Minutes from January EC Meeting
Summary of the minutes from the January 2007 EC meeting held in Miami, Florida. This was a face-to-face meeting of the committee members.
January 11-12, 2007, Miami Beach, Florida
Attendees: Julie Jacko (President), Fred Sampson (VP for Finance), A.J. Brush (VP Membership and Communications), Joe Konstan (Past President), Dennis Wixon, (VP for Conference), Gerrit van der Veer (VP for Conference in transition), Scooter Morris (VP for Operations), Philippe Palanque (Adjunct Chair for Specialized Conferences), Dan Olsen (VP at Large), Jimmy Ginn, Brooke Hardy (ACM), Fran Spinola (ACM), Jimmy Ginn (Julie’s project manager)
Attendees joining by phone for sections: Mary Czerwinski (Executive VP), Paula Kotzé (VP at Large) and Elizabeth Churchill (new VP of Chapters)
Attendees joining for CMC meeting: Susan Dray, Tom Erickson, Mike Atwood, Thea Turner
Attendees joining for 1/12: John Karat (IFIP representative), Jonathan Arnowitz (Interactions co-editor)
- CMC/EC Joint Meeting
- CHI 2007 is in final logistical phase
- CHI 2008 kick-off meeting will be held in Florence at the end of January
- CMC sub-committee has been formed to address strategy for conf location/chairs
- Work has begun to place historical data in a centralized location
- The EC thanks Apala Lahiri Chavan for her wonderful work as VP for Chapters. She is in the process of transitioning that role to Elizabeth Churchill. Welcome Elizabeth as the new VP for Chapters.
- The EC thanks John Karat for his work with IFIP, and we are delighted he will continue this work.
- Preparations in progress for ACM review of SIGCHI, SIGCHI looks healthy!
- Budgeting for FY 2008 in progress, numbers look good.
- EC has allocated $45,000 for a development fund for FY 2008.
- CHI 2007 Award recipients have been selected and planning is in progress for the banquet. Thanks to Mary Czerwinski and Stuart Card for chairing the awards committees.
- We are recruiting applications for the next Interactions editor since Jonathan and Elizabeth’s term is almost over.
- Scooter is making progress on the Website RFP for reworking the website.
- We drafted and approved a SIGCHI policy for volunteer travel (http://sigchi.org/documents/TravelPolicy.html).
- We drafted and approved a SIGCHI policy for Interactions editorial responses Our next meeting will be the Friday following CHI, May 4, 2007.
Joint Meeting of SIGCHI EC and CMC
January 11, 2007, 8:30 am – 12:15 pm EST
Attendees: Julie Jacko, Fred Sampson, Joe Konstan, A.J. Brush, Dennis Wixon, Gerrit van der Veer, Scooter Morris, Philippe Palanque, Dan Olsen, Jimmy Ginn, Susan Dray, Tom Erickson, Mike Atwood, Thea Turner, Brooke Hardy (ACM), Fran Spinola (ACM), Jimmy Ginn (Julie’s project manager)
Julie and Dennis welcome everyone to the meeting. Dennis welcomes and introduces Philippe Palanque, the new specialized conference chair, and Gerrit van der Veer, who is transitioning into VP for Conferences.
ACM Update (Brooke)
Brooke continues to support CHI conferences. She is working on negotiating and signing contracts for 2008 conference, and closing and making sure everything is set for 2007. Also working to ensure that Dennis, Gerrit and conference chairs get what they need. It was a bit of a process for CHI 2007 to get budget the approved, and she would like to speed up that process.
Gerrit asked which SIGs does Brooke work with. She works with 8 other SIGs, 85 other conferences, however CHI is one of her biggest and she spends considerable time on it. Fran works with 7 other SIGs, Fran doesn’t work in conference area specifically, but some things carries over, e.g. getting things in DL.
Brooke and Fran report that CHI 2007 has generated interest at ACM, looking to do buzz, publicity etc.
Fran reports that we are a little ahead of schedule in the budget process, Darren kindly provided figures for this meeting. She informs us that there is an initiative going to standardize FMRs (financial management reports). ACM would like to improve the descriptions so that you can more accurately compare costs in the future.
CMC Report to the EC (Dennis & CMC Members)
CHI 2007 update: The conference committee moving along fine, in final logistical phase. The committee will do walkthrough in a couple of weeks to check room assignments. Submissions were strong and continued upward trends, with a couple of exceptions. They are pleased about dramatic increase in number of courses submitted and more diversity ( 75 submitted, 41 accepted). This includes retaining popular tutorials, which adapted to course framework, and now new areas. Experience reports were also up (75 submitted and 35 accepted, 57 of those in the design area). Committee delighted to see interest in design area. Notes also grew (264 Notes submitted, 40 accepted). However, new format did lead to some confusion between papers and notes. Papers were up slightly, 20 more submitted than last year. There was a downturn in workshop (27 submitted 18 accepted). Workshops were very popular in 2006, might be natural oscillation. There were concerns expressed about the cost of registration for workshops. If cost is reason we’ll see if that trend continues in 2008. Some people might be moving from workshops to other venues like courses.
Some concerns about a possible “success disaster.” We may have more attendees than we can accommodate. Some discussion about a registration cap, we are going to urge the conference committee not to put a registration cap in place, but instead investigate sub-optimal ways to handle extra people – e.g. remote video feed and consider what to do about one day registration. For now, give priority to full conference registration as opposed to one day registration, perhaps hold off one day registration to conference, except for workshops.
Fred thinks we may have a lot of walk-ins from the Silicon Valley, any discussion about member discount to other organizations, e.g. UPA and others. Dennis points out that membership discount would be a major policy change, probably too late at this point, especially given possible challenges around last minute success disaster. Fred suggests discussing for future conferences ways of perhaps offering discounts to other groups. For now he’ll mention 1 day registration. Further discussion of fees, and that if you aren’t a member then registration includes becoming a member of SIGCHI and ACM as part of the conference fee
CHI 2008: Part of transition between Gerrit and Dennis. The committee is getting established. Kick-off January 25 – 27 in Florence, finalising contracts for logistics and for sponsorship and exhibition. Conference chair, Fabio Paternò is developing ideas around the theme. Much more work on the budget to be done, getting lots of support from ACM. Working at full speed, looking forward to the kick-off meeting. Developing additional levels of sponsorship.
CHI 2009 discussion: Three venues under consideration, we would like to get back to a schedule where we are at least two years ahead. Timing on getting concrete data on those locations, concern about our European draw and being careful not to overlap locations with related conferences.
Action Item (Brooke): Check with Elizabeth Grove on timing of sending RFPs to get pricing from venues
Formation of CMC subcommittee to address strategy for conf location/chairs: The idea is to step back and establish some procedures around selecting chairs and locations. Initial sub-committee including Gerrit, Scooter and Dennis will explore this question. Input requested from EC, questions around whether chairs and location selection need to be synchronized, it might work well with generating list of chairs further into the future. Also some questions about keeping the process flexible and keeping the window of commitment appropriate.
More general discussion of locations in the future. We would like to look more globally for locations, identifying them, and making the financials work. The subcommittee would be the place where we could explore options.
Specialized Conference (Philippe Palanque)
Philippe presented slides covering ideas for a policy of agreement on “what is a specialized conference.” He identified theme, location, and applications domains as reasons a conference might be considered “specialized.” We discussed reactive versus proactive approaches to sponsoring conferences, and questions of being inclusive versus exclusive. For now we will continue on with the current policy. Philippe will prepare a detail descriptions of options and proposal about policy at next meeting. This will include an implementation plan, as well as thoughts on conference reporting and constraints tracking.
Joe: Two things going on at the SGB, across SIGs that are very related. 1) is developing a set of guidelines for in-cooperation and chapter sponsored conference to be branded appropriately. 2) Recognizing the concept of a “conference series”, SGB is working on the conference series being documented.
Joe also suggests trying to make it feel more like a support process rather than a approval process, especially for people starting a new conference. ACM is also looking at a possibly simplified TMRF (technical meeting request form).
Conference Data Archive (Dennis, Thea, Philippe, Scooter)
Current state of archival data sets a relatively low bar for improvement. There are lots of willing people that have preserved a lot of data. Unfortunately it’s a lot of data that is disparate and scattered. This effort is about bringing the data together, improving its quality, and better defining what data we collect, why we collect it and what we will do with it. Dennis points out that in the future it will be useful to pick the low hanging fruit, define a subset of data and do those first.
1) Inventory of the data we have (conceptual inventory), what and where, why do we have it. Lots of progress made during meeting on 1/10. There are probably about 50 – 60 individual items of information that are collected and stored. For example, all of the conference reports of various forms, vendor and volunteer reports, registration data, conference survey information, detailed budget data, publicity reports from vendor, data on volunteers in general, training material for people running the conference, various forms like TMRF, travel forms etc. All of the contracts. Also looked at what conferences the data is from, most from CHI, some from sponsored, some from co-sponsored.
2) Where is the data, where should it reside and how should we protect and release it? Right now it is scattered, which can mean it can get lost (dead laptops etc). Plan moving forward is centralize on the plone. Julie asks about timeframe, it hasn’t been set yet. Dennis says they are hoping for a smaller deliverable in shorter timeframe. Julie: who will it involve to get it centralized? Dennis, Thea, Philippe, Panu, Scooter will all be involved initially.
3) As we organize this data, how do we share it and with whom and for what purpose? Having information together and in a repository is a pre-requisite are for making these decisions. The current goal is to share as much information with people that makes sense for the purpose for which they need it. Note, some informal sharing practices have evolved over time. For example, at the end of the CHI conference usually display graph of where people have come from, currently no follow-up of posting to the community at large.
Julie: A great win for the CMC/EC to be able to have more data to assist in making decisions.
Julie: Question about what people, resources are needed.
Scooter: We will leverage the great work that Panu has already done, merge this with the web site. The big effort will come with the analysis. No need for a bunch of people at this point. The place where a team may be needed is to help manage the website. Philippe will be helping to manage data collection from the sponsored and in-cooperation conferences.
Dan: Summarized it as two kinds of data 1) reports 2)registration data/financial data in spreadsheets and database. Low hanging fruit is getting data where people know where to find them.
Thea: conference reports is fairly low hanging fruit, going back to conference chairs where we don’t have them.
Scooter: Yesterday a sub-sub committee discussed what will we do with the data and make it easier for the data to come in, Goals: 1) single repository, 2) role based, 3) support SIGCHI leadership, support conference leadership, 4) supports policy implementation – e.g. we have policies that are available when you are setting up your data. 5) Ability to have different level of access, 6) web based (probably plone) 7) Ability to publish appropriately and easily
Scooter – will make plone space available to conferences before they start. For example, we’ll set up a plone for CHI 2008 this weekend before they start
1) Fix and migrate the CMC plone
2) Start the progress of getting and uploading conference information
3) Leverage the SIGCHI WebRFP to include ability to easily publish things on the public web site
4) Define policies for access
5) Create a plone site for CHI 2008
Longer term: Once there is something in place more analysis can be done as needed. Joe asked for relationship between author and attendance, repetition and attendance (discussion about using ACM membership number)
Action item [Dennis, others] Migrate conference related data to plone.
Specific conference marketing (e.g. CHI 2007):
- Increased attendance, Metric: increased attendance, increase newcomers (Joe, how to know it came from marketing)
- High quality submissions, Metric: Track the number of submissions, number of citations of conference submissions, number of dl hits of conference articles
- Increased volunteerism, Metric: number of first time volunteers
Discipline Marketing: More broadly publicizing the organization, HCI, conference series, having content from the conference. Work with ACM discipline marketing group to market the conference series. Could go to national association of science writers, for a fee they would produce a plan to market the conference.
Action Item (Scooter): Investigate fee range for discipline marketing group.
- Increase awareness of HCI as a discipline and within ACM
- Increase awareness of SIGCHI,
- Larger presence with respect to US public policy
- Long term conference growth (CHI, UIST, CSCW etc)
Publicity Action Items:
Action item[ Fran/Julie]: Contact the ACM media relations group
Action item[A.J.]: Write or find someone to write SIGCHI/HCI articles for Wikipedia
Action item[CMC]: Work with Fabio to develop marketing plan
Action item[Joe]: Work to get more SIGCHI representation on ACM boards and committee
Travel policy for volunteers (Gerrit)
We all agree that SIGCHI should have a policy on volunteer travel. Joe will lead the effort for a travel policy that represents the spirit of what we try to obey. Fred points that almost all travel requires pre-approval. We may have been lax in the past. Julie asks for “block approvals” for specific meetings to be part of the travel policy. Joe will have a policy together soon for review.
Workshop with Attendees from Developing Countries (Susan)
Susan got a travel grant from NSF for people coming from developing countries to attend workshop. She’s also in discussion with conference chairs around reduced fees. They already have more applicants than they can fund from the travel grant. Current reimbursement is still set at a level where people will need to contribute.
General discussion on how do we make CHI more affordable. Julie and Susan discuss an “Adopt a Colleague” concept. Perhaps people who are sitting on unrestricted funds could sponsor folks that would like to come. It would ialso enable building connections through 1-1 mentors.
Scooter: great idea, set up a conference scholarship, people will want to donate. However, it will really take a volunteer to make it happen. Someone is needed to make sure the money goes through ACM, setup a fund in our budget and handle selection criteria.
Joe: ACM named tax exempt fund could be a good things. Perhaps one way in the short term is for universities and industry to use their visiting speaker budgets and then we can leverage those visits to also allow the person to attend CHI.
Julie: We have a short term challenge and longer term strategy
Action item[EC]: Think about short term challenge of perhaps supporting people to come (particularly from developing countries).
Action item[EC]: Longer term handle or create a process around how to support people from developing countries.
Dennis asked if there is anything else related by an ACM SIG that we could model on? Consensus is there isn’t.
Meeting adjourned for lunch
EC Meeting 1/11 Afternoon
1:30 – 5:00 pm EST
Attendees (EC) : Julie Jacko, Fred Sampson, Joe Konstan, A.J. Brush, Dennis Wixon, Gerrit van der Veer, Scooter Morris, Philippe Palanque, Dan Olsen, Jimmy Ginn, Brooke Hardy (ACM), Fran Spinola (ACM) , Jimmy Ginn (Julie’s project manager), Elizabeth Churchill by phone for her section.
Preparation for ACM Review (Julie)
Fran presented the data report. Joe suggests augmenting list of publications with dates of electronic bulletin. Questions around when new members from CHI get on the books. Scooter is worried about how the new people from the conference get added. Fred described the financials. Key points: Fund balance getting closer and closer to required balance. Conferences are making returns. All our projections are to meet or beat the required fund balances. AJ described membership stats and presented slides. Dennis discussed content for conferences slides and Dan discussed content for publications. Everyone doing a slide will get something to Julie this weekend.
Action Item [Fran/AJ]: Are people from CHI 2006, represented in June 2006 numbers
Action item [Fran/AJ]: Are the people who register at CHI being put in the right category?
Action item [Joe]: Mark up the data report to check names and positions.
Action item [Fran/Dan] Get the download figures for the digital library and give to Dan.
Action item [Dennis]: Slide to Julie
Action item [Dan]: Slide to Julie
Action item [Fred]: Slide to Julie
Action item [A.J.] Slide to Julie
Travel Policy Revisit (Joe)
Joe presented a travel policy, we approved it and Scooter placed on the web.
Chapters (Elizabeth by phone)
Transition is starting, Elizabeth and Apala had a half an hour chat. Apala is sending materials to Elizabeth about surveys. Hopefully co-host the chapters workshop at CHI. They have mostly focused so far on CHI and getting everything prepared for CHI. Elizabeth would like to bring more conversations from chapters to CHI into SIGCHI. Her request is to understanding how many chapters, who they are, what they charge. Asks the EC who does she talk with to understanding the organizational structure? We point her to Lauren at ACM. Scooter asks Elizabeth as she makes her contacts to understand what the local sigs need in terms of electronic infrastructure.
Elizabeth also working to have some deputies to represent the needs of cultures of other parts of the world,
She requests that we follow-up with her to suggest names. Joe suggests talking with Lauren, and also the folks at SIGGRAPH. Discussions about things to do to coordinate getting Elizabeth going, email aliases etc.
Some questions about the Chapters workshop at CHI. Brooke will help figure out the logistics. Elizabeth is working with Apala this week and next week to get it all wrapped up. Fred also went through the current budget allocations with Elizabeth for the chapters position.
Action Item (Elizabeth): Work with Brooke on Chapters chairs workshop
Action Item (Elizabeth) Make local chapter ribbons happen. Make sure they have these.
Action Item (Jimmy): Send schedule of conference calls to Elizabeth
Finances and budget planning (Fred)
Year to date we are looking pretty good. Projection is 3 Million in revenue, 2.8M expenses and a net 226,000 which would put us just a little short of the 1 Million fund balances, but close. The digital library number will be known next month, currently budgeted for 107,000 so we will probably have more revenue. Also, we have CHI 2006 final numbers as well, which exceed what is in the FY 2007 budget. Fred was also pleased to see that FY2008 figures, Darren’s projection was close to Fred’s projection so Fred is coming up to speed well on budget.
Darren (ACM) puts together numbers based on our existing budget putting in anything he knows from ACM. Darren leaves spaces for expenses that EC will affect.
Schedule for budget process:
• On/about 1/15 Darren will have ACM numbers into budget
• 2/1 is deadline for when EC has to let ACM know if we are going to change our dues.
o Only reason Fred knows to change the dues is if we think we want more return from Interactions, or if we might implement digitizing videos
o We do not want to change our dues
• 2/12 deadline to present to Darren what we think our numbers should be
• 3/16 approval by ACM
• End of March placed in ACM budget
Questions and discussions about the net CHI conference return, sponsorship budgets at various conferences. We then discuss various sections of the budget. Joe explains CHI plus - the line item is the cost of printing the proceedings order by people with the Members Plus Package (people who prepaid). There is an explanation of developing country conference scholarship fund, and history of the SIG CHI development fund. We propose for 2008 of creating a SIG CHI development fund under the chair
Scooter makes a proposal to allocate money from the scholarship and discretionary fund (from the VP Chapters budget) for more scholarships (matching part of NSF travel grant) for User Centered Design and International Development workshop that Susan and Julie discussed earlier in the day. Dan points out that we shouldn’t get too conservative, if we get over the fund balance then we should return what we can to the membership. Scooter also proposes adding 20,000 for FY 2008 to the CHI development fund
We will return to the budget at the end of the meeting to see if any other changes need to be added.
Membership & Communications (A.J.)
We discuss the volunteer database and wrapping it into part of the Website work. We then discuss volunteer recognition, in particular stickers for volunteers that will be handed out at CHI 2007. People give feedback on sticker designs and we settle on some modifications on one of the designs as the favorite. We also discuss process and decide that stickers will go in the envelopes of those people that volunteered for CHI 2007 in any capacity (Committee, reviewers , etc), but members of the EC/Conference committee will also have stickers to hand out to people that have volunteered at any point in the past 25 years. We will also have stickers at the SIGCHI booth. We would like to celebrate all volunteers.
Action Item (AJ): Get updates on design and pricing for stickers.
Action item (AJ): Make a sign for the SIGCHI booth at CHI, “Celebrating 25 years of SIGCHI volunteers”
Action item (AJ): Make digital version of the sticker easily available
Scooter updated us on the Digital Media Capture Committee (DMCC) as it related to capturing and providing access to taped content as a member benefit. This is an ACM wide committee, working on putting together policies and technologies so that conferences and other interested parties can easily capture digital content and provide it to members.
Action Item [EC]: Feedback to Scooter and the DMCC about what we would like to see online
Scooter proposes that for CHI 2007 we capture a subset of content (e.g. plenaries, a few panels and a few talks) and make them available as a test case. Scooter will draft up a proposal on how much this will cost.
Action Item [Scooter]: Proposal to EC about capture at CHI 2007
Motion: Dan moves to approve Scooter’s proposal pending a budget review. Approved.
Publications (Dan Olsen)
SIGGRAPH/SIGCHI best paper awards: Dan’s made contact with the SIGGRAPH person on the Best paper Awards swap, Dan proposed that SIGGRAPH could make invitations from CHI 2007 accepted papers and then we could make invites to folks from SIGGRAPH 2007 for CHI 2008. It’s moving forward, we will see.
Pubs Board status: It exists, terms are 3 years. We discuss the role of the pubs board.
Papers Support Team: After some discussion we decide that the original goals of the papers support team (make the papers process easier, carry over process from year to year) are covered between the CMC and EC. We decided to dissolve the papers support team.
TOCHI: Dan has discussed with Jack Carroll. Some plans and discussion points.
• As soon as a ToCHI paper is accepted it will be placed in the digital library, the lag between acceptance and appearance in ToCHI paper publication (about a year) is compensated by this electronic publishing.
• Should we abandon print for ToCHI? Dan and Jack both believe that we should. Mark Mandelbaum says they’ll do whatever we want. Pros: This allows for eliminating delay in publishing, allowing longer papers, color, and a video. Cons: potential of looking less real or less serious, has this affected promotion? Question of whether paper will retain volume number, page numbers. Plan is to get input from a broader community, question about whether someone could do a digital subscription to just a publication (e.g. just for ToCHI)
• Creation of New Transactions: Jack is less excited because it could dilute the CHI brand. He proposes having a look at creating subsections of a journal. For example, could have a track under ToCHI series for different communities.
Interactions: Looking for new editor of Interactions, have put out an ad but not very much response yet. Discussion of the mission of Interactions. Approved in principle a policy statement for Interactions editorials.
We adjourn for the evening.
SIGCHI EC Meeting
Attendees (EC) : Julie Jacko, Fred Sampson, Joe Konstan, A.J. Brush, Dennis Wixon, Gerrit van der Veer, Scooter Morris, Philippe Palanque, Dan Olsen, Jimmy Ginn, Brooke Hardy (ACM), Fran Spinola (ACM), John Karat (IFIP representative), Jonathan Arnowitz (Interactions co-editor), Mary Czerwinski (by phone), Paula Kotzé (by phone) , Jimmy Ginn (Julie’s project manager).
Education (Paula on phone)
Paula has been working to understand current education initiatives in SIGCHI. There are the things that she found:
• CHI education chair, She has never seen a report from the session on education. This is a community within SIGCHI.
• There used to be an education editor for the bulletin. Apparently this stopped in 2003.
• Tutorials to go: Paula asks about this. Joe updates us. A while ago SIGCHI would help get tutorials to chapters by taking tutorials that were well reviewed and working with chapters to pay the tutorial instructors ,charge money for attendances. However, about 2 years ago the EC voted to remove the program since most chapters were working directly with instructors.
Green Book: Paula is also looking into revising the green book. She has spoken to quite a few people on the green book from around the world, there is no uniform idea about what a CS, IS undergraduate level and PhD level should be. In that context it might be difficult to come up with a single proposal for various countries. What might be a better solution would be for course structure instead. It will also be difficult to have one group, both logistically hard to work face-to-face and due to the needs of the different regions. Sub-groups for the different regions (e.g. Asia, Europe, North America) might be more appropriate and it will probably take a few iterations in workshop like setting. Paula is starting to approach and talk with people that might be willing to head efforts in their region and build teams to work on that region. This is not a short process, the green book took 2 ½ years to get to publication stage. Would like to have it done by CHI 2009, might try to get people together at CHI 2007.
Scooter asked if this is being coordinated with the ACM Education board. Suggests that this board is working through many of the same issues and we should coordinate with the ACM education board, so that they do the most general definitions and we focus on the HCI part. Another strategy would be to focus on getting chapters in existing chapters.
Joe suggests it might be worth trying to have Paula join the education board of ACM. They are working broadly with education SIGs and IT SIGs to revise education. Julie asks Paula to look over information about Education board and drop her an email if she is interested.
Paula bring up that another component is HCI education for industry. Scooter mentions the ACM Professions board. Scooter thinks that the board would be interested in potentially partnering with us. This board looks broadly at how ACM can address the needs of the working professional in IS/IT.
Paula mentions that for meetings related to this she will need some financial support and will talk with Fred in that regard.
Action Item [Paula]: Look up information on ACM Education board
Action Item [Paula]: Look up information on ACM Professions board
Action Item [Paula]: Work on CHI 2007 meetings for organizing this
Action Item [Paula]: Budget follow up with Fred about potential costs relating to meetings
Interactions (Jonathan Arnowitz)
Jonathan points out there is only half a year left in Jonathan and Elizabeth’s 3 year term. Encouraging a proactive approach to find replacement for them. Dan updates on ACM’s plan to have new editors appointed by July. Some discussion with Jonathan about who might be appropriate to approach about editors. Discussion about single editors and co-editors. Jonathan advocates having co-editors for having a higher quality magazine.
Discussion about mission of Interactions, mission to serve the practioner community. Discussion of what makes appropriate content or not.
We discuss policy for editorials. Criticism of SIGCHI is fine assuming there is an opportunity for the SIGCHI EC to respond. This policy will be posted. Process is to email EC with editorial and VP’s for Pubs and Communications will make sure that editorial is addressed. EC requests notifications on deadlines for editorial responses
Action Item [Dan]: Get finalized editorial policy to Scooter for posting
Action Item [Jonathan]: Notify EC with deadlines for responses and publishing.
Jonathan requests some feedback on Interactions. Dan asks if the magazine is getting thinner? Jonathan: Yes it’s getting thinner. There is pressure due to budget to make the magazine smaller. ACM folks pushes back to keep the page content down. Led to short, punchy articles.
Action Item [Dan] Work with ACM to understand constraints.
IFIP Update (John Karat)
John is ACM representative to TC 13 (Technical communities are like SIGS in ACM), Chair for 2001 - 2004
TC13 is primarily its conference: INTERACT
• INTERACT first held in 1984, INTERCHI in 1993
• Outside Europe, Sydney, Tokyo, Rio
• APCHI, lesser extent NORDICHI
• National Representatives, many of who we know (about 30) also ACM, IEEE
• 1-2 meetings a year
• IFIP doesn’t have members itself
• INTERACT Conference: 2005 Rome, 2007 Rio, 2009, (next locations t to be selected during next TC 13 meeting in March – either Sweden or Portugal)
• TC 13 Working Groups (WC13.x): Education in HCI and HCI Curriculum (WG 13.1), Methodologies for UCD (WG 13.2), Human Computer Interaction and Disabilities (WG 13.3), User Interface Engineering (WG 13.4/ 2.7), Human Error, Safety and System Development (WG 13.5), Human-Work Interaction Design (WG 13.6). Web site http://www.ifip-hci.org/WorkingGroups.html
• Budget from SIGCHI for IFIP representatives: $2500/yr (usually less)
Discussion about more formal ways for SIGCHI to learn from TC13 about their experience, particularly in hosting conferences in diverse locations. Discussion of having some SIGCHI CMC/EC people going to INTERACT 2007 to participate in meetings and observe (Sept. 10-14, 2007) For reference, INTERACT in U.K. has a size of about 600 -700, Asia 150-300.
Julie: Could John be involved in the CMC sub-committee that is looking further out in terms of CHI locations? Yes.
Action Item [Dennis, Gerrit, Scooter] Include John in CMC Location sub-committee.
Awards & Recognition (Mary)
Report on awards progress
• 2 awards committee, one by Mary and one by Stuart Card
• Mary, Julie, Sara Bly were committee for Social Impact and Lifetime Service, choose two people for Social Impact and one for Lifetime Service.
• Awardees have been notified and plaques are designed
• Similarly for CHI Academy, Stuart has notified awardees and plaques designed
• Awards dinner:
o Brooke will work with conference and logistics, once she has a bit more information about numbers,
o Last year, they went to a special restaurant with private room
o 50 minimum, 50-75 larger space
o Banquet will be Sunday night April 29th
Action Item [AJ/Fran] Communicate with the awardees about their travel arrangements
Action Item [Brooke/Dennis] Make sure RegOnline for banquet are going to happen like last year
Action Item [Joe, done] Will send to Julie the previous invitations.
Action Item [Julie] Sends the award invitation, list, academy, previous awardees, EC and current awardees.
Action Item [AJ] Update the award policy for next year to remove pre-pay part and switch to reimbursement.
Designation for a global strategy person for awards: This is a strategy role, would have operations persons working with the role. Discussion of possible candidates. Goal of promoting people for ACM Fellows, Is there someone we should nominate for other awards from ACM?
Action Item [Julie] : Approach people to ask if they would be willing to serve in this participation
Action Item [Dan]: Work on specific people for ACM Fellows
Small discussion of process for award certificates. Scooter points out that when we grant awards when need to make sure that the appropriate publicity happens.
U.S. Public Policy (Mary)
Discussion on wording of public policy document: Dan will make suggestions about wording and send them to Jonathan. Mary is asking for markup changes between last version and this version.
Action Item (Dan): send his wording requests.
Notes from Public Policy Conference Call: Their goals: update the web page, web accessibility policy statement approved, CACM on CHI and policy, Fact Sheet on public policy (put on web – e.g. reporters can get quick answers to questions), experts list, again if press people wanted to interview people. CHI 2008 are interested in something more broad, panel or short tutorial, about public policy. For CHI 2008, have their list of awardees suggestions considered by committee.
Joe suggests it would be helpful for the EC to see a list of the public policy issues which the committee thinks are most important (e.g. research funding, privacy). EC requests before the next meeting that the public policy team provide a list of issues.
Action Item [Mary]: Get public policy team to provide list of issues before next meeting.
ACM public relations coordinator has contacted Julie about helping with publicity around CHI 2007, exploiting anniversary and awards. Joe raises the idea of SIGCHI messages. Julie would like to work with Gerrit on developing a couple of slides that get the SIGCHI message across.
Action Item[Dennis]: coordinate with Mary Beth, CHI 2007 folks and get back to Julie
Action Item [Julie, Gerrit] Develop slides that get the SIGCHI message across.
CHI Communities (Dan Olsen)
Due to time, Dan will initiate an email discussion on this topic. Philippe (AC for specialized conferences) will work with Dan.
Action Item [Dan]: Initiate email discussion on CHI Communities
Web RFP (Scooter)
Initial Web RFP, asked for respondents to come up with tech, develop it, information architecture and to manage the site. Scooter thinks that some of the aspects are solved due to our collaboration with SIGGRAPH and ACM
In current RFP, it says that plone is likely technology, tech and maintenance has been removed. ACM is putting large investment into this technology and funding work on the plone. SIGCHI is riding on the coattails. We are very thankful to ACM for the support they are giving us.
Two ways to go with the RFP, 1) look for a large scale firm that will bid the process we will see the portfolio (probably $20 – 25,000) 2) we can also go with a contractors that would do it, (this was SIGGRAPHs approach more iterative, more agile, but it will take more of Scooter’s involvement). We discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the different strategies toward the RFP. Some emphasis on the importance of an ongoing relationship and also to have visual design skills. Dennis also emphasizes some short term deliverables, so that we have an iteration. General agreement around the value of an iterative process. Dennis suggests that RFP should allow for large scale design firms as well an independent consultants. Fred asks if there is any reason to adjust the budget, Dan would like to spend the money to make it work right, ACM at this point is covering our maintenance cost. We may have a grander vision than others about access. Most of the money will be spent next fiscal year so we are adjusting the budget to add $15,000 for next year for the website.
Adjourn for lunch
After we return, Scooter moves for the EC to thank John.
Motion : EC thanks John Karat for his work with IFIP, and would like to ask him to please continue his work.
Vote: By acclamation
Budget Revisit (Fred)
We discuss several items in the budget and come up with action items for Fred.
Action Item (Fred) Move the Development Country Scholarship Fund and discretionary fund line items from the VP-Chapters area to the chair
Action Item (Fred) Make the development fund $45,000 for FY 2008
Action Item (Fred): Website development is bumped up to $40,000 for next year
Action Item (Fred): Move IFIP representative money to chair, show as volunteer travel-ifip rep.
Action Item (Fred): Move $500 from AC Mentoring up to General under Communications
Action Item (Fred): Track down if we were charged byACM for having 5000 members
Motion: All in favor of the budget as discussed, passes unanimously
Review of Action Items (AJ, Scooter, Jimmy)
We quickly read through our action items and added missing ones from the list.
CHI Business Meeting
A discussion of messaging. What are the issues we want to get out? Any questions/input we want to solicit?
Action Item[EC]:Send ideas to A.J.
Action Item[A.J]: Pull together the agenda for the business meeting
Our next meeting will be the Friday following CHI, May 4, 2007.