1 / 9

In-Cooperation Events issues and challenges

Explore the benefits and concerns of in-cooperation events, including reduced registration fees and access to ACM publication program. Address uneven practices and provide guidelines for vetting requests.

crohrer
Download Presentation

In-Cooperation Events issues and challenges

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. In-Cooperation Eventsissues and challenges Alex Wolf SGB Chair

  2. Benefitsrelatively lightweight mechanism • SIGs and SIG members • community involvement, promotion, and coordination • reduced registration fee • Event organizers • credibility and exposure • use of ACM and SIG logos • access to ACM publication program (ICPS) • dissemination via ACM DL

  3. Concernsuneven and questionable practices • Requests for cooperating status after ACM publicized as the publisher and promoting the appearance of the proceedings in the DL • Status rescinded by SIG after finding out that other SIG leaders chose not to cooperate • Cooperation being granted to events sponsored by organizations producing events of “uneven” quality

  4. Concernsuneven and questionable practices • Chapter chartered by an individual who worked for a conference management firm began requesting cooperating status from various SIGs to promote the proceedings as an ACM publication and increase attendance • chapter was placed on probation and the individual offered their resignation • Members and volunteer leaders reporting ACM-branded activities for questionable practices

  5. ResponseNeed to refocus effort on vetting requests • Share best practices • Document SIG-specific criteria/guidelines • Publicize on ACM web site Good examples: SIGPLAN http://www.sigplan.org/sigplan_incooperation_proposal__.htm SIGCSE http://www.sigcse.org/sigcse-conferences/policies/incooperation-status

  6. Criteriasome things to consider • Dates • is there conflict with other related events? • is there potential overlap of audience? • is it a good time of year with regard to workload of the proposed audience? • Finances • who is taking the financial risk? • is there a profit or other financial motive? • are there other sources of funding?

  7. Criteriasome things to consider • Organizational quality • are the organizers and sponsoring organization credible in the technical area? • do you know the organizers and do they have the time to make this event a success? • is this audience part of your membership? • will the attendees of this conference be sought as members of your SIG?

  8. Criteriasome things to consider • Technical quality • are you familiar with members of the program committee? • will the technical content attract the audience that the organizers have in mind? • does this event substantially overlap with an existing event, enough to impact on it? • will the proceedings meet the quality standards of ACM publications?

  9. Action items • Review/renew your policies and process for considering cooperating status • Document the policies and process • make them visible on your web site • provide them as part of your yearly report • Designate a point person for executing the process

More Related