Welcome page
Founders' Corner
> Meeting notes
Log out
  Meeting notes
Apr 25, 2014 Phone conference of board members

Attendance: Deborah King, Lynne Marks, Kimberly Law, Riet de Vlieger, Christina Ong, Lilian Bustamante, Patrick Chun

Discussion about approaching AICI members now.

(In chronological order)
Riet - gender-based questions difficult to set up

Lynne - volunteered to help clean up gender-based questions

Riet - test should not be about language competency: need pictures

Riet - will re-organize and re-structure gender-based questions

Kimberly - concern about scope creep

Christina - the danger of IITTI advisory role

Deborah - the dilemma of a referral list

Deborah - do we just refer to AICI members?

Kimberly - liability concern wth a referral list

Riet - we should not endorse trainers

Team - drawing conclusion about advisory role within IITTI

Patrick, Lynne - questioning conflict of interests within our roles

Kimberly - how would advisors work without conflict of interests

Kimberly, Deborah - who should do the vetting?

Patrick - insulating IITTI from being a service provider

Lilian - how ISO works

Patrick - how to separate IITTI from your private practice

Patrick - why you should represent your own company when providing services concerning IITTI

Patrick, Christina - does disclosure eliminate conflict of interests?

Patrick - how to avoid conflict of interests while on the IITTI board

Lynne, Patrick - investigate the role of a commissioner, just like with ISO

Lilian - will investigate how ISO governs accreditation companies

Patrick - we may still need to police somebody

Christina - advisory role hard to scale, suggest computer-generated report instead

Deborah - computer-generated report

Christina - what computer-generated info we need

Kimberly - no charge for computer-generated report for more than 20 people

Lynne - summarize benefit of computer report over advisory role

Team - decide computer report only for paid test, not self-test tool

Kimberly - only groups with more than 20 people will get computer report

Patrick, Lynne, Christina - summarize computer report will replace advisory role

Kimberly, Christina - decide self-test tool will not have computer report

Team - decide to call computer report "analytics"

Team - decide report for groups of 20 people or more

Patrick - describe the experience of approaching a Fortune 500 company

Patrick - Fortune 500 company said separating men/women for training doesn't make sense

Riet - how irritating to learn about stuff for the opposite sex

Lilian - how men/women are trained separately

Riet - how men/women are trained separately

Kimberly - doesn't see separate gender training t be feasible

Deborah - gender-neutral more common in the U.S.

Lynne, Deborah - Level 1 questions too detailed

Kimberly - harder questions can be moved to Level 2

Kimberly, Riet - Level 1 should focus on the basics

Riet - four options per question are too many

Lynne, Kimberly, Riet, Patrick - let's not tell outside world about male/female questions

Kimberly - tabling approach to AICI?

Patrick - suggest not to approach any more Fortune 500 companies

Patrick - suggest need to introduce concept of IITTI to consultants soon

Patrick - introduce product soon to avoid being blind-sided

Kimberly - concern about IITTI not slick enough yet

Kimberly - concern about IITTI not slick enough yet, part 2

Kimberly, Lynne - what else do we need before approaching consultants?

Patrick - concern building "perfect" product, not testing water enough

Patrick - what we can do now

Deborah - beware of paralysis by analysis

Lynne - re-establish S&G is free for consultants

Kimberly - re-affirm stopping approach to Fortune 500, but approach consultants now

Kimberly - summarize switching strategy from focus on Fortune 500 to consultants

www.IITTI.org       email: info@IITTI.org         © 2011-2018 IITTI. All rights reserved.