also, I agree with additional fees only if there is an additional service – e.g. a community of practice member only section on the website, special activities or information.

• This works for me. • Yes • Hard to say, as I'm not too sure what "specific groups" would be. If it allows the base

fee to be lower, that could allow us to more quickly grow our membership base. Thoughts I've heard also say to charge for more courses, events, etc. (So to spread out sources of revenue) Not an easy solution.

• Yes, I would pay additional fees for networking, communities of practices, etc. It would be great to be able to fund some resources dedicated to IAP2.

• additional fees should be for events: learning/educational opportunities, training, events (conferences, etc.)

• As above - but obviously, fee for service is reasonable for events, training, materials, conferences etc.

• I would prefer to see one fee structure developed. • Pay more to be more involved?? Huh? How about pay less to be more involved . . . • I would pay additional fees on top of my base fee to be part of a community of practice

if it was interesting to me. We pay extra to be part of conferences, so why wouldn't we pay extra to get added value from communities of practice?

• if so, the additionnal fees must be reasonnable and in relation to the advantages/additional services provided

• I have no opinion. • Again, I would need to understand what 'specific groups' means in terms of services,

etc. Regardless, I see communities of interest/specific groups as a staged service - right now I think it's more important to focus on getting the basics of IAP2 Canada down right and secondly, focusing on a framework for regional chapters. Membership will increase dramatically once there is a better framework for regional chapters and the communities of interest question can be better addressed/resourced at that time.

• Complex but at this early point why not just have a base membership. • I can support that - it is very similar to PRSA in the U.S. • I believe there should only one membership fee to pay to join the IAP2 Canada. The

member would automatically join the regional chapter associated with the address provided at the subscription time.

• Base fee should cover everything. If it's an effort to gather additional money, then look at providing services for a price (ie. paid monthly newsletter on 'what's new in social media' etc...). Though I think I'd probably prefer just sticking with the base fee.

• I like the tiered funding system. You can always buy up if you change your mind and want to participate more fully.

• Would be fine to have an additional fee for "chapter membership" so someone could choose to be a national member only but need to be careful that any charge is not too much of a disincentive to join (e.g., $20-25 for the region). This could help support chapter development/activity. I would not be in favour of having additional fees for topic-specific member categories (i.e., "communities of practice").

• Figure out what makes sense to support then charge enough to cover it. I want to pay only one fee, once a year and to receive the full array of services and programs - at the


international, national and local levels. Providing a shopping list of fee options is going to get very complicated very quickly.

• I would be interested in a base membership fee only. • I would be willing to pay extra fees if I was involved in directing the use of those fees. • I don't know why an additional fee would be required • I would need to understand more about the suggestoin of additional fees. • As indicated above, I don't think extra fees should be charged unless there is no

money to operate these groups. Then perhaps it should be laid out to those wanting to participate in the group what the operating costs are, why they can't be covered by the parent organization, and have members help cover the cost.

• Sure I don't have a problem with that. In my case I would assess the value for money charged extra.

• Too confusing...keepit simple with one membership that opens up services to you ...and with specific membership categories menitoned above.

Input from the engagement process has previously suggested that a base membership fee plus additional fees for involvement in specific groups would be of interest to members. What are your thoughts?

• I'd be prepared to pay an additional fee to get information specific to that topic and to participate in occasional events related to that topic. Here is the thing though - something would actually have to happen - right now i'm not getting much for my membership. I stay involved because I am committed to the organization, but I know many who have opted out due to lack of activity or information.

• CoP require resources to operate. People need to get something out of member. Active membership is the lifeblood of CoP. An annual fee satisfies both these requirements

• Keep it simple. CoP is enhancing or streamlining interaction and knowledge across the country. The same argument could be made to have fees based on local chapters...which also could make it messy.

• I think the overall IAP2 Canada membership fees should cover Communities of Practice - given that the value of a CoP is actually driven by what the participants bring. The infrastructure for it is the least of it...

• There is no guarantee that a community of practice will provide value for a specific member (e.g., I could ask a question only to find that no one responds).

• Specific membership fees by community of practice would be hard to implement - who pays more and why? I would not support that. Identifying communities of practice by would be helpful to identify areas of continued interest/need and help to focus training needs. Also helps those accessing IAP2 for consultants to focus their search.

• I wish there was an "I don't know" option. I would need to think about this more in the context of what basic membership fees were and what services were provided as part of the communities of practice, vs a more committee-like format

• It would set up an inflexible structure given the fluidity of practice among some members. This would mean a series of silos.

• Quality costs money. • there should one single membership fee. The member may then subscribe to the

groups that he or she wants to join. • My answer is actually yes and no for several reasons. Yes - it is easier to track the

number of interested/practicing members and therefore if a category is poorly populated and supported it can be cut. No - if the categories are discrete including fees then it is more difficult for members to move between categories for the purposes of learning and experience. This also seems to preclude the option of member's changing interests. The category is second to the overarching IAP2 membership.


Maybe the initial fee for IAP2 could include fees that would be allocated to categories according to membership and those categories be up for change once a year.

• Encourage cross-fertilization (among Communities of Practice) rather than "silo-ization" - more learning that way! Additional or specific costs could be offset through fees for training targeted to specific communities. The "communities" approach could provide some structure (e.g., themes or streams) for national and/or regional conferences...

• This should be a service provided with membership in IAP2 Canada and each CoP should have a web presence on the IAP2 Canada web site.

• While I'd expect the chapter to provide free basic admin and technology (e.g. mailing list, wiki pages) Fees could allow for some special projects that otherwise would not happen with just volunteer efforts, e.g. creating education materials, pay for an advertising campaign. Fees could be different for different CoP.

• I don't think extra fees should be charged since a fee has already been paid. It seems like the Communities of Practice should be a part of what IAP2 Canada has to offer.

• Other organizations I have belonged to have levied a separate fee in order to belong to a community of practice within the basic membership so precedents are known.

Your involvement and final thoughts Are you interested in volunteering or playing a role in IAP2 Canada? _Yes 18 yes _No 9 yes If so, tell us your name, contact information, location and what interests you or what role you are interested in. [contact information removed for privacy – will be given to incoming board for follow up] Please tell us a bit about yourself. Are you an IAP2 member? _Yes 23 yes _No 4 no If No, would you like to be an IAP2 member? _Yes 3 yes _No 2 no What city to do you live in?

• Ottawa (3) • Winnipeg (2) • Oakville (2) • Barrie • Vancouver (2) • Calgary (8) • Quebec City • Victoria (2) • Toronto (3) • Montreal • Halifax (2)

Can we contact you to better understand your opinions? [contact information removed to protect privacy]


Do you have any final comments to share with us? • Thanks to the member engagement team for allowing people to have input. I hope the

Board (current and future) makes good use of this valuable info. • Thanks very much for asking. This engagement process has been well done and

thoughtful. I know the Board has been working hard on many things and I appreciate their efforts and commitment. However the lack of communication, transparency and information sharing is very disturbing from a core values and code of ethics perspective. Without this engagement process I can imagine IAP2 would have lost many more members over the last 6 months. It will be nice to see a permanent Board move to correct these things, so the organization functions as a best practice in governance.

• Great engagement process! Kudos. • Thanks for doing this! • Thanks for asking my opinion. • Looking forward to the next stages... • What do you have against survey monkey? ;) • I'm not sure if my membership is paid up. I had paid for a membership in the past but

can't remember when that was. • Great job so far and very best wishes for success as we move forward! • Let's start with some small and focused projects that we have enough enthusiastic

champions to see quick results. Something tangible and don't get bogged down in strategy, policy, and governance. Keep an outward view on impact, not internal institutional on structure. go team –jd

• Thanks for all your efforts in this member engagement! Well done and much appreciated.

• No...good luck to us all!


Regional Input

Survey of Atlantic IAP2 members and friends Survey conducted and compiled by Geoff Wilson 148 surveys sent 18 email bounce-backs 15 responses Response rate: 11.5% 1. Tell us about your connection to IAP2. (Check all that apply) I am currently a member (either individual or part of a group membership) 4 I am a former member 2 I have taken IAP2 training 14 I have attended an IAP2 conference, event, and/or webinar 4 I am familiar with IAP2's materials (such as the Spectrum of Public Participation) 6 I have visited the IAP2 website 6 Other (please specify) 0 2. What is the value of the International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) in your opinion? Check all that apply. Credibility of an international professional association for public participation practitioners. 12 80.0% 5 A network of professionals from many sectors 11 73.0% 3 Training 15 4 Provides access to international research in the field of public participation through a peer-reviewed journal and special publications and events 6 40.0% 2 Conferences and events (national and international) 6 40.0% 3 Advocates for best practices in public participation 12 80.0% 5 IAP2's annual international awards program (Core Values Awards) 4 27.0% 1 Other (please specify) 0 0 3. In your own words, what do you think is the value of being an IAP2 member? Or if you don't think there's value in being a member, tell us why. I am not a member but if I was, the access to best practices and training on public participation. It provides an opportunity to network with like-minded professionals and serves as a place to get information on new techniques and advances. Not sure networking and best practice learnings Finding out about training opportunities and other news.


For me the utility was training. Ongoing membership has helped me track training opportunities for staff and it is useful to know there is somewhere we could go if we needed support for specific projects but up to now that has not been necessary. For all the reasons noted above, particularly as a network of professionals in the field of citizen engagement. My interest in engagement has been sparked by IAP2 and I have looked to the organisation for leadership/irection in this area. While the spectrum of participation has been very helpful to me, and the training was well done, I would like to see more diverse membership and outreach that would appeal to those of us who are not facilitators/consultants, but work in fields (e.g., policy) that require better tecnhiques and decision-making tools for engaging stakeholders/citizensto to help improve policy recommendations. Valuable to be part of recognized organization. Training and networking opportunities. Being an IAP2 member allows you to share resources and experiences with other members. It also gives you a better sense of the bigger picture and how to manage expectations both within your organization and with the public at large. Connection to others who work in the field of practice. 4. What services should IAP2 Canada offer to Canadian IAP2 members? Check all that apply Interactive website and discussion forum 9 E-newsletter 15 Local networking and professional development events 10 National or regional conferences 12 Professional development webinars and teleconferences 13 Mentorship network (to tap into knowledge and experience of other IAP2 members) 7 Advocacy and public communication on public participation issues 6 Practical publications and toolkits on public participation issues and practices 14 Online resource library 12 Awards, scholarships and fellowships 3 Research on P2 topics relevant to Canada 10 Online job board 1 Other (please specify) 0 5. What will make IAP2 Canada a uniquely Canadian organization? focus on people Canadian website and Canadian board seems sufficient. A focus on national P2 issues and practices, coming from a common public policy base. Respect, empowerment, open two-way communication and approaching things in a practical, reasonable way.


Sponsoring research into uniquely Canadian P2 issues (i.e. aboriginal consultation, environmental consultation, health care sector) 6. What are the uniquely Canadian priorities or interests in the public participation field that IAP2 Canada needs to have on it's radar? 1 response out of 5 I believe there is a general lack of public participation in general within Canada, no matter the field - key is to figure out how to effectively engage and interest the general public. This extends from voting, to attending municipal town halls etc... Current federal government climate around how information comes into the federal government and goes out, this has been changing. None come immediately to mind. The changing role of public engagement in the development of public policy at all levels of government. How to engage the diversity of Canadian citizens' perspectives. Health care system sustainability Does hockey count? In all seriousness, we have priorities/interests that affect the majority of Canadians i.e. health care, education, environment, economy but there are also priorities on a smaller, community/provincial scale i.e. having the local town hall declared a heritage building. Both the big picture issues and the grass roots issues need to be balanced. 7. How should the IAP2 Canada Board of Directors be structured to ensure fair representation? (For example: Should there be representation from each province? Should chapters or communities of practice be represented on the Board? How should the Board executive committee be selected? How should Board members be selected? How long should the term of Board members be? etc.) Not sure on this one but it seems fair to have representation from across Canada as each province is unique. There should be representation across the country based on the existing chapters/communities of practice. One per province and one for Atlantic Provinces and each would nominate/select their representative. 2-3 year terms 8. Tell us anything else that you feel is important for us to hear - whether good or bad - as we work to put a Canadian IAP2 structure in place. Within the current financial situation, the opportunity for travel to attend conferences/training is diminished. As indicated by the next question, there could be consideration given to using technology to bring people together, i.e. video conferencing. 9. What kinds of networking or professional development opportunities would you like to take part in locally or regionally (ie in Atlantic Canada)? Check all that apply. Webinars (educational, professional development) 10 Teleconferences 8 Networking events (professional, social) 6


Professional development workshops, presentations 11 Social media connections (Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, etc) 5 Regional seminars, conferences 10 IAP2 training programs 11 Other (please specify) 0 10. Would you be interested in working on or participating in the following: (Check all that apply) An Atlantic Regional IAP2 Canada Chapter 3 33.3% 3 An IAP2 Chapter in my province 0 An informal network of public participation professionals and practitioners in my local area 6 A virtual network of public participation professionals and practitioners in the Atlantic region 0 If you are interested in one or more of these opportunities, enter your email address below [email addresses removed to preserve privacy]


St. Lawrence Chapter Feedback The St. Lawrence Chapter hosted 3 face-to-face sessions in Ottawa. Due to the lack of turnout at any of these events, Rick Delaney from that chapter followed up with members via email. On 6 May, Rick sent individual email to all 64 IAP2 members in St. Lawrence. He received 7 replies 1. What do you see as the key objectives and purpose for IAP2 Canada?

• "spreading the word" re philosophy, values and mutual benefits of citizen participation • provide access to leading edge "thinkers and doers" • opportunities to meet and learn with/from peers and "experts" • getting tools into the hands of practitioners - training, via the e-waves • Building a Canadian network of like-minded professionals to advance our respective skill sets,

share best practices, establish new relationships and identify areas for future focus. Canadian objectives/purpose should be similar to international organization to ensure common approach, but with additional focus on the Canadian needs. In other words, how do we tailor the new organisation to Canada, but stay true to the international trends?

2. How will IAP2 Canada provide value for its members?

• action on the above • not every event in Hamilton? • By achieving the above, through discussion groups (online, regional), annual meetings,

professional development/certification opportunities and publications. Recognition could also play a part, perhaps in the development of national/regional award programs drawing attention to innovative work.

• Providing a link to international work, trends, leaders • Understanding the Canadian needs - how do we differ: western, central and Atlantic • A more broadly applied focus - facilitators AND those who are working in government and other

organisations who truly need exposure and assistance in public participation and engagement. The decision-makers course is a very good example of how we can 'bring more people into the tent.'

• How can IAP2 Canada reach out to non-government organisations - e.g.,environmental associations? Government may be working to develop a more engaging approach to policy/program development and decision making, but advocacy groups don't necessarily understand/accept the new direction. Perhaps their purpose has to change, too. It's been a challenge for me as I've tried to implement a more collaborative approach in policy work.

3. What will make IAP2 Canada a truly Canadian organization?

• support participatory democracy • adhere to the values and practices even under pressure to act without consultation • Canadian governance (with the obvious necessary ties into the international body/bodies)…

Canadian-penned publications… AGM in rotating Canadian centres that attracts a critical mass of practitioners and speakers.

• The IAP2 Canada organisation must reflect the current needs of Canada and provides insight into our national and regional issues, challenges; e.g., engaging youth, aboriginal populations, even democracy. One question I have (here in Nova Scotia, having almost completed a 3-year highly inclusive strategy process for natural resources management) is how we link/co-exist with the Mi'kmaq Terms of Reference that our provincial government has ratified and which requires formal consultation with Mi'kmaq Chiefs in areas of interest/relevance. Engagement, under this ToR, clearly isn't enough, so we need to understand its limitations, and (perhaps) how it can help nurture a relationship before and after a formal consultation.

4. How will IAP2 Canada promote and advance the practice of public participation (P2)?

• We'll need to promote the practice and gain acceptance - at least on some minimal standard


basis - with the key organisations (and individuals) throughout Canada that (who) would benefit from this practice. I'm thinking particularly of policy, where the manner in which people/organisations are asked to participate in options and recommendations can have very different effects on the outcome, AND the relationship of the participants with the policy makers. We suffer from consultation overload (speaking from my current position in NS government, but also when I worked in strategy development in federal government in Ottawa), yet we don't often get the results we need when we 'consult.' This is probably due to using the 'consult' word too liberally; it seems that we are typically committing to 'consult,' but the public may be thinking we are committing to 'involving' or 'collaborating.' Expectations are not well managed and both sides feel unappreciated.

Winnipeg Event IAP2 Engagement – Manitoba 28 April 2011 5:30 pm to 7pm Tavern United at MTS Centre (345 Graham Ave) 8 Attendees Facilitation and notes by Tiffany Skomro Questions for Discussion

1. What’s important to you about IAP2 from a regional, national, and international perspective?

2. How can IAP2 Canada best provide value for its members? 3. How will IAP2 Canada promote and advance the practice of public participation (P2)?

NOTES FROM CONVERSATION • First step is to establish local network to build community. Association would grow from ground-

up. • Addressing local needs

o Need to build a local network • Are there synergies with Saskatchewan? Alberta? (Prairie chapter?) NW Ontario? • At the end of the day it is local public engagement in Manitoba/Winnipeg • Need to gain critical mass to get chapter started • Benefits: network, sharing experiences • Could start informally to gauge interest • Run luncheons to present experiences with lower costs (e.g. local business lunches

are $25 for non-members, $20 for members). Good to build critical mass and gain local support.

o Need local training • This is a key issue for this region • There are challenges in public sector to afford training when very few courses are

offered locally • Need more flexibility in training • Need to “train the trainer” to have someone local to train • Would like to have yearly training – even if only certain courses • Would be key to build organizational capacity (locally and nationally)

• National role

o Create committee-based “communities of interest” nationally (e.g. natural resources, health care, etc.). Would allow for cross-sharing of information.


o IAP2’s national board should have regional representation to ensure inclusion o National level should not be represented by a handful of organizations – need to ensure

broader membership is represented o Annual National conference would be beneficial – allowing for flexibility in participation to

assist with travel costs o Role would be supportive

• Mentoring • Sharing information, successes, lessons learned • Share sector-based information • National co-ordination of efforts • Build credibility for IAP2 – get association name recognized • Create a shared understanding of P2 practices

o No desire for formally creating certification, as can be too rigid (e.g. ISO standards) o Membership fees should be structured similar as before: individual, organization, student

• Currently we are in embryonic state so need to consider scale to allow for growth. • Review structure as IAP2 grows • Can’t have fees too high since the “value” isn’t there yet • Start building credibility first

• International role o Keep affiliation to keep legitimacy o Allows for diversity o Enhances what would be received nationally o Communication informing what is happening elsewhere (e.g. newsletter)

• Ensure that divisions between levels in IAP2 are clear so that there is no overlap. • IAP2 training needs

o Learn other techniques – shadowing processes, case studies o How to deal with lack of trust in communication o Annual planning to ensure that at least one course is run locally each year. Courses can

rotate in region. o Hard to have all courses in one week, as it is hard to be away from the office for so long o Allow for student spots in courses (pro-rated) to build young professionals – allow for a

mentoring component • IAP2 training barriers

o Cost for courses is prohibitive o What is the threshold for holding a course? What are roadblocks to having a course locally? o Are there alternative delivery mechanisms for courses? Is there potential for lowering rates

for trainers? Opportunity to have local trainers? o Can’t assume there is no demand locally for training o Is there currently a monopoly on who provides training?

• IAP2’s role as an advocate

o Mixed views o Best way to build credibility in profession is to demonstrate by actually doing good work o Allow to gain trust in process o Focus on building professionals o Efforts would have be national o Educate stakeholders about good practices o Advocating good practices can be done across sectors o Have annual national awards to recognize exceptional work

• Professionalization of IAP2

o Already becoming more common o Need to have training available to allow asking for a requirement in RFPs


o Could be recommended to organizations to “have working knowledge” or “demonstrated experience” with IAP2’s processes

o LEED structure as a potential example

Edmonton Event Member Engagement Edmonton Lunch N Learn April 19, 2011 6 Attendees Facilitated by Jan Bloomfield, notes by Kim Kolenc What is important for you in the new structure?

• Clarity in terms of membership and training courses (got some initial information but then communications petered off)

• New/potential members have access to by-laws, objectives, etc • Attracted if I knew that my membership gave me resources eg. Professional support in the work

I do and access to best practices • Possible use of communities of practice • Networking: to be organic and share passion with others who are like minded • Have professional designation (accreditation) • -IAP2 Canada to facilitate activities and projects that all chapters can become apart of and work

on together • use of blogs/newsletter to communicate • pr • regular email/newsletter/communication: use small paragraphs and well-written bite size

pieces • -need to be aware of “over-kill’ in communication

o People getting overwhelmed, maybe communications need to come from people you know

• Many other organizations have only one newsletter/communication that is national and can highlight activities in the different chapters

• Need to have 2nd level certification for advanced practioners • IAP2 to have materials on the definition of a decision making process and how this connects

with citizens being engaged o Sometimes people are engaged without having to make a decision (includes awareness,

education, citizen involvement) want to be able to talk and learn more about this • figure out ways to show value to directors/managers/companies in order to support

membership • Need to have convenient face to face locations and times to have good turn out • Use “hot topic” sessions so you don’t get all membership but those who are interested Eg.

Aboriginal awareness session in Edmonton 2011 • Could partner with schools/students to do some of the advertising and marketing work eg.

NAIT business/marketing programs • Use of facebook and twitter • Call out to members for topics/speakers/sessions to include in communications • Value of membership is credibility, IAP2 is an accepted and recognized practice internationally,

use of core values • Good for networking and joint venture projects • Have reduced membership for seniors or students • Becoming and marketing self as the “epi-center” for this kind of work

o Training o How do techniques link to best practices and examples of this happening o Exposing people to the range of techniques and levels o Provide clear objectives and overview of what’s out there

• Determine full membership vs. Associate membership


• Need to participate in certain # of activities in order to keep your membership active, need more encouragement for people to participate in IAP2 Canada activities

• Going to similar organizations and finding joint membership, this helps in the corporate world when your organization will only support one/two professional organization memberships

• Need to give opportunity for on-going feedback, lots of promotion, express and show value of membership

• What services should be provided for members?

• Training, coaching and mentoring • Sharing of best practices between chapters and affiliates (webinars, etc) • use of different industries/locations, sharing between each other • need to find ways to share learnings from international and national conferences for those

people who can’t attend (more interesting ways than posting presentation to the website, maybe the chapters and host a mini-something)

• use of youtube to show presentations from conferences • Want to delve deeper into techniques of P2

o -initial training is good but want to learn more o Maybe to use a technique as a way of communicating information o Double win og learning and demonstration as well

• sharing of learning o Invite IAP2 members to come to real P2 event eg. City of Edmonton open house and

then provide comments/feedback/critique o There can be a de-brief and provide the value of watching live events o Maybe this can be apart of the designation/accreditation process in order to get X you

need to participate in Y • what are the learning outside of outcomes: develop a reflective tools for facilitators • Need to have both local and broad news in communications (eg. Globe and Mail vs Edmonton

Examiner) • provide tips and tools, eg. Top 10 XXXXX in communications • Have job postings on the website for other members to view

How can IAP2 Canada best promote and advance the practice of P2?

• Develop more comprehensive membership package that individual can use and be given to companies, managers, etc

• Know your message and sell to companies • Look at the rotary club membership and see how they get such active participation • More marketing of training courses like “decision-makers” • Work with the corporate HR departments to encourage membership and support of IAP2

Canada o They are the ones involved in corporate and social issues o Create newsletter that are tailored to these departments

• IAP2 to find corporate partnerships-provide access to employee inside companies • Membership discounts from numerous membership • Perks on becoming a member or going to conference (discounts) eg. Pay $ XX for XX

memberships What is important to you about IAP2 Canada from a regional, national and international perspective?

• Use of awards eg. International Association of Business Communicators, Blue Quill Awards or Gov of Ab Premier Awards

• should have core value awards continue at the international level • exposure to what’s happening to what’s happening elsewhere (international) • Communications, use of graphics/headlines so that people can look quickly and determine is

they have interest in reading more (design is important)


• Want to learn from different affiliates (evaluations)-as a new affiliate what can we learn from other existing ones

Calgary Events IAP2 Engagement 23 March 5pm-7pm Attendance: 9 members, 1 non-member Meeting began with networking and general discussion. The following comments were captured after an introduction about the history of IAP2 Canada and reasons for the engagement process.

• I took the training about a year ago and have had a career in communications. I’m interested in community engagement and am looking for networking opportunities…there was only one real event in Calgary last year. I’m looking for opportunities to talk with real practitioners…this didn’t happen for me. I didn’t know the scope of the organization and thought everything was happening in Edmonton.

o I want luncheons, networking, international conferences, and accreditation. I also want to know about best practices, and have resources for the practice

• Compared with IABC…an international organization with a Canadian Chapter with its own awards; CPRS is similar and smaller but also good

o They have a local website; 8-10 professional development events per year in Calgary o They have a group just for consultants o They provide job postings on their website, which is great

• IABC had a “new members’ breakfast” when I joined, which was a great way to connect with other people new to the organization.

What haven’t you liked about IAP2?

• From a Calgary perspective, events are inclusive in the emails and invitations but exclusive in practice. There’s a club mentality where names are dropped and it’s uncomfortable if you don’t know people.

• Word of mouth is key for building the organization • I enjoy learning about local case studies (eg. Wild Rose Café w/Frances Bowen): new

information from like-minded people • Core Value #7 is to mentor new practitioners…we’re not doing this well • You get to know people by being involved; if you don’t make yourself a part of it, it’s tough to

feel connected How can we get more people involved?

• Have predictable events (regular time and place) eg. Coaches’ breakfasts every 2nd Thursday or something at the same place

• Non-regular events can be intimidating and hard to plan • Wild Rose has tried regular events in the past with dwindling success…maybe it’s time to start

them up again • Breakfast professional development with speakers (someone who is different from the norm to

attract attention; eg. Visiting from another country) • Develop a “who’s who” of the organization to help us get to know each other • Coach/buddy/mentor program for new and experienced members/practitioners; have a core

group that runs the program and ask for volunteers to participate o This would provide personal support for new members o There could be so many opportunities to come from these connections like getting more

people involved who haven’t been before • International has always had a members’ directory…the IAP2 Canada site will be built on a

social networking site that asks people more about who they are, what they do, etc. o There will be a members’ only space, blog, newsletter; interim for a few years to be

revisited • WR has done surveys about member interests


• LinkedIn group is helpful way to have conversations and keep contacts. It would be nice to have the engagement/member/website info on there

• Communities of practice could be helped through involvement with USA • International networking would be a great benefit of being a member; have conversations with

others o “learning partners” with other people in similar roles in other countries to connect with

Other organizations we should talk to? • IAF, C2D2, Canadian Association for Public Engagement, CPRS, IABC, ISO26000 • IAP2 is not currently the leading organization in P2 in Canada/North America…we should

connect more with C2D2 (NCD2 in US) to understand how we complement each other • Where is IAP2 situated in the spectrum of all these organizations…what makes us different?

Case studies

• What makes someone write up a case study? WR has tried very hard to get them in but only received one submission

• Have people share their case studies verbally (through symposium or conference) and then write them up and produce conference proceedings to publish

• Core Values Awards for Canada (best practices awards) • I came close to submitting a case study to WR but was worried it wasn’t good enough so didn’t.

I found the process intimidating…maybe if we did it through local events or with a mentorship connection, that would be more comfortable

• It would be good to encourage case studies of ‘what went wrong’ as well and what not to do…how can we make this comfortable?

• Planners at annual conference do awards of excellence (national organization) o “Guts and Glory” awards to celebrate both

• Regular feature in newsletter/on website of what we tried and what didn’t work (normalize the learning)

Finances

• These are all great ideas that take a lot of time and money…how can we support them, given our financial situation?

• Volunteer drive to get support for specific initiatives • Be very clear about what the benefits are of membership (different levels of membership might

help with this) • Re-instate regular lunch & learns/events to get the word out (don’t charge at first, then maybe

charge more) • Mentorship program to help build organization; two offers to help with this (should be local to

start, then maybe national/international) • Be very casual initially to manage expectations and get the relationships going

o Eg. Women’s diversity network was started with a social (have a bingo dedicated to fun & getting to know each other)…social and fun…had to RSVP with a fact about yourself

o IABC Christmas party is great because there’s no professional development, it’s just pure networking

• Have coffee clatches Lunch Discussion Thursday, April 7, 2011 ConocoPhillips Auditorium 14 Attendees – facilitated by Karla Reesor

In a modified open spaces format, attendees were invited to share ideas and provide input related to shaping IAP2 Canada. Following is a summary of the discussions.


Composition of the National Board and Regional Association

• Go with whatever regional associations make sense – be organic o E.g. Could be a municipal or regional

• Key is to create the platform to keep local groups/chapters connected o E.g. Should there be a representative from each local group on the national board? OR

should national members automatically be on local chapter boards? • What research has been done to determine why Wild Rose has been so successful?

o E.g. More regulated sector? Hard work of a few people? Demographics? Governance – look at Australia model

• Board composition a potentially divisive issue o Very sensitive given history with east/west, etc.

• Have to follow where the strengths are to support viability – people on Board don’t necessarily just represent their own interests.

• Could structure Board according to communities of practice • This decision will be a key point for Board – composition is a big part of governance

o May need more focused dialogue on this topic • Look at capping Board size – what is optimal size? • Consider co-directors (share the load)

o IABC Calgary Board recently went from co-directors to directors • ~ 12 is a good size – partly depends on decision making model – consensus more difficult with

more people • Look at succession options within Board

o E.g. Fill roles from each region • Consider having a “Senate” to interview Board members – Senate could have a representative

from each region – helps to align expectations Priorities for the incoming IAP2 Board

• Social performance (become a leader on this) • Communities of practice

o Energy sector o Education o Municipal (urban/rural) o Government o Aboriginal engagement

Ties into all of them Huge interest

o Or have communities by discipline E.g. HR, Communications, ADR, stakeholder engagement

• Building memberships – Wild Rose has so many members and other regions have so few • Consolidating a platform from which we operate – how will we stay connected? • “Give and take” based on experience

o Training/teaching • Understand and deal with the vastness of the country

o Need to keep everyone connected; how will we do this for a national organization in 5 time zones?

• Be transparent in operations o Maintain very high standards

• Professional development opportunities o Informal and formal o Seminars, topic specific (“deep learning”)

In line with communities of practice (E.g. Aboriginal law for those in Aboriginal consultation)

• Accreditation


o Training – more than just “basics” of certificate program “New knowledge” courses – innovative, out-of-the-box, just around the corner

stuff • Accessibility - how else can we deliver information/opportunities

o Webinars o Face-to-face

• Balance timing of events to avoid burnout • Connection to USA organisation

o Especially for oil and gas sector • Take a strong stand on staying focused on their charter/strategic plan

o Avoid individual, political agendas Most important IAP2 Member Services

• Opportunity for community of practice specific learning • Increased connections to other groups/sectors that are involved in P2

o Awareness, advocacy for the practice • Strategic approach to organisation’s communication; to membership and others

o What are the messages • Mentorship program to link newer and more experienced members*

o Need to formalize; have structure/process for both mentors and mentees • Accessibility (geographic)

o Don’t always have the AGM in Toronto o Use technology to stay connected (blogs, webinars)

• Workshops, conferences with a mix of “hands-on/two-way” and “presentation/one-way” • Good communication on a regular basis

o National newsletter with regional updates o Big picture and regionally specific o Include “News” section regarding new regulations, policies, etc.

• Networking across country as well as regionally* • More accessible membership directory (profiles)*

o Contact, employer o Use social media to facilitate connections

• Sharing best practices • AGM: have online availability live for sessions (pay to view?)

o Host local sessions at same time for everyone in Calgary to connect • Job board* • Opportunities to engage the more senior people in the field; recognize with awards or other

honours o Help keep them involved so newer practitioners can access them o People like to be rewarded/recognized

*These ideas would be particularly attractive to new members getting started in P2 careers What will make IAP2 Canadian?

• Accreditation o Fit in with international perspective o Add Canadian flavour

• Need to be able to meet the diverse needs of a vast country o E.g. Aboriginal Consultation has different issues in AB/BC and north/south

• Take full advantage of technology to meet regional needs


BC Chapter Feedback BC Chapter President Donald Golob met with a total of 18 IAP2 members from Metro Vancouver, BC Hydro, and Translink in late April and early May to discuss IAP2 Canada. The following is a summary of the discussions: Maintaining chapters at the provincial level is important – provides on-the-ground local support, networking, and educational opportunities for local members; provides a provincially based organization to talk with provincial governments about IAP2, its values, etc. and ability to work with the governments on P2. Enabling communities of practice across the country without necessarily mandating their existence as part of IAP2 Canada’s structure is important. Having IAP2 Canada national conferences is important. Ensuring there is value for experienced, seasoned P2 practitioners. Ensuring there is a wide variety of training and educational opportunities available from introductory to advanced, and across communities of practice – both at the local and national level. Looking to accreditation as a way of increasing the profile of and professionalism of IAP2 and its practitioners, without making it an immediate focus. Focusing IAP2 Canada’s efforts on raising its profile with the Government of Canada, and IAP2 and Public Participation in general in Canada. Combining efforts with other related organizations such as C2D2, Canadian Institute of Planners, International Association of Facilitators, and others to provide joint training and educational opportunities and conferences. Professional Development - that is useful, helpful, and affordable Case Studies – what was done, how did it work, lessons – with particular focus on areas of practice – in this case linear developments Linking with other communities of practice locally, nationally, in North America, and internationally. BC Group/Local Networking - local members being able to get together and network and share expertise and experience Access to Local Resources – expertise, others dealing with similar issues although they may be in different areas of practice.

Webinar Feedback

The member engagement committee had planned to host 5 daytime and evening webinars to discuss the future of IAP2 Canada (one of which was to be held in French). All but one session were cancelled due to lack of participants. From the webinar that went ahead on May 5th with 4 participants, the following notes were captured: Member Webinar Thursday May 5, 2011


Led by Anne Harding, Notes by Blair McNaughton How should IAP2 Canada advocate for P2 in our country?

• P2 – ensure the public (as defined in context) is heard • IAP2 needs to engage individual practitioners, expand to sister organizations —planners etc --

and bring IAP2 values into the organizations. Can happen at national and provincial level. • Create awareness of IAP2 and its training with other professional organizations. • Advocacy: work to make sure that the requirements (acts) line up with IAP2 values and ethics

(share). – all levels of government. These are the boxes that Industry needs to tick. • Bring it into the post-secondary education system. Align with the ethics of engineering etc.

Come into the work-force with awareness. • Need a chapter in SW Ontario. • Marketing and others go to communities but lack the principles and values and techniques to

implement effectively. • Job Fairs and communications programs in Post-secondary • Public administration programs • Engineers will run the country - -so need to convince them

How can IAP2 Canada provide added value to P2 in our country?

• There is a legal duty to consult (aboriginal) and we do not train people to do this. • Lots of trainers with related products. IAP2 could be a central point. • Affiliate should involve Aboriginal and bring international approach to local context. (Ripple

effect - Calgary, Bob Joseph – BC, National Aboriginal Land Managers Assoc - NALMA.org) • IAP2 Value: training – creates a standard, • Need training in: Aboriginal relations, EOP2, Facilitation, refresher, case studies, tools –

implementation and effectiveness, social media, all short and current - -refresher. • Designation would be useful – ongoing professional development. • Need that local initiative. • Demographic differences – youth and sr’s?

How should IAP2 Canada collaborate with related organizations?

• Canadian Institute of Planners (national with prov affiliates) o Provide courses, within the org, o Educational aspect – sharing of info and standards, o Para-memberships – shared cost – mixed input.

• Canadian Institute for Mining, metallurgy, and petroleum (national with provincial chapters. Internationally recognized), (P2 is a value)

• CAPP • Assembly of first nations • Architects, Archaeologists, Engineers • Federation of Canadian Municipalities • Prospectors developers association of Canada (P2 is a value) • Identify orgs that have P2 as a value and build from there – more open to input.

Let’s Talk IAP2 Verbatim Comments

How will IAP2 Canada provide value for its members? I've heard a lot of people say that the most value they get from IAP2 is the network of P2 practitioners from diverse sectors. Do you agree that networking is THE MOST IMPORTANT thing that IAP2 has to offer its members?

adellepalmer


Comment 1.1.1

28 Feb 2011, 12:42 PM

I agree that networking is important, but I think that best practices communication is also one of the key reasons to network. Networking is a way of sharing information.

CreationA Comment 1.1.1.1

Anne Harding - Chair of Engagement Process Committee 28 Feb 2011, 3:54 PM

What has 'best practices communication' looked like for IAP2 in the past? Are there approaches that other organizations/groups use to communicate best practices that IAP2 should try?

Sullivan Comment 1.4

6 Mar 2011, 5:18 AM

Best practices development and communication is fundamental to the success of IAP2. This provides the practical link between theory and practice. IAP2 Canada, as the national organization should focus on: 1) Research; 2) Linking to IAP2 International; 3) Best Practices communication; and 4) National networking. Chapters should focus on implementing the research, best practices, etc. through training and networking opportunities.

redheadsteph Comment 1.5

6 Mar 2011, 6:52 AM

For me the biggest values of being a member of IAP2 are the link to international practice, innovations and learnings and the connection to a community of practice. I'd like news, tidbits, research and information about what is happening internationally and then nationally.

I'd like to know what International or the other Affiliates are doing too. Australasia has a conference in October 2011 - do members in Canada know that? Some of us would go. International put out a call for new trainers of the certificate program in February - did members in Canada get the opportunity to apply? I attended the IAP2 Innovation Summit as 1 of 2 Canadians in February - what a fabulous opportunity for IAP2 Canada members to share thoughts, discuss and contribute. The UK is doing some really innovative work online - it would be wonderful to learn more about that. IAP2 USA had their first face-to-face board meeting in February - what did they talk about? How is economy and the political turmoil in the US affecting engagement? You get the idea.....I'd like to know these things from IAP2 Canada. I know about them because I've gone to find them - but these are important parts of being a member of an international organization, where service is delivered nationally.

I'd like opportunities to connect with a community of practice, including conversations in specific topic areas or to hear about really great and innovative projects - with all the things that went well, and all the things that were learned along the way. I'd be willing to show mine if others would show theirs :) The organization often focuses its energy on training - like the IAP2 Certificate program. As a trainer of that program, it is a solid, foundational, best practices approach to public engagement, and it works well for beginner and even intermediate practitioners. It does not serve the needs of advanced practitioners. I led the development of IAP2's new course - Emotion, Outrage and Public Participation, and that supports learning in specific aspects of the field. Where is the advanced research and training? Where are the conversations or opportunities to talk about really cutting edge design, innovation, process? Some of us who have a lot of experience need the opportunity to continue to grow and learn as well. I'd like to see IAP2 Canada meet the needs of ALL members, not just beginners.

GGW


Comment 1.5.1

11 Mar 2011, 4:45 AM

Again, I totally agree with you Redheadsteph. My first exposure to IAP2 was through the training. While the was an excellent grounding in the practice and organization, the greatest impression that was left with me from that experience was the diversity of culture and international perspective that I got by training with others from Africa, Australia, US, Europe and elewhere in Canada. Many of these people I still correspond with, and I have gained enormous benefit from learning about P2 practice and research in other countries.

So, strengthening the links and communication between affiliates and the international organization are critical. Yes, we need a healthy, growing, well-managed Canadian affilitiate but we also need to continue supporting professional development, research and internationalisation through IAP2 International

mplante Comment 1.6

7 Mar 2011, 8:21 AM

We should encourage more communities of practice to become more engaged. Where are the public involvement officers from the federal government? Public health nurses, believe it or not, would also lend some expertise and best practices when it comes to community engagment. I think IAP2, in Canada anyway, is too narrowly focused. This is our opportunity to tell the world who we are, what we do, and what we offer. If it's just networking opportunities, then it isn't enough. Training is fine too, but can be expensive to some individuals who want to practice P2 but may not have the financial resources of a workplace supporting them.

Let's look at other member-driven organizations and see what it is they do to recruit and retain their membership base.

GGW Comment 1.6.1

11 Mar 2011, 4:49 AM

Yes! Training should not be the only pathway to IAP2 membership. Creating and growing communities of practice is crucial. I am involved with a community of practice that is emerging around P2 evaluation in health care. There are people from all across Canada who are involved in this, some of them are IAP2 members but most are not, so what do we need to do to demonstrate the value of IAP2 and what supports do we need to be providing?

Blue eyes Comment 1.6.3

26 Mar 2011, 10:10 AM

I agree that membership is "light" in members from the full spectrum of public consultation. We should be certain that we are meeting the needs of all members and prospective members by providing tangible value to everyone not just a select few. The American Marketing Association has a good model for its members. It provides education programs that focus on all aspects of marketing both online, in conferences or seminars and both free and paid for. The presentations are from highly specialized individuals that add value to being a member. Further there are local networking opportunities, training opportunities and great resources provided right on their website. I believe if we look at a simpler version of this model we could draw in everyone who should be enjoying the value of an organization like IAP2 Canada and dramatically grow our membership.

Moira Comment 1.6.4


28 Mar 2011, 5:38 AM

The key messages from membership associations seem to be:-

- events that are professional development opportunities - locally organised workshops on key topics; mini-conferences, paper bag lunches, breakfasts etc

- networking - formal and informal; face to face and on line - the evidence is this only works if it is purposeful

- professional credibility - linking to accreditation and recognition as a professional

- regular updates on research, latest thinking and links to helpful resources for day to day practice

The 2009 IAP2 Membership Survey conducted internationally reflected this as well. In difficult financial climates bite size affordable support is what members seem to be seeking.

jayi Comment 1.6.5

19 Apr 2011, 8:59 AM

I'm one of the PI officers from the federal government. I think the great thing about P2 is that at it's core, the principles and learnings are transferrable. Granted, there is a short hand culturally understanding when similar professions come together, but if there could be a forum where practitioners can post their experience (with an outline to follow), this could be a "free" and informal way of being trained.

Miriam Mahnic Comment 1.7

9 Mar 2011, 2:21 PM

I find some of your resources are invaluable tools in creating awareness and understanding of public participation principles and practices. Your spectrum, toolkit, and core values, and code of ethics handouts are fantastic!

IanMccDP Comment 1.13

1 Apr 2011, 7:12 AM

The challenge with the field in general is that there are so many people from different backgrounds and experiences saying they run consultation or they are public engagement experts. And its great to draw on the diversity of fields; communications people, ADR, so forth however there is TOO MUCH poor consultations. All these poor consultations make it more difficult for true P2 pro's to do the work with clients, have engaged and interested community/public participants. In short we need the field to increase its professionalism. When the breadth of the field increases in quality, all our boats will rise.

The list above provides a number of common tools for P3's to gain access to new tools, ideas and support individuals in their professional development.

But in the end, the recognition of professional college or accreditation with second tier training courses and a body able to advocate for the constant improvement of government regulatory directions and support improvements across the field needs to be apart of the mandate of the new board.

traceyehl Comment 1.14

13 Apr 2011, 7:17 PM

The member services working group is pulling together a framework for online resources. We are


working with the idea of a members only section of the website where case studies/resources could be posted and member curated. The public facing portion of the site could also house Canadian examples of P2 excellence, possibly identified through a Canadian recognition program. If anyone has specific examples of where this is done well, please share! Also any ideas on this are welcome!

jayi Comment 1.14.1

19 Apr 2011, 8:54 AM

I agree that a Canadian recognition program would be a great way to celebrate good P2 and to start determining standards as they apply to real life experiences.


Anne Harding - Chair of Engagement Process Committee 27 Apr 2011, 6:40 AM

Would a 'Canadian Core Values Award' similar to the International Awards meet this need? Or do you have something different in mind?

Brad.Cardinal Comment 1.18

5 May 2011, 8:56 AM

When I first took IAP2 training in Calgary, Alberta it became obvious to me that the trainers were unfamiliar with engagement of Aboriginal populations. Every time I would ask a question or make a comment about enagement with Aboriginal populations the conversation was immediately redirected or dismissed. It became painfully obvious that individuals were uncomfortable in speaking about Aboriginal Engagement (my intent to "engage", create a teachable moment for trainers/participants and ultimately assist in new learning for participants!).

I firmly believe if IAP2 Canada is to be an organization that has willingness to engage will ALL diverse, hard to reach populations we will be willing to make Aboriginal Engagement/Best Practice with Aboriginal Populations/Cross Cultural Training a core component of any training we conduct. Perhaps we should consider an Aboriginal Committee to discuss/explore what this might look like?

Brad Cardinal

aharding Comment 1.18.1

8 May 2011, 1:36 PM

Thanks, Brad, great comments! We've heard the desire for IAP2 Canada to develop and provide expertise in Aboriginal Engagement throughout this process.

What other Canadian based groups/people do you think we should talk to to find out more about integrating/developing Aboriginal engagement training?

BC boy Comment 1.19

5 May 2011, 9:55 AM

Being based in BC I have been able to attend the BC symposiums, social events, and conferences (both Wild Rose signature events and the big IAP2 International conferences). I would benefit from having more of these events Nationally/Regionally so that I can network and learn from a more diverse group of practitioners and industry members. I have found that consultation is approached slightly differently from Province to Province (and Industry to Industry) so having these types of events would keep me


informed with industry changes, trends, and would provide me with access to a broader range of industry contacts. I would also benefit from continuing to attend local social events to keep up local news, trends, contacts (and now friends) where I live. Finally I would benefit more from a Canadian conference rather than an International conference.

bjv

Comment 1.21

12 May 2011, 8:47 AM

The networking opportunities that IAP2 has provided for me have been fantastic. It has created a great community for me to share thoughts and best practices with. I have also really appreciated learning from folks that do public engagement work but that do not work in the same business sector I do. Thsi has allowed me to look at what I do with a slightly different lense.

Governance Structure – How do you see IAP2 Canada operating, making decisions and delivering services? Because IAP2 Canada is a national organization, do you think we need to make sure that board members represent the whole nation (ie. mandate geographic representation)? It seems important for us to make sure we have a board of competent, passionate people, but what if they all come from the same province or region? Is that okay?

Sullivan

Comment 1.2

6 Mar 2011, 6:00 AM

Broad geographical representation is critical. Given Canada's regional differences, participation from all is necessary to ensure that IAP2 Canada's mandate is implemented in all areas. While achieving meaningul participation from all elected to the Board is not guaranteed, given the nature of volunteer organizations, providing a framework for success is necessary.

A Board of 17 is far too lare to be effective. While this number is required to provide sufficient diversification within the organization, the size will make achieving consensus on critical issues virtually impossible, and at least inefficient. I would suggest that the Board be limited to:

1) President

2) Vice-President

3) Secretary/Treasurer

4) Membership

5) Regional representatives (1 per chapter)

IAP2 Canada's rep to IAP International should be the Vice-President position in IAP2 Canada. This will provide on-going connectivity between the two organizations and provide the VP with a solid working knowledge of IAP2 initiatives which will assist IAP2 Canada with needed guidance.

Interest representation would be best attained through the creation of Committees, which would be chaired by an IAP2 Canada appointee. There is no need to provide opportunity for Sector involvement. This should be addressed sufficiently through the variety of candidates wishing to participate. SHould IAP2 wish, Committees could be struck for public, private and NGO initiatives.


Elections and Board members:

1) Create a standing Nominations Committee (chaired by Vice-President or Membership VP), which would be tasked with putting forward a slate of officers representing IAP2 Canada's membership. Recognize, of course that finding interested people to volunteer for positions is more important than finding representative people.

2) IAP2 VP should be the IAP2 International representative.

3) Officers should be elected by the membership. This ensures that an interested individual takes on a specific position.

4) Board Terms should be a minimum of 2 years, renewable once. Ideally, terms would be 3 years, to give opportunity for learning and then implementation.


6 Mar 2011, 7:11 AM

Here are some things I would like to see:

A Board made up one rep from each province or territory plus 2 additional spots to be filled at the Board's discretion for specific strategic initiatives (i.e. aboriginal engagement, local government)

All Board members should be elected by the membership but all officers should be elected by a vote of the Board.

The Board needs a dedicated nominations committee chair, who promotes, mentors and supports regional and national leadership opportunities and knowledge.

The VP should also be the international representative, or the international representative has to be directly linked to the board. The international rep will have a large job and meetings outside of IAP2 Canada so it may be too much to ask for that member to play a core role in the national organization, but they need to be really linked to the national activities and priorities

I suggest terms be for 3 years with a maximum of 2 consecutive terms

I suggest a Code of Conduct for Board members that makes clear responsibilities, conflict of interest and roles. When I was Pres of International we put one in place, Moira could provide it to you.

I'd like to see a conflict of interest policy and also one that focuses on ethics of Board members, provincial / territorial reps etc. It would be great for all members who serve the organization to confirm and uphold the roles, responsibilities, ethics and values of the organization, and to know these before they sign on.

The Board needs to decide on a decision-making process - consensus, majority vote, a combination, but it needs to be explicit.

I suggest that IAP2 trainers NOT serve as elected board members due to the conflict of interest. Since trainers are often the front line and the ambassadors for the organization, I suggest that trainers have some other form of input / advice to the Board that is ex officio in nature.

All Board meetings should be public, with agendas and minutes posted and the opportunity for members to participate, should they choose.

GGW


Comment 1.3.1

11 Mar 2011, 5:21 AM

As a current international rep, I can attest to the huge demands (time, work load, financial) that are placed on individuals holding this role. Essentially, being on the affiliate board and the international board doubles all these demands so we need to be very careful about what we are asking of people and how they are supported in this work.

CreationA Comment 1.3.2

Anne Harding - Chair of Engagement Process Committee 21 Mar 2011, 7:20 PM

Is a board of 15 people (one rep from each province/territory) and 2 members-at-large the right number for the national organization? Sullivan suggests that 17 is far too large to be effective and that regional reps should come from existing chapters.

Is it feasible for us to get a board rep from each province/territory? What would we do if we can't find anyone...hold that spot vacant, open it up to someone from a jurisdiction already represented, or something else?

Sullivan Comment 1.3.2.1

14 Apr 2011, 8:30 AM

In my experience on the Board of OPPI (Ontario Planners), a board of even 13 is challenging to get work completed. I agree that provincial/territorial representation is needed, and perhaps we could start with Alberta and Ontario (so western and central). This would represent the majority of members. New representatives could be added as the membership grows and boundaries changed to maintain a workable Board size. If we can't find someone for a position, I suggest leaving it vacant, but not filling it from other jurisdictions as this would not serve IAP2 Canada's interests.

I absolutely agree with Redheadstep that the VP should also be the international rep, and that terms should be for 3 years, with 2 terms maximum. Having the VP as international rep allows foc fresh connections to IAP2, as well as an excellent training ground for incoming leadership. I also suggest that elections be split, with area reps and the VP being held one year, followed by the remaining reps. This provides for better governance continuity and constant intro of new blood.

I also agree with others that Trainers should not be able to be Directors, given the conflict of interest issue. While with OPPI Council, I was not allowed to be a membership examiner, as Council was the appeal body where an exam result was in dispute. I realize that IAP2 Canada does not represent the same situation, but the opportunity for influence remains and should be addressed up front.

It is refreshing to read the need for public meetings, including agendas and minutes. With certain exceptions, the membership needs to know what their Board is doing.

A Code of Conduct is essential, as are position descriptions.

mplante Comment 1.4

7 Mar 2011, 8:29 AM

Really good ideas here!

I'll add that we consider geographic area (but not as broad as the current chapter make-up, rather, we look at provincial and even large municipal areas), that trainers would be in conflict of interest (and that this policy be made very clear to all interested parties).


There should be two term structures - a two-year and a three-year term, to ensure continuity on the board while in election/transition years, max of two terms.



What would determine which term structure a person is on?

CreationA Comment 1.9


It looks like we have some strong support to change the bylaws so that there is

a) a board of no more than 15 members (maybe even 13?),

b) that seeks to be representative of Canada's different regions,

c) with terms of at least two years, possibly three years (with a maximum of 2 consecutive terms),

d) and terms that are split/offset so that a whole new board is not being elected at once (this would not be a change to the bylaws, but I wanted to add it for clarity).

Did I get this right?



Some additional suggestions we've had from here and other sessions that I'd like your feedback on are:

a) to include a formal link to chapters on the board (ie. someone who holds a seat on both the Chapter board and the IAP2 Canada board)

b) to exclude trainers from being eligible to sit on the board as directors due to a conflict of interest while including a formal ex-officio role that links into the training community

c) to have the Vice-President role include the International Representative position; and

d) to make IAP2 Canada board meetings public for all members, with agendas and minutes available online

Do you agree with these proposed changes? Why or why not?

What categories of membership should IAP2 Canada have? CreationA

Comment 1.1

Anne Harding - Chair of Engagement Process Committee 28 Feb 2011, 11:20 AM

Should IAP2 Canada have 'Corporate Members' and if so, should a corporation have the right to vote at IAP2 meetings? What if that corporation has 15 individual IAP2 members. Should each member get a vote and then the corporation gives its 'vote' to a single person? I'm not a big fan of corporations


having voting rights myself, but am open to the conversation.

Sullivan Comment 1.1.1

6 Mar 2011, 6:09 AM

Corporate members would be 'Full' and 'Candidate', 'Provisional', or 'Student' members, denoting varying levels of experience. I have some difficulty with the distinction between Life Members and Honouray Members. Life Members, in my interpretation would be those individuals recognized for contributing substantially to the organization over time. Honourary Members would be non-corporate members who support the principles of the organization, without necessarily being paid-members of IAP2 Canada.

CIP, by example, is using the term 'Canadidate' for students wishing to attain membership. While I realize that IAP2 is not necessarily striving for certification as it is an Assocation rather than an Institute, so has a different mandate, the Board could decide which terms/titles it wishes to use.

I agree that corporations should not have voting rights on their own, but rather represented by the collective views of its membership. Individual votes are more more representative of the organizations' rather than skewing that with the corporate position.

redheadsteph

Comment 1.3

6 Mar 2011, 7:19 AM

I think there should be corporate memberships, but that would be translated in application into (for example) 10 individual memberships, and it those individuals that vote on behalf of the corporation.

I agree with honourary members - but some criteria related to how these are identified would be good.

Student memberships are important to growing the field and supporting learning.

Life members were instituted where members knew they were going to members for a very long time, and wanted to not have to pay annually. I'm a life member but can tell you the money I paid a number of years ago is insufficient to last a lifetime. I suggest these lifetime memberships be phased out over time. Perhaps long term members could also have an option to pay for 3 years of membership at a time at a slight discount?

I'd be prepared to pay additional fees to be a member of specific communities of practice. So you could "top up" your fee to participate in these specific groups.

I'd suggest the organization offer a discounted rate of membership for anyone registering for IAP2 training, for a one year period.

mplante Comment 1.4


7 Mar 2011, 8:38 AM

Professional membership

Corporate - package would offer discounts to 5 or more employees, but membership belongs to the employee, not the employer. You can certainly break this down into various categories to recognize size of organization and the needs of the organizition

Student - discounted for the term that they are in a recognized university or college, plus the rate would be good for one year post grad.

Honorary


9 Mar 2011, 2:25 PM

Would you consider a para-professional membership for those in related fields? It could be non-voting (perhaps to ensure the integrity of the organization's mandate), but would allow those who wish to be affiliated with the organization an opportunity to participate in discussions, to utilize resources, etc.

GGW Comment 1.6

11 Mar 2011, 4:57 AM

Yes to corporate memberships, student memberships, para-professional or associate memebrships. Honorary memberships should only be used as a way to celebrate a significant or lifetime contribution to P2... if they are thrown around too much they cease to have much value.

What about offering a special membership category and rate in partnership with other professional organizations (architecture, engineering, public relations, planning, etc.)? This would encourage membership growth and align nicely with a community of practice focus as well.

CreationA

Comment 1.6.1

Anne Harding - Chair of Engagement Process Committee 22 Mar 2011, 6:46 AM

Neat idea about partnering with other professional organizations! I'll make sure this gets added into the conversations we're having with other organizations as part of the engagement process to test the waters on what this might look like.

Are you familiar with any existing groups of organizations that offer these kind of consolidated/bundle memberships?


Should IAP2 Canada continue to have regional Chapters (BC, Wild Rose, and St. Lawrence)? Blue eyes

Comment 1.1

28 Feb 2011, 2:31 PM

Local connection to other professionals that you can meet with face-to-face is always valuable in any organization. We have extensive access to electronic networking but it is not the same as shaking someones hand and having a person to person conversation. All forms of communication add value but meeting in person will give members a sense of belonging and I believe help sustain the foundation of IAP2 in Canada in the long run as well as improve recruitment and participation.



Are regionally based chapters (with associated training opportunities and networking events) the best way to organize these face-to-face opportunities? How do you see the role of regional chapters as being different from IAP2 Canada, the national organization?

ruehenry Comment 1.1.2

9 Mar 2011, 2:16 PM

I am in Toronto and based on my work which varies I have less to no support from my workplace for going to face to face events. I would definitely feel more engaged and benefit from some practice based on-line groups, that could share ideas or resources. Of particular interest to me is natural heritage/environment consultation practitioners. I agree that face to face is better but not all of us have this access.

rickd Comment 1.3

5 Mar 2011, 8:49 PM

Over the past 4 years surveys were conducted in each of the existing chapters. In all three cases the top priority of members was professional development opportunities and f2f networking / social opportunities.

Meeting online is great, we need a blend and the opportunity to choose. Buildings relationships is the foundation for an association that can do great things. Getting people together builds an energy to develop common goals and do good work together.

Sullivan Comment 1.4

6 Mar 2011, 5:05 AM

I agree with the other 2 comments. Other professional organizations where I belong have the national organization to provide a voice, vision and administrative direction, while the local chapter focuses on events, both social and professional, including conferences. Both groups are necessary to provide the membership value for their involvement, and for the organization to implement and maintain its vision.



6 Mar 2011, 6:19 AM

I agree with everything said so far. However, I don't think the possibility of coming together face-to-face requires the same structure of chapters we have now. From my knowledge, BC Chapter communicates regularly with members and hosts occassional training and events. Same with Wild Rose, plus also hosts conferences every 2 years. East of Alberta, everything is under the St. Lawrence Chapter. In addition to the enormous geography, this presents logistical issues for face-to-face gatherings. In addition, there has been very little activity and very little communication over the last few years, and no chapter sponsored training of any sort. I think the structure we have is not working for members in Canada overall, and this presents an opportunity for meaningful change.

I would really like to see a structure broken by province and territory with reps in the major cities in each province or territory. I think that would support local activity, communication and energy. I'd also like to representatives focused on communities of interest - local government, aboriginal engagement, health, energy etc so that anyone can participate or be part of planning specific activities or learning opportunities related to these topics.

For me that means a structure that includes the 2 existing chapters that are working, and a new provincial structure with representation in each province PLUS representatives or groups focused on specific communities of practice.

tskomro Comment 1.5.1

9 Mar 2011, 12:43 PM

I have to agree Steph.

The structure in Alberta and BC seem to be working, and could be a template for the rest of Canada. But when you live in a more remote place (and Winnipeg isn't even that remote), it makes it more of a challenge to connect with members.

The challenge in coming up with regions is to determine the breakdowns:

BC

Alberta

Prairies - pair with Alberta? NW Ontario?

Ontario

Quebec

Atlantic - could this be broken down further?

GGW Comment 1.5.2

11 Mar 2011, 4:31 AM

I totally agree with Redheadsteph. Being on the east coast, I feel wholly disconnected from activities happening in central Canada. This is by no means a criticism of the great people who have been working so hard to make St Lawrence Chapter a vigorous and active group but I don't get much value from it when the networking and PD sessions are a day's drive or a two-hour plane ride away. It is certainly hard to feel any sense of real connection under these circumstances.

I believe that a provincial/territorial structure needs to be explored further, and as someone working in P2 in the health sector, I am already seeing opportunities to create a national community of interest for this sector which says to me that we need to explore this as well.


rickd Comment 1.6

6 Mar 2011, 8:22 AM

I think the principle of local capacity is most important and should be the key that defines what a chapter is. In St.Lawrence (which is really the national capital region - at least that what the charter says) we have been able to host or co-host about 6 "lunch and learn" type events per year, plus a social get together in early December and again in late June. I think it's important to have an annual cycle / program. Having said that, although we send the invitations to all chapter members, the people in Halifax aren't likely to attend a lunchtime learning event in Ottawa. The chapters have to be relevant to the members.

There needs to be a balance of programming also. f2f events for the local members and webinars for those not located where the events take place. There also needs to be a routine of small and large events. Wild Rose has a good formula for this with their Signature Events every two years.

I think our structure needs to be flexible enough to accommodate the needs and capacity of the chapter itself. For example, we have just seen success in the GTA, where St. Lawrence Chapter, D&A and AECOM combined to co-host the first chapter meeting (50+ people turned out) there, in November, under the leadership of Bob Waldon and Loren Polonsky. Given the population of the Toronto area, there is critical mass for a solid chapter. This isn't the case everywhere in the country. We are working right now to establish a "local network" in Victoria and up the island. This network would be supported by the BC Chapter, which is mostly centered in the Lower Mainland.

Ultimately chapters should be built around the membership that is present locally or regionally and the structure needs to accommodate their limitations and be able to capitalize on any opportunities present. My vote is to establish a "chapter" model that can be applied to any geographic construct and that these chapters have the capacity to nurture the development of other chapters through the establishment of "local networks" that will eventually grow into other chapters.

Singybird Comment 1.7

6 Mar 2011, 8:29 AM

Over the last several months, I have worked on two seperate projects teams that never ever met in person. We did our work via teleconferences and virtually on the web. I frankly found this to be extremely taxing and boring! We need face to face contact! That is what makes us human. I think the regional chapters are a good idea. I would like to see more chapters, not fewer.

mplante Comment 1.7.1

7 Mar 2011, 8:10 AM

I have to agree here. More chapters, not fewer. Certain criteria should be met for formal recognition at the national or provincial level, however. Meeting frequency and a set number of members would be a good start. How people meet is irrelavent.

natalies Comment 1.11

10 Mar 2011, 12:16 PM

i think local chapters a great idea! it provides members with continued opportunities to meet and network with other professionals in our region.

Moira


Comment 1.11.1

28 Mar 2011, 5:32 AM

and IAP2 CA members will be able to link to all the other IAP2 members around the globe through on line platforms soon and build international networks with peers too on common areas of interest.



We've heard the comment that there should be an IAP2 chapter in every province and territory to support face to face networking and professional development AS WELL AS "communities of practice/interest" that cross provincial boundaries. Should each of these chapters be required to have a representative on the national IAP2 Canada board?

What role should IAP2 Canada have in establishing and supporting these chapters?

GGW Comment 1.13.1

14 Mar 2011, 6:12 AM

Yes, Anne, there should be chapters in each province. IAP2 Canada needs to support these by making it easy for members to connect with other members. Since joining IAP2 in 2007 I have been looking for ways to connect with members locally and regionally but there are no mechanisms. IAP2 Canada needs to support local volunteers willing to start an organization with information and some basic tools (such as an online platform).

As for representation on the Board, at the very least, each province should be represented with a single rep. to ensure a good national perspective.



What makes an IAP2 Chapter an official Chapter?

Moira has commented that Australasia has regional committees (see "lessons from outside of Canada" topic area). We currently have 3 chapters at varying degrees of formality. Should we be aiming for chapters that are highly structured and incorporated as separate entities like Wild Rose?

What would be the pros and cons of every province being expected to follow this model?

Moira Comment 1.15.1

28 Mar 2011, 5:30 AM

Here are a few more ideas. There are a number of models for organisational structure that may or maynot have governance implications. Building the grassroots through existing platforms has worked well in IAP2 as in other member based organisations. What also works well is governance that reflects decisions that are made by the level that they are being made at - the principle of subsidiarity. Chapters need not be part of the governance structure - eg in USA they are not - with the national board being elected from the entire membership. However Canada has always reflected a strong chapter culture and has in its national governance a federation/ provincial nature and IAP2 CA may want to work towards this over say the next 5 years rather than trying to do it in one big step. The essential ingredients for any national board is to support representation, getting the skill set mix and also having the connections to those you need to hear from and influence. This includes local,


provincial, national and international links.


Anne Harding - Chair of Engagement Process Committee 12 Apr 2011, 6:54 PM

Thanks, Moira, that's a great summation and excellent food for thought! Much appreciated :-)

What do you see as the key objectives and purpose for IAP2 Canada? CreationA

Comment 1.1


The LP document states objectives (a) through (h). Objective (g) is to "explore and encourage partnerships with associations having similar or related objects in order to further the preceding objectives of the Corporation (IAP2 Canada)."

Based on your experience, what other associations should IAP2 Canada be exploring partnerships with and what should those partnerships look like?

rickd Comment 1.1.1

5 Mar 2011, 8:53 PM

In my opinion C2D2, IAIA and IAF are no-brainers. Bringing people together to solve wicked social problems is the driving force behind these organizations; by putting our oars in the water together we can really make a difference.

Sullivan Comment 1.1.2

6 Mar 2011, 5:15 AM

I agree with IAIA and IAF. I would also suggest CIP and affiliates (OPPI, PIBC, API, etc.). Many planners, like me, are members of both organizations and believe that both organizations would benefit from the others involvement.

Miriam Mahnic Comment 1.1.3

9 Mar 2011, 2:17 PM

Other associations: ICA Associates, since they do facilitator training that is applicable to and supports public participation principles and practices. See the following link: http://ica-associates.ca/



6 Mar 2011, 6:35 AM

Anne - the link to the letters patent is broken FYI. I'd like to focus on the goal statement for IAP2: IAP2 Canada will be the national organization that helps to deliver the positive potential of public participation in Canada." I very much agree with this, and think it means advocacy and a proactive agenda focused on setting truly best practices and standards for the field and practice. It means engaging participants, proponents and practitioners in identifying the state of the practice and creating opportunities for growth. It means working with existing organizations to set that standard. (I'll send a list of organizations we identified a few years ago when I was on the Board if that helps.

As a counter to this, I've been sent 2 "best practices" documents in the last 2 months that are in no way best practices documents. They are produced by industry or industry associations and are focused more on getting decisions made than on a values based process that is truly meaningful and that is grounded in the Core Values and the Code of Ethics. This presents an opportunity for IAP2 Canada to put out a call to governments, members, practitioners, citizens and set the real standards for Canada - not to endorse "not best practices". Part of this is working with other organizations doing great work.



Thanks for the heads-up on the link, we'll get that fixed right away. I've heard other comments too that IAP2 Canada should be setting the standards and the organization that people go to for advice and input about P2 (for example, media covering P2 processes should be asking IAP2 to comment, not self-proclaimed experts).

If I understand correctly, IAP2 Federation has been promoting truly best practices for a number of years through the annual Core Values Awards. Should Canada have its own version of these awards? Is this a good model for soliciting, evaluating and communicating best practices? I'm not familiar with them and don't know what happens after an organization has won. Are there case studies written up or something?

CreationA

Comment 1.4.2


There was a suggestion at the first Calgary engagement event that we can learn as much from our failures as we can learn from our successes. How can we encourage a culture of learning from each others' train wrecks AND home runs?

Lessons from Places Outside of Canada CreationA

Comment 1.1



Thanks, Moira!

How have other affiliates handled the regional chapter and national organization structuring issue (ie. where more than one chapter existed before the Federation model came in)? Do the chapters still exist and if so, what is their role and how is it similar/different from the national affiliate's role?

Moira

Comment 1.1.1

5 Mar 2011, 8:19 PM

Hi Anne,

Only USA has chapters and Affiliates like Canada. Australasia has state/ territory committees and they are not part of the governance model, they do have a job though to organise local events, build membership locally and generate income for the national program. Each year the national committee make an investment in each area based on their strategic objectives and the local group is expected to deliver a dividend to the Affiliate. In Southern Africa everything is centralised at present - but there are local committees emerging to host local events only, again not governance. In France everything centres on Paris and there are no plans at this stage for regional groupings. In Uk and Ireland it is nationally organised and there are plans to have local groups in Scotland, Wales, England and Ireland (both North and South) to organise local professional development and networking events - again not for governance. I don't want to speak on behalf of USA as they like CA are working this out - you might like to chat with them directly and I am sure they would be please to chat with you. Chapters are sub-entities of an Affiliate and therefore in my view should be subject to the strategic intentions of the Affiliate and I would encourage CA to look to the chapters for local events, professional development, membership growth and networking at regional level, with governance to be national and membership fee collection and support nationally organised as well. Chapters can still exist -it is up to you - CA may like to consider development of chapter charters, group insurance and the like if they are going to be a sub-entity within the national Affiliate. CA will need to think through the relationships and draw up clarifying guidelines on roles and responsiblities. My expectation is that Chapters need to be the local expression of the national agenda of IAP2 Canada. It is very dependent on whether or not Chapters will have a governance role in IAP2 Canada and once you've determined that then the rest will flow, regards Moira

Moira

Comment 1.1.2

28 Mar 2011, 5:52 AM

Here are a few comments - without fear or favour that I hope will help with the conversation. There is no formal governing relationship between chapters or committees at the local level in any of the Affiliates within the Federation. There is no barrier however if IAP2 CA want to govern or organise in that way. USA and Australasia have an elected national body. In Australasia each state and territory has


a committee and they are tasked annually with the national goals and objectives including hosting events and bringing in revenue and members. The USA elected a national body and seek advice from their chapters but there is still some working out happenning on this. It is my view that chapters support and serve the national agenda so that there is overall national direction, but the local expression of that is preserved and encouraged by the national body. Equally the national body shapes their agenda from the local structures. In CA your chapter structure is mature in some places, emerging or non-existant in others. I would therefore be encouraging you to develop a model that enables the mature places to support the newer ones and generates new ways of growing together. I think regional might be the way to go for CA in the short term and gradully building over time to every province and territory getting representation as local groups come into being - so perhaps 3 reps from regions (east, central, west or perhaps use time zones as your regions) across the country and 1 from each of the existing chapters and then as a new chapter emerges you could reduce from the regions - it is important if people are representing in this way - there are members to represent. The local level is the power house for membership, networking and issues/ skills based professional development. National for matters of national identity, advocacy, bringing CA perspective to international domain, building brand and professional idenity in national domains (eg public policy).

How will IAP2 Canada promote and advance the practice of public participation (P2)? CreationA

Comment 1.1


How do you feel about IAP2 being both an advocacy group and a professional organization? I'm curious about what it means to be an 'advocacy group' and if that's the direction that we should be taking as a national organization. Who are we advocating to and for what?


6 Mar 2011, 8:03 AM

I think accreditation and designation is the role of IAP2 International and I believe they are working on that. I'd like to see it - at least to set a baseline of practice, values and ethics.

I'd like to see IAP2 Canada LEAD a conversation, with others, that examines and puts forward the state of the practice in the nation and then pro-actively hold conversations with specific sectors, government,s FCM, etc about how to make the standards and practices real. Let's work with other organizations focused on good process and community building - C2D2, IAF, IAIA, the Centre for Public Involvement, Civic Camp etc and make this happen. Right now we have scattered pockets of really great practice, some mediocre practice and lots of bad examples. Industry and specific sectors seem to have a desire to get it right and engage with best practices, but some are writing their own practices, and these leave lots of room for improvement.


IAP2 Canada could work with research organizations (for example the centre for public involvement) to do research on canadian practice.

What about Canadian specific Core Values awards?

Miriam Mahnic Comment 1.2.1

9 Mar 2011, 2:29 PM

Well said!

mplante Comment 1.3

7 Mar 2011, 8:03 AM

I envision IAP2 Canada as a similar professional organization like CPRS (cprs.ca) or IABC (IABC.com) for PR practitioners. Accreditation is extremely important (the "what's in it for me" hook for members), as is networking, skills upgrading, and job opportunities.

I also think the 'idea' of P2 needs to be written into Mass Comms or Public Relations curriculums. Just as media relations or labour relations all fall under the PR umbrella, I see a natural fit for P2 as a specialized discipline.


9 Mar 2011, 2:32 PM

When considering accreditation, please don't forget the FULL range of skills that practitioners have, such as facilitation, training, visual facilitation, skills with social media, etc., and ensure that skills on a practical level are matched with skills on a theoretical level.

traceyehl

Comment 1.6

13 Apr 2011, 7:13 PM

The member services working group, a committee of the interim board, is working on a template for a uniquely Canadian P2 recognition program that honours the Core Values. Our goal is to pass along a meaningful framework to the duly elected board. We are exploring categories such as: explorer (new techniques and tools), ambassador (advances the policy/practice), bridge builder (begins and/or fosters dialogue in challenging circumstances - as so many are!), P2 excellence, mosaic maker (brings together/involves hard to reach stakeholders). What do you think? On the right track or need a rethink? Love to hear/read your thoughts!

rickd


Comment 1.7

26 Apr 2011, 6:11 AM

I think that it is important to have a comprehensive and strategic approach to advancing the practice. This strategy should be supported by a program, which is directed by an IAP2 Canada director, with the title of advocacy, for example. That director would have an annual work plan and budget. Elements of the plan should include a variety of activities, such as:

~ outreach and capacity-building with:

elected officials

civil society

government officials

big business

~ oversight - commenting on the quality (vis-a-vis our values) our national and regional consultations (an annual report, as an example)

~ hosting meaningful conversations - showcasing exceptional public engagement as a truly neutral third party

~ research to build the business case to P2

~ promotion - developing and distributing literature on the benefits of P2

I think that IAP2 Canada needs to be a "doer". Sure we need to talk about the democratic imperatives and cost benefits of good P2, but I think most of all, as an organization, we need to be seen to be actively doing engagement and working directly, as partners, with government, civil society and big business to advance the appetite and ability of organizations and institutions to do good work in this area.

What will make IAP2 Canada a truly Canadian organization? Sullivan

Comment 1.1

6 Mar 2011, 6:22 AM

IAP2 should develop and espouse Canadian values. Values I see as important to Canadians include: 1) Inclusion, 2) Tolerance, 3) Consensus building, 4) Respect and 5) Progressive. The true question, which we have had much difficulty is: What does it mean to be Canadian? Sensitivity to Aboriginal issues is important, and can be covered off through Tolerance and Respect, both of which I see as important to our Aboriginal friends.


Recognizing regional differences is also important. For example, Alberta is focused on energy production, BC on natural resources, Ontario on economics, Quebec on cultural matters and Atlantic Canada on economic transitioning.


6 Mar 2011, 7:24 AM

I agree with everything here, and would add a few more thoughts about what makes engagement unique in the Canadian context: our history of peace-keeping and our role (until recently) on the international stage in supporting people in conflict; our connection with the land and the isolating nature of our extreme weather and geography; our multiculturalism; in general, our politics of inclusion (although not so much in the last few years; the role and history of our aboriginal peoples; our resources based economy; bilingualism. All these things make P2 in Canada different than P2 in the UK, France, South Africa, the USA, etc.

mplante Comment 1.3

7 Mar 2011, 8:46 AM

I don't think we need to put too much energy into defining ourselves right now. This will come with time, number and diversity of memberships, etc. Canadians as a whole don't need anything written down for us to define who we are - the fact that we are Canadians does that for us.

What's more important here is that we provide a national standard that provides value to our membership. At the same time, as a member of IAP2, regardless of affiliation, I would like to know that my skills and expertise obtained in one country could just as easily be transferred to another country. IAP2 should provide the basic foundational learning. The type of work we do, the geographic location, and the area of employment tends to set us apart from others.

GGW Comment 1.4

11 Mar 2011, 5:12 AM

I believe that this is a potential research question to be explored. And I would also agree we shouldn't obsess over it too soon; however, I firmly believe that unique Canadian values, systems of and approaches to government, politics, our cultural, regional and linguistic diversity all contribute to different or unique approaches to P2 and public discourse in general that would be fascinating to explore in greater detail.

IanMccDP Comment 1.5

1 Apr 2011, 9:04 AM


The world needs a little more Canada. I appreciate Sullivan's comments about some of the regional differences, and that would be one way to create some smaller local discussions and areas of practice. As Canadian's in three-tier federal governance structure it’s easy due to regulatory demands to stay in that framework. However as a pan Canadian organization we'll gain the most as practioners by having broad areas of practice. The oil and gas pipeline group is really quite similar to electricity transmissions type of work. Oil and gas has a difference from some resource extraction sectors however they are physically situated in communities with tailing/waste issues. If areas of practice are kept broad I believe there can be some great sharing and learning that will support cross-pollination.

On the value side, it may be an interesting exercise to take The Charter of Rights and Freedoms with IAP2 ethics and see if a next generation value piece could be created with broad members support.

As an organization more efforts will need to be made to support the French language groups. I also think efforts need to be made to have the spectrum and other materials in a multitude of Native Languages similar to NWMO conclusion of their phase 1, after all they are the only ones with the government having to consult.

Tell us about your local experience with IAP2 and what it means to you? GGW

Comment 1.1

14 Mar 2011, 6:15 AM

So far my only experience of IAP2 is an international experience through training, conferences and participation on the international Board.

CreationA

Comment 1.2


Through this engagement process, IAP2 Canada is hosting local events in areas where there are volunteers to host them and members/stakeholders to participate. So far we've got Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg, Ottawa, Toronto, and Halifax - are we missing your local area?

Where else should we be having conversations about IAP2?

Brad.Cardinal Comment 1.2.1

5 May 2011, 9:21 AM

A consideration - Most Aboriginal populations in Alberta will not be likely to participate in the engagement process.


Important to remember that Aboriginal populations in Alberta on a First Nation or Metis Settlement although most are willing; truly are unable due to socio-economic hardship. We need to go to them to make it meaningful engagement and to also remember Aboriginal cultural protocol in the process.

What has IAP2 done for you lately? CreationA

Comment 1.1


I'll get this one started.

IAP2 has given me a wonderful network of P2 practitioners to learn from and connect with. Volunteering through opportunities like the Wild Rose Signature Event and interim IAP2 Canada board have allowed me to develop my P2 skills while learning from the best in the business.

IAP2 has also given me a fantastic excuse to travel to San Diego and expand my world view of what it means to 'do' P2.

Documents

IAP2 Canada What We Heard Final 2011 Canada... · 2011. 6. 3. · IAP2CANADA% WhatWeHeard% The IAP2 Canada Engagement Process Final Report % Written%by%Anne%Harding% % On%Behalf%IAP2%Canada%Interim%Board&%Member%Engagement%Process