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.