[Stc_presidents-discuss] New CAA Guidelines

Ben Woelk ben.woelk at gmail.com
Wed Jul 22 13:52:10 UTC 2015


Robert--The website hosting is not the same as the SIG migration. It's only
a change in hosting provider. Website administration still lies with the
chapter.

Debra--You mentioned the difficulty in achieving platinum. What about the
other award levels?

Debra and Robert--The intent wasn't to reduce participation. I suggest
getting a preliminary "score" together and contacting the CAA committee and
the CAC with your concerns, including the delayed availability of the new
guidelines.
The webinar about the CAA changes was held on May 19. I don't know if the
new documents have been posted to STC.org

Incidentally, Rochester hasn't evaluated how they would do on the new
application yet. We will move the website, but I can't get to it until
August/September.

It's good that you're having this discussion now.

Ben
Ben Woelk, CISSP



Author of *Shockproofing Your Use of Social Media: Staying Safe Online
<http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00OJMK4T2/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B00OJMK4T2&linkCode=as2&tag=infosecommun-20&linkId=2Q4UZYWENIEEKVYG>*,
available on Amazon Kindle.



*Connect with me on social media:*

   - *Facebook <https://www.facebook.com/ben.woelk>*
   - *LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/benwoelk>*
   - *Twitter: @benwoelk <https://twitter.com/#%21/benwoelk>*


*Follow my Infosec Communicator Blog <http://benwoelk.com/>*

On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 9:20 AM, Robert Perry <Robert.Perry at sas.com> wrote:

>  As the past President of the Carolina Chapter and the person who about
> together last year’s application, I totally agree with your assessment. As
> it stands, if we don’t have a conference and let STC host our website
> (which is unthinkable based on past experiences), we have no chance of
> getting an award. The Carolina Chapter has always been honored with
> Excellence or Distinguished, and last year won the Community of the Year.
> And yet, this year we won’t meet the requirements as they stand. The new
> systems seems overly rigid and unacceptable.  I do not agree with being
> forced to having STC host our website especially based on their poor
> technical performance over the years.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> *Robert Perry*
>
> Technical Writer, Customer Solutions Documentation
>
> SAS Institute Inc. ▪ Cary, NC 27513
>
> *SAS**®** …* *THE POWER TO KNOW**®*
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* stc_presidents-discuss-bounces at mailer.stc.org [mailto:
> stc_presidents-discuss-bounces at mailer.stc.org] *On Behalf Of *Johnson,
> Debra
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2015 11:32 PM
> *To:* stc_presidents-discuss at mailer.stc.org
> *Subject:* [Stc_presidents-discuss] New CAA Guidelines
> *Importance:* High
>
>
>
> Hello Fellow STC Presidents,
>
>
>
> As some of you know, the Community Achievement Awards Evaluating Committee
> just released its latest CAA application and guidelines. Unlike previous
> updates, this one is a total revamp.
>
>
>
>
> *Have any of you had a chance to review the new application and think
> about whether your community will be applying for an award this year? What
> are your thoughts on the achievability of the new requirements? *We would
> love to know…
>
>
>
> Our chapter, Orlando Central Florida, bases our chapter activities and
> initiatives to a large extent on the requirements for the CAA, since
> according to STC, these are the activities in which communities should be
> engaging. To this point in the year, we have been working to the previous
> year’s guidelines as the revamp was not available.
>
>
>
> Our Administrative Council discussed the revamped guidelines and believe
> that with so many new requirements, the deletion of many activities that
> have long been key CAA criteria, the inherent inflexibility of the system
> (“either you do it or you don’t” with no substitutions and only two Bonus
> options), and a completely new scoring system that has raised the bar
> significantly, *communities will be hard pressed to achieve the goals set
> by the CAA committee within the time remaining in 2015.*
>
> We did an item-for-item analysis of the new criteria and projected how our
> community would stack up against them. We determined that if we did all the
> things we did last year to earn our community achievement award, we would
> not qualify for an award under the new system.
>
> One reason for this is the requirements were apparently established for a
> 12-month period but the documents were not posted this year until nearly
> summertime, and summer is when many chapters go on hiatus. There isn’t a
> full year’s worth of time to pull off the number of new activities needed
> to win recognition. For all practical purposes, communities have *four*
> months to adjust.
>
>
>
> An example of this is, several activities (both new and carry-overs from
> previous years’ guidelines) are now scored on a sliding scale heavily
> weighted towards how many times the activity occurs during the year.
> Particularly with new activities, which communities were not aware of and
> may not have been pursuing, with just a few months left in the year it’s
> not feasible to achieve full points for them.
>
>
>
> In addition, and in a surprise move (…at least to us) , there is heavy
> emphasis on *regional conferences*, so much so that communities who do
> not sponsor one of these conferences are at a tremendous disadvantage. They
> lose 5 points—that’s 5 out of the baseline total of 83.  Since a Platinum
> Award requires 90% of the possible points, you can only lose 8.3 points and
> qualify for it. Thus for all intents and purposes, if you don’t sponsor a
> regional conference, you can’t earn a Platinum Award.
>
>
>
> Do you think this was the committee’s intent?  If so, should they
> consider the fact that smaller communities may not have the person-power
> to work at regional conferences, nor the financial resources to organize
> and run them?  In the interest of fairness, we feel the *five* points for
> a regional conference should be moved to the Bonus category, and not be
> part of the baseline “required” criteria.
>
>
>
> …and there are many such examples.
>
>
>
> *We were wondering what you think… So would you be so kind as to answer a
> few questions for us as a fellow community?*
>
>
>
> 1.      If you have submitted CAA applications in the past, were you
> intending to do so for 2015?
>
>
>
> 2.      Has the new application changed your mind about applying?
>
>
>
> 3.      Please comment on the application: Do you believe it’s a fair way
> to assess the strength of a community’s activities? Specifically, how do
> you think your community will fare under the new guidelines?
>
>
>
> 4.      Would your community support an appeal to the CAAEC and the Board
> (if necessary) to revise the scoring in order to take into consideration
> the late release of the point assignments as well as to “level the playing
> field” to account for community size and financial resources?
>
>
>
>
> Thanks for your input!
>
>
>
> *Debra*
>
> *Society for Technical Communication – Orlando Central Florida Chapter
> President*
> * ____________________*
>
> *Debra D. Johnson *
>
> *Technical Communication Lead **| **Information Technology Services **| **Knowledge
> Management  **| **Content Strategy **| **Information Development,
> Delivery, and Storage*
> *Wyndham Vacation Ownership*
>
> *6277 Sea Harbor Drive*
>
> *Orlando, FL 32821 *
>
> *Office: (407) 626-4428 <%28407%29%20626-4428>*
>
> *Cell 407-212-0963 <407-212-0963>*
>
> *debra.johnson at wyn.com* <debra.johnson at wyn.com>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> "The information in this electronic mail ("e-mail") message may contain
> information that is confidential and/or privileged, or may otherwise be
> protected by work product or other legal rules. It is solely for the use of
> the individual(s) or the entity(ies) originally intended. Access to this
> electronic mail message by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the
> intended recipient, be advised that any unauthorized review, disclosure,
> copying, distribution or use of this information, or any action taken or
> omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful.
> Please notify the sender immediately if you have received this electronic
> message by mistake, and destroy all copies of the original message."
>
> "The sender believes that this e-mail and any attachments were free of any
> virus, worm, Trojan horse, malicious code and/or other contaminants when
> sent. E-mail transmissions cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free,
> so this message and its attachments could have been infected, corrupted or
> made incomplete during transmission. By reading the message and opening any
> attachments, the recipient accepts full responsibility for any viruses or
> other defects that may arise, and for taking remedial action relating to
> such viruses and other defects. Neither Wyndham Worldwide Corporation nor
> any of its affiliated entities is liable for any loss or damage arising in
> any way from, or for errors or omissions in the contents of, this message
> or its attachments."
>
> Wyndham may monitor all incoming and outgoing email communications,
> including the content of emails and attachments, for purposes of security,
> legal compliance, training, quality assurance and other purposes permitted
> by law.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Stc_presidents-discuss mailing list
> Stc_presidents-discuss at mailer.stc.org
> http://mailer.stc.org/mailman/listinfo/stc_presidents-discuss
>
>


--
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailer.stc.org/pipermail/stc_presidents-discuss/attachments/20150722/7da8c040/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Stc_presidents-discuss mailing list