ASMP’s Governance Committee (GC) is responsible for: 1) identifying qualified ASMP members with the necessary talents and abilities to serve on national-level committees; and 2) recommending qualified individuals to serve on the national board of directors.
Frequently asked questions and answers about the GC and the screening process for board candidates follow.
One of the main reasons for having the GC is to ensure the most qualified ASMP members are recommended for national board service. Like many organizations, ASMP has many members with unique, yet unrecognized, talents, knowledge and experience. The GC identifies those members and encourages their active participation in ASMP’s operations. The GC not only seeks ASMP members qualified to participate as candidates for election to the ASMP national board, but also identifies those members with the necessary talents to participate actively on committees. Ideally, committee participation can serve as a foundation for future national board service.
Having the GC review and recommend national board candidates is a service for members. Those holding stocks, bonds or mutual funds are likely to be familiar with the GC recommendation process, since it is used by corporations and other organizations throughout the world.
The national board is not consulted during the assessment and recommendation process. The GC works independently from the board in conducting its search, questioning, and assessment. The decision to recommend belongs solely to the GC. National board involvement is limited to the appointment of the GC chair.
The GC’s recommendation does not ensure anyone of being elected. Ultimately, selection is in the hands of the voting members. The GC is a service that can either be used as an aid in members’ voting decisions or ignored altogether.
The GC screens for candidates who are expected to contribute to the advancement of ASMP’s goals and objectives. Accordingly, the GC looks for the following:
The GC identifies members who meet these criteria and recommends them to committee chairs. Committee chairs may then assign the identified members with committee responsibilities. The members’ committee work then offers the GC an opportunity to assess whether or not the recommended member has the necessary skills required to assume more demanding ASMP duties. While a national board candidate, for example, is not required to participate actively in committee work, doing so provides the GC with the much-needed perspective to assess the member and offer a recommendation.
The screening process is year round. Candidates involved in ASMP at the chapter and national levels are evaluated throughout the year. Candidates interested in running for the board are encouraged to volunteer for ASMP service so that they can be evaluated by the committee. In mid December, an intensive screening process begins that includes reviews of candidate questionnaires, in-depth candidate interviews in-person and by phone, as well as consultation among members of the GC. Candidates to be recommended are notified at the close of the screening process.
ASMP by-laws stipulate that there is neither a minimum nor maximum number of candidates that may be recommended by the GC.
While the candidate ballot statement provides some information, it may not adequately reflect the candidate service records, commitment to ASMP and other information important for selection or voting. The GC goes so far as to offer a “360 degree assessment” by interviewing people the candidate has worked with on many levels, thus offering voters information not found in the ballot statement or elsewhere.
Screening of candidates can take much time and energy. Members with neither the time nor the desire to sift through candidates on their own are offered a candidate list that has been judged to be excellent by the GC, thus assisting or supplementing the members’ candidate evaluations.
The GC encourages voters to read candidate statements, review answers to the series of questions on the ASMP election site and review the names of those who have recommended them. Voters can also contact those making recommendations for more background information on candidates. While voters have a responsibility to decide on candidates based on their own investigation, the GC’s work can supplement that investigation and assist those who seek an unbiased, thorough candidate assessment.