A I P
C O M M U N I C AT O R AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF PARLIAMENTARIANS
FA L L
2021
Presidents Message:
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Are Hybrid Meetings the Wave of the Future?
President’s Letter
1
2021 Annual Session Recap
2
Announcing the 2021-2022 AIP Officers
3
AIP Officers
4
Calendar of Events
4
Deadline Dates – Communicator
4
Accrediting Department Update
4
AIPSC2 Team Progress – An Update on our Parliamentary Authority
5
Education Department Update
5
The 41st Annual AIP West Coast Practicum
6
Call for Parliamentary Journal Article Submissions 7 CP Announcements
8
When were your Chapters last Reviewed
9
Correction to Be Southern
10
New Members
10
Amazon Smile
10
The answer to that question is simple! Nobody knows! That being said, let’s have a brief discussion of what holding a hybrid meeting entails – and for that matter, what a hybrid meeting actually is. At the last AIP Annual Session, approximately 1/3 of the attendees were present in Oklahoma City; but 2/3 of the attendees participated virtually, via Zoom. First, does it feel like a meeting? Being involved in a hybrid meeting still feels like a meeting but it is also impossible not to notice some striking differences. With the advances in some of the virtual meeting platforms, like Zoom, in a virtual-only meeting, voting and other applications of parliamentary procedure are relatively easily modified to comply with the basic standards of treating all members equally much the same way you would in an in-person meeting. Last year’s Annual Session was, in effect, a virtual-only meeting. This year, AIP met in a hybrid setting, and we proved that it is much more difficult to do. Modifications have to be made to both the in-person AND the virtual attendees’ methods of recognition, speaking and voting to ensure that all parties are treated equally. Combining methods for most operations is simply not an
effective solution. Voting by voice or voting cards for the in-person attendees and using a zoom poll for the virtual attendees might seem like a simple and cost-effective solution. But timing up and sharing the results between the two locales may be difficult; further, the preciseness of one vote compared to the imprecision of voice voting and voting cards in the other could lead to a lack of clarity amongst ALL attendees that the outcome of the votes was presented fairly; particularly if the virtual attendees vote one way and those in the room vote another. Of course, voting by voice in both locations is an absolute disaster unless there is unanimous consent. If the body is small enough and a fixed and static membership, roll call votes are the simplest method available provided everyone has access to a microphone that feeds into the virtual portion of the meeting. But for many organizations, roll calls are time-consuming and inefficient. The solution for larger meetings is to use an outside voting software so that all parties are voting utilizing the same platform. The fairness, relative speed, and equality of this method are all major benefits – but there may be negatives or potential negatives to this approach. Member’s inability to operate the platform, the requirement for all members to have an internet connected voting device, loss of internet access either in the room or Continued on following page
Fall 2021 | AIP Communicator
Page 1