Petition to be on the Ballot for the 2022 ISC2 Board of Directors Election

[mencik]

Myself, Diana Contesti, and Richard Nealon are all trying to get onto the ballot for the upcoming ISC2 Board of Directors Election and need your support. For information about us and how you can help, see:

Stephen Mencik petition
Diana Contesti petition

Richard Nealon petition

Thanks for your support.

Stephen Mencik
CISSP, ISSEP, ISSAP

[TrickyDicky]

@claudiocilli  "... even some of you were successful, you need to be voted and - moreover - what can you do alone once in the Board?"

I know that Steve, Diana, Wim and myself share a lot of common views in regards to some of the larger issues that need to be addressed:

- risk to our not-for-profit status, and the huge war-chest of money that has been amassed, without any of it being used to support or provide value to the current membership

- complete closure of communication channels so that all members would have a voice that could be heard by management and the Board (advisory councils, Chapter support, in-person events, etc.)

- the provision of full membership rights to CC certification holders, and the impact that will have to the professional certification value of the current membership (1 million additional members)

- the complete and utter mess that has been caused by ineffectual leadership within the Board committees (e.g. Ethics, Scheme, Nominations, etc.)

In the event that we might be successful in our bid to be elected, I think it's good that we agree on so much. We're bound to differ on other smaller issues, but together we can effect real change.

[JoePete]

---

@TrickyDicky wrote:

I introduced a change when I was Chair of the Bylaws Committee in 2014 that members could not serve more than 6 years as a Director in any 10. 

---

Thanks for your past service and willingness to serve again. I have to say that I think term-limits tend to be a crutch for ineffective nominating committees and processes. In my work, I've seen them do at least as much harm as good as they induce a lot of turnover. This in turn can lead to challenges of continuity, strategic planning, and most importantly, executing that planning.

I applaud the design of six out of 10 years. I've seen some really bad designs (e.g., board members cannot serve consecutive terms). My preference would be to create better and more independent nominating processes. A good nominating committee can recognize when a director has been around too long and should also be able to identify the leaders that the organization wants to retain for more than a term (or even two). I think what term limits can induce is an almost rubber stamping of terms by nominators until someone reaches their term limit. 

The other thing to consider is that term limits (especially aggressive ones) tend to shift stability toward management, and that is a path, no matter how good your management is, that can lead to dysfunction. So I think the six-out-of-10 approach is a good compromise, but I think we'd benefit from a bylaw that created an independent nominating committee and process. As is, the bylaws grant the board too much flexibility and control over its own elections.

[claudiocilli]

I don’t know your personal story, but I’m aware of other petitioners.

• Richard has been in the Board for many, many years, mostly as Secretary of the Board
• Diana was in the Board for decades, and when she was not nominated by the Board itself again (yes, the Board can nominate their own members), she hired a room in Philadelphia during the (ISC)2 annual congress to ask attendees to sign her petition
• Vim Remes was on the Board for a long time as well (several years)

Now, after some years, they all are trying to jump into the BoD again.

Thsi is not exactly the definition of “bringing new blood” they are using in their petitions…

I have nothing against this: the ambition is the essence of life. If they really have something new and valuable to bring to the Association they were not able to do during the long time spent in the BoD, they are welcome, but I would like to see something new, not the same propagandistic sentences. I’m sure the rest of the association basis wants the same.

[dcontesti]

@claudiocilli 

• Diana was in the Board for decades, and when she was not nominated by the Board itself again (yes, the Board can nominate their own members), she hired a room in Philadelphia during the (ISC)2 annual congress to ask attendees to sign her petition

I find this funny.  Yes I was on the board for a number of years.  However where did you EVER get the notion that I have or had enough money to hire a room in Philadelphia?????  specifically gather signatures?  I have not been on the board since December 31, 2015.

Wim was on the board for (I believe) six years and rolled off as per the by-laws. 

Richard was on the board and also rolled off as per the by-laws and he was NOT mostly Secretary.  Richard chaired the By-laws committee for several years, he also served on other committees as required.

[claudiocilli]

Dear Diana,

I respect you, you know. It was on 2012 during the (ISC)2 Security Congress in Philadelphia from 10 to 13 of September. The location was the Pennsylvania Congress Center, Philadelphia, PA

I was there invited by Tony Baratta for a workshop. I met you in a room next the main hall. I remember you asked me to sign the petition (endorsing in person does not require an email, but just the signature and the Membership ID).

I don’t know if you paid for the room, but you were alone there asking the participants to come in and sign.

Lastly, I am not aware of the whole story within (ISC)2 of the others petitioners. You well know BoD (and the Association governance) keeps the maximum secrecy of what they are doing. In any case, when I first joined (ISC)2 about twenty years ago, you all were already on the BoD…

[wimremes]

---

@dcontesti wrote:

@claudiocilli 

• Diana was in the Board for decades, and when she was not nominated by the Board itself again (yes, the Board can nominate their own members), she hired a room in Philadelphia during the (ISC)2 annual congress to ask attendees to sign her petition

I find this funny.  Yes I was on the board for a number of years.  However where did you EVER get the notion that I have or had enough money to hire a room in Philadelphia?????  specifically gather signatures?  I have not been on the board since December 31, 2015.

Wim was on the board for (I believe) six years and rolled off as per the by-laws. 

Richard was on the board and also rolled off as per the by-laws and he was NOT mostly Secretary.  Richard chaired the By-laws committee for several years, he also served on other committees as required.

---

I know we don't think the same way about a bunch of things, and that is fine by me, but we did the hard thing. We implemented the term limits that ensured we wouldn't do what @claudiocilli is describing here. We can argue about stricter or looser term limits. Both come with upsides and downsides. the current term limits strike a subtle balance between keeping experience onboard (also allowing it to return) and onboarding new people to create continuity. 

The very wrong assumption that many make is that board work is a ceremonial function and basically anybody that breathes (or in this case holds an ISC2 cert and speaks English) can do it. When I arrived in Tampa in 2012 I had no clue whether I would be able to be a valuable board member. I set out to read Robert's Rules of Order and listen very carefully in the Board meetings. Evaluating the total 6 years I served, I'd say I didn't do a shabby job but others might disagree on that. I'm not here to toot my own horn. I also have nothing to prove.

I do not need ISC2, ISC2 does not need me, but a lot of upcoming professional colleagues of ours deserves an ISC2 that defends their interests. It is why the organization exists.

[claudiocilli]

Hi Win,

thanks. You are not right: we DO agree in all things, especially after your clarification.

I, like many members, are grateful to you for what you did, including the revised limit for staying on the BoD.

Unfortunately, this was not enough. Too many people circumvented this limitation simply waiting for one year and then re-joined the BoD.

The result is under our eyes. Same people, with few recurring exceptions, always there, precluding anyone else to have even any little chance.

What we need is real transparency and real turn-on. After a cycle in the Board (e.g. three years), the member should not be allowed to sit again in the BoD, although they can continue serving the Association in other ways.

Members need to considered and listened, they need to have the possibility to be actively involved, even in the governance, not only in some volunteering workshops aimed to populate the questions database.

I really want to help in this tough task, but I'm aware this is not what (ISC)2 wants, so it's better to avoid frustrations, unless we decide - together - tu push them to accept the situation

[dcontesti]

And yet after almost 20 years, you are still the president of the Rome ISACA chapter?

[claudiocilli]

Yes, but it’s only as a representative function, mostly because I’m an university professor, which helps in cooperation. I have no decision right and, moreover, we do not have the nominating committee or similar funny things. During the general assembly all members can vote anyone.

Maybe it was also worth to note that we have no budget, no money to administer. The chapter is a true no-profit organization. Everybody is welcome to serve on pure voluntary basis. We do not provide expense reimbursement, no travel, no dInner, no compensation. I believe this makes a big difference. I personally pay for the web site and its maintenance, I would be happy if someone wants to do this for me.

[claudiocilli]

Since I received several replies, I believe it’s better to clarify my thoughts.

I am NOT in the official (ISC)2 endorsed slate, NOR I made the petition to be elected.

I’m only amongst the 99.99% of (ISC)2 members who pay the maintenance fee only to have their certifications alive, although they are losing appeal and credibility everyday. Unfortunately, they are still required sometimes to participate to public bids.

It was said the BoD represents the Association and has the power to influence the strategy, therefore BoD is the only accountable for this bad situation.

I’m just trying to bring this to the attention of all members. We have the power to change by electing people who are really committed in serving members’ interest. The same people who lead (ISC)2 down into the cliff are still there and asking to be brought into the Board again, while we know nothing about the official nominated, including the criteria followed to select them. Maybe they are excellent people, but in what?! What they did in the past for (ISC)2? Maybe something, but we are not allowed to know