| Discussion Point | Notes | Actions: Responsible / Note |
| Working Group Continuation and Mandate | The initial discussion centered on the necessity and mandate of the Governance Working Group, following successful completion of previous recommendations. A participant argued that the group should either be formally closed/voted on by all initial participants or redefined with a clear, fresh scope to avoid carrying forward past friction and to attract new contributors.The Secretary noted the ISC initiated the group, and its purpose is ongoing governance improvement, which is still within its original charter. | |
| Working Group Monitoring and Membership Value | Concerns were raised about the high number of inactive working groups (approx. 10-15 considered active out of 30 total) and the lack of proper tracking and accountability for member participation. A participant argued that if Intersect does not properly value and track member contributions, its status as a Member-Based Organization (MBO) is compromised. Suggestions were made to prioritize automation for collecting participation data. Membership team to continue working on the new working group section in the member area to improve visibility, archival, and tracking of working groups. | |
| Improving Committee Operations and Accountability | A participant offered detailed recommendations for improving committee and working group efficiency, including using a simple Kanban board (Ideas, To-Do, In Progress, Blocked, Done) and conducting quick 10-minute status updates answering three questions: "What have you done last week?", "What are you doing this week?", and "What is blocking you?". It was stressed that Chairs need project management knowledge to enforce accountability and ensure clear task delegation. A participant (Wilco) to share a presentation and ClickUp example detailing recommended operational principles (Kanban, 3-question updates) with the Working Group, potentially starting implementation with the MCC. The Chairs must set clear expectations and hold members accountable for task delivery. | |
| Committee Term Extension (Two Years) | The idea of extending committee member terms from six months to two years was strongly supported, citing voter fatigue and the need for long-term continuity and execution, as six-month terms often end before major work is completed. A potential drawback raised was that good people might hesitate to apply due to the long commitment. This was countered by suggesting an increase in compensation and maintaining enough seats to have a line of succession (next highest vote-getter) if someone resigns. | The Working Group is to compile a simple proposal on extending committee terms to two years, outlining pros and cons, to be shared with the ISC/Board. Decision-makers to consider adjusting compensation in parallel with term extension. |
| Committee Chair/Vice Chair Election Process | The current process is inconsistent (some committees elect a Vice Chair who later becomes Chair, others elect both every term), leading to excessive elections and "seat warming" (a person may hold four roles in two years). Concerns: Lack of time for substantive work, excessive bureaucracy, and potential burnout. Proposal: Simplify the process; elect a Chair and Vice Chair, and the Vice Chair automatically steps in if the Chair steps down, without immediately forcing a new election. | Simo to document a proposal for a simplified, standardized Chair/Vice Chair election process (focusing on continuity and reduced election frequency), incorporating the two-year term proposal. |
| Chair's Role and Authority | A key question was raised about the Chair's actual power beyond being an ISC representative and meeting facilitator (e.g., veto power, removal power). It was asserted that if the Chair is merely an assistant/team leader, excessive election bureaucracy is unnecessary. It was noted the committee itself votes for its Chair to choose its leader, which is a different decision than the membership election. The Working Group emphasized the need to first clearly define the Chair's responsibilities and duties to justify the importance of the Chair election process. | |
| Scheduling and Next Steps | A participant (Wilco) requested access to the Working Group's Google Drive and Miro board. Given the discussion momentum and the importance of the topics (term extension, chair elections) leading into the next election cycle, the Secretary proposed resuming weekly calls to maintain focus and complete proposals quickly. | The Secretary to schedule weekly calls for the Working Group to finalize proposals. Secretary to draft the Chair Election/Term Proposal and the Two-Year Term Proposal for review. |