SHRM Board of Directors Election Guide
About me first: I have been a loyal SHRM member since 1999 – the year I retired from Air Force Active Duty. As life events intervened and receded, my engagement level has adjusted accordingly. I am active in my local chapter as Volunteer Leader holding roles as Marketing, Marketing/Treasurer, Treasurer, and now Webmaster. I’ve been to two National Conventions – pre-Katrina New Orleans, and most recently Atlanta; and two Leadership Conferences. I pay for my membership out of pocket – it is mine, always will be and never will be my employer’s. The same goes for local HR Association dues. In the interest of full disclosure, generally, my employer funds/subsidizes State or National Convention attendance. I achieved my PHR through self-study and then upgraded to SPHR with a locally taught preparation class. I am thankful for my membership in SHRM and will remain a loyal member.
However, my personal integrity, honor and commitment to excellence require to present the following. Bear with me, give me another week and this would have been more slickly presented. As it stands, this will be my longest blogpost ever.
Purpose: Review the slate of candidates and issues for the 2012 SHRM Board of Directors Election
Process: Review background from the Society for Human Resource Management and from the SHRM Members For Transparency.
Society for Human Resource Management
Board Website The Board of Directors provides leadership for SHRM by: Upholding SHRM’s vision, purpose and values; Setting the broad policies, direction and priorities of the organization; Ensuring that SHRM has highly effective leadership; Providing fiduciary oversight; and Maintaining the integrity of SHRM services and products developed for the benefit of SHRM members.
Current Board Membership: Click on their names for the link to their bios. I have selected key professional highlights. Please read each of their biographies for more complete information
Chair: Jose A. Berrios: vice president of leadership development & diversity
President and Chief Executive Officer: Henry G. (Hank) Jackson, CPA : before that he was Chief Global Finance and Business Affairs Officer
Director-at-Large: Jeffrey M. Cava: held executive human resource positions with several major corporations
Director-at-Large: Jorge Consuegra: global business and marketing professional:
Director-at-Large: Calvin W. Finch, CPA: Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and a member of the Board of Directors of CPP, Inc., a leader in workforce development solutions
Chair Designate: Bette J. Francis, SPHR: senior professional in human resources with 25 years experience developing talent and improving productivity in rapidly growing organizations
Director-at-Large: James A. Kaitz: responsible for managing the operations of an association that represents over 14,000 treasury and financial professionals
Director-at-Large: Gary P. Latham, Ph.D.: Secretary of State Professor of Organizational Behavior, University of Toronto
Director-at-Large: My-Chau Nguyen, CPA:broad-based background in global and U.S. marketing strategy and execution, plus business-to-consumer and business-to-business direct sales.
Director-at-Large: Virda M. Rhem, SPHR: amassed more than 20 years of human resources and diversity management experience in high technology, manufacturing, service, and consulting environments
Director-at-Large: Coretha M. Rushing, GPHR: has more than 25 years of HR experience and has been an active member of SHRM since 1998
Director-at-Large: Brian D. Silva, SPHR, GPHR: has devoted over 25 years of his career to human resources
Director-at-Large: Jose Tomas, SPHR: has been a SHRM member since 1999. Tomas is president, Latin America and Caribbean (LAC) and global chief people officer for Burger King Corporation (BKC)
Observations:
- Five are certified by the Human Resource Certification Institute and hold G/SPHR Certifications
- Eight are not certified by the Human Resource Certification Institute
- Side note: The SHRM Executive Leadershiphas only one certified by the Human Resource Certification Institute
- Personal analysis: There is a cultural divide between the SHRM Board of Directors/SHRM’s Executive Leadership Team and SHRM’s advocacy of advancing the profession through certification.
SHRM Board of Directors Meeting Summaries – June 23, 2012
Approved a motion to adopt the recommendation of the Governance Committee to appoint Nominees to serve as the Candidates for Election to the 2013 SHRM Board of Directors. The slate included one candidate not currently serving on the Board, David Windley, the CHRO of Yahoo Inc., to replace Cal Finch, whose term limit will be reached at the end of 2012.
Agreed that the 2013 Board should include an additional person with accounting or financial management expertise
SHRM approved candidates for the Board of Directors
David Windley: the CHRO of Yahoo Inc., to replace Cal Finch, whose term limit will be reached at the end of 2012
Jorge Consuegra: Up for re-election
My-Chau Nguyen, CPA: Up for re-election
Coretha M Rushing, GPHR: Up for re-election
Brian D. Silva, SPHR, GPRH: Up for re-election
Jose Tomas, SPHR: Up for re-election
SMFT was formed in 2010 as a way for former SHRM volunteer leaders to voice collective concerns about decisions affecting the Society. Our 50 Steering Committee members include almost all Past Chairs serving prior to the introduction of Board compensation, several Past Chairs of HRCI/SHRM Foundation/SHRM Consultants Forum, two former SHRM CEOs, and many others who have held significant volunteer leadership roles. Our Steering Committee collectively represents greater than 1,400 years of membership in SHRM and includes the sole living founder of the organization. We also count among our supporters a large number of grassroots SHRM members who are actively involved in our work, as well as many media contacts interested in HR-related issues.
Who They Are: Click the Link on the left side of the page.
SMFT’s Slate of write-in candidates. (Links available on the SMFT home page)
Jacqueline (Jackie) Gordon, SPHR: Senior Vice President and Chief Human Resources Officer for the YMCA of the USA
Kate Herbst, SPHR: been a member of the Society for Human Resource Management since 1986. Her SHRM volunteer leadership experience is extensive,
MARILYN R. HOPPEN: a Senior Vice President and the Director of Human Resources for Kitsap Bank headquartered in Port Orchard, WA
MICHAEL R. LOSEY, SPHR, CAE: Retired President & CEO of the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM),
Jack W. Milligan, SPHR, GPHR: joined Leathers, Milligan & Associates in 2000 and is currently the President & COO. Leathers Milligan is a boutique HR consulting firm engaged in a wide variety of HR and organizational development activities,
Susan Warner, ESQ., SPHR: is President of Human Resource Trouble Shooters and a nationally known speaker who has also presented Human Resource programs internationally
Rules for the SHRM Election Board: There will be six Director positions to be voted for on the official ballot for the 2013 SHRM Board. Voting members may vote by using either an official paper ballot which will be mailed to them via regular mail or by using an official electronic ballot that is accessed by clicking on a website link contained in an email sent to the voting member by SHRM’s election company, Election Services Corporation. See the link on SHRM Board of Directors page for the full rules.
The Electronic Ballot Looks Like This
David Windley: the CHRO of Yahoo Inc., to replace Cal Finch, whose term limit will be reached at the end of 2012
Jorge Consuegra: Up for re-election
My-Chau Nguyen, CPA: Up for re-election
Coretha M Rushing, GPHR: Up for re-election
Brian D. Silva, SPHR, GPRH: Up for re-election
Jose Tomas, SPHR: Up for re-election
The relationship between SHRM & SMFT on the surface has been cordial while fraught with sublime conflict. As expected there are overt & blatant incidents of deliberately hostility, typically directed from SHRM towards SMFT. What happened in Atlanta can be read be about here, SHRM Atlanta: Get Ready For Great Speakers — and a Little Drama.
And most recently, open HRTalk -SHRM’s Member Bulletin Board- has become a battleground of censorship through both member’s posting being deleted and some member’s banned. A recent search revealed the all of Mike Losey’s and any reference to SMFT had been fully erased.
Three examples of deleted content;
ONE: Dear Mr. Jackson,
I am writing to you today to express some serious concerns that I have with some recent actions that SHRM staff have taken on the HR Talk bulletin board. With SHRM being an international organization with over 260,000 members, HR Talk is a valuable resource for members across the country and world to communicate and discuss issues that are important to us.
SHRM is a non-profit organization whose role and mission is to serve the membership. As such, the SHRM Board of Directors should be accountable to the membership. One way for us to hold the Board of Directors accountable is to have open and honest elections for the members of the Board. When we have concerns with the direction that the Board is taking, we deserve the right to discuss those concerns with our fellow SHRM colleagues. We should also be free to discuss the upcoming Board elections and provide information on alternative candidates. HR Talk is one of the best vehicles for members to engage in such discussions.Unfortunately, over the last several days SHRM staff has routinely and systematically deleted numerous HR Talk posts where the election and our options have been discussed. Worse, some of the individuals who posted those topics have had their access to post on HR Talk revoked without any explanation. As a longtime member of SHRM (including serving as a volunteer leader), it is disheartening to see my professional organization engaging in such blatant suppression and censorship in regards to an issue that is extremely important to members.
I have never before questioned or doubted the ethics and integrity of SHRM. These actions have, for the first time raised doubts in my mind. If this is a case of an overzealous employee or employees, I believe that it is important that you are made aware of this unacceptable activity so that it can be addressed and corrected.On the other hand, if these actions are being directed and driven by you and SHRM leadership, it places the integrity of the SHRM in serious jeopardy. As the largest and best organization serving Human Resources professionals, SHRM’s integrity is vital to its future success. Losing that integrity would cripple SHRM’s ability to lead the HR profession forward.
If SHRM’s leadership is promoting censorship of open dialog regarding the Board election, how can we have any faith that the election process itself isn’t tainted?
Therefore, I encourage you to put an immediate stop to this censorship and allow SHRM members to discuss the Board election on HR Talk. Members should be free to express disagreement with the actions and policies that have been implemented under the current Board. We should not be afraid to discuss other options to the slate of candidates that SHRM has listed on the ballot.
Thank you for your attention.
Two: My comments below are based on personal experience having served as a member of five (5) NFP BODs, and as president of three (3) of those BODs, over a period of 25 yrs. I am hopeful that this experience brings with it valuable perspective and a certain degree of credibility. I also comment as an HR professional and practitioner for over twenty years.
I confess first that I have been far behind the curve on the goings-on regarding the SHRM elections.
To that end, I thank Mrs. C for posting certain of the links she did on another thread; this was most helpful in my understanding and discernment process.If what I am now gathering from review of the documentation and related posts is accurate, what we are witnessing on this OT BB is no less than
unconscionable; that is, the willful attempt to stifle or limit information critical to the decision-making process of SHRM members who post on this BB.Readers are urged to note that the operative word in the above statement is “if”.
I specifically refer above to any posts that have been arbitrarily or capriciously poofed because they have been deemed incongruent with whatever is the agenda of the SHRM management team or the current or potential BOD.
My overriding concern–among several others–is the potential for conflicts-of-interest on the part of members of the BOD. In addition, issues of BOD compensation and travel beg close scrutiny.
With this post, I publicly register not only my strong complaint with SHRM, but my concern at such actions.
Members of the BOD and other SHRM leaders are urged to remember that without transparency trust can neither exist nor survive. This goes not only to the heart of any organization, but to the integrity of its leaders and the level of respect with which its members hold these individuals.
Without transparency, trust, respect, and integrity, an organization will surely fail in its mission to its constituents.
Three: I was listening to NPR this morning and the news out Syria struck me as eerily similar – legitimate opposition to an oppressive regime was being crushed without cause or mercy. SMFT is the legitimate opposition, censorship and banned members speaks volumes.
We The People of SHRM have the right and obligation to express our opinions by engaging in respectful dialogue. No one should ever fear an exchange of diversity of ideas.
I have not voted yet. I intend to review the slate of candidates selected by SHRM v the slate of write-in candidates offered by SMFT.
My goal is post my endorsements on my professional blog – the Maine HR Cafe at http://www.mainehrcafe.com. You are welcome to read, compliment and comment.
My philosophy is this, IF you and I completely agree, one of us is not needed. We each need to hear different ideas. Otherwise we each stagnate
Summary:
The board no longer fully reflects SHRM’s membership demographics or core agenda of advancing the profession.
Consequently, the board has gone rogue with self-indulgence; excessive compensation and luxury travel
As such, none of the current SHRM nominated candidates for re-election deserve to be re-elected
SFMT’s legitimate and steadfast advocacy speaks for both the profession and the members of SHRM.
Your vote is your choice – choose wisely
Thank you for your balanced analysis, Robert! I am heartened to see that so many SHRM members are learning about these governance issues and taking the time to carefully consider how to vote. The stifling of member voices on HR Talk has called into question the ethics of SHRM’s leadership, and members are responding with appropriate outrage. I sincerely hope the end result is the dawning of a new day at SHRM, the leading voice of our HR profession.
kateherbst said this on September 1, 2012 at 3:00 pm
Life is a choice between being a Victim, Villain or Victor. The SMFT’ers have each chosen the role of Victor wisely and are following in the footsteps of our Nation’s Founding Fathers who pledge their sacred honor. I salute each and every one of you.
RMSJr said this on September 1, 2012 at 3:42 pm
Your analysis knocked me
to my knees.
Tom Fabian
Tom Fabian said this on September 1, 2012 at 6:16 pm
Excellent commentary, Bob! While I am solidly appreciative of SHRM as an organization, I find myself more and more interested in HRPS as an alternative. The appeal being primarily the focus on research and higher-level strategic focus. I don’t know whether or not the organization as a whole is more or less transparent, but it is good to know there are quality options.
Sandra Abbey said this on September 1, 2012 at 8:36 pm
Bob, an excellent summary. Having been away for a week, missed some of the poofed posts. Thank you.
Maggie Robinson Zieg said this on September 2, 2012 at 2:41 pm
Bob,
Thank you for such a detailed and clear presentation of the serious conflcits that exist with the SHRM BOD and the operation of the entire organization for the benefit of a few instead of for the members.
I have been a supporter of SHRM for over a decade and I even supported the luxury travel of the BOD as reasonable. As long as open back and forth, give and take, consideration of the membership view was part of the compact I am ok if my view is not always the way as long as I have a voice. I think most people feel similarly.
Recently for me, over the past 24 months I noticed a drastic change in SHRMs desire for any kind of effort to hear member concerns. At first I viewed SMFT as initially a group of disgruntled members, I have now begun to understand the greater issue at hand that being unreasonable censorship of member voice, and disreagard of any member attempt of input past the weak voting process.
Apart from that, all we are to SHRM…are units of revenue. Pets. Income Producing Units.
The lack of ability of members to have a voice, to appeal a decision affecting members, in other words, any semblence of fair treatment is non-existent now.
I had resisted making the association to the Assad Regime lest I unintentionally discount the true suffering of the brave people fighting for a new country in Syria, but the similarities in censorship and banning are not lost on me.
SHRM strong armed tactics in a member organization is wrong. Unethical in a discipline where eithcs are our primary measure where without ethics, we are nothing.
That is where SHRM is now.
Bob, Despite our sometimes frequent differences we have enjoyed a back and forth kind of relationship for a number of years and we both have the ability to argue today and forget about it by tomorrow.
I simply offer my support to any efforts to mount a campaign to hold the SHRM BOD accountable and put in place the sorely lacking mandate that member concerns be heard, and be addressed in a fair and impartial way.
I am prepared to contribute my time (as much as I reasonably can) and also monetarily. I will forward this pledge to Mike Losey as well as a pledge of my committment.
I ask others to do the same.
Feel free to forward this message or let me know how else I can help.
This is a fight that is not only necessary and good, the legitimacy of the SHRM organization depends on us.
Cheers,
Steve,
Steve. SPHR said this on September 2, 2012 at 3:06 pm
Right on, Steve! Members are SHRM’s stakeholders and the organization exists to serve their needs. For the SHRM BOD and CEO to dismiss members concerns and refer to dues-paying members’ collective dissident voices as “a non-SHRM group” is inappropriate. For the BOD members to make themselves immune to any member recourse through formal channels is a further sign of their focus on protecting themselves, rather than protecting the organization.
As HR professionals, we should be the models of ethical behavior in our respective business organizations, and our professional Society Board should be the models for our profession. It is indeed disconcerting, at the very least, that our Board appears to be self-serving and unembarrassed by the appearance of any conflicts of interest. What does this bode for the future of ethical American business practices?
kateherbst said this on September 2, 2012 at 4:07 pm
@Tom Fabian – Time to rise up and shout out the truth to all of your HR Colleagues.
@Sandra – intellectual growth is always amazing.
@Maggie – please help get the word out, time is short and SMFT can still prevail once SHRM members realize that we are being looked at as Income Producing Units
@Steve Thank you, your support alone adds depth & breadth.
Now, one final request;
IF you agree, please crosspost this blog so that as many SHRM members have the opportunity to make an informed choice.
So far, I have used Linked In – both SHRM’s official page *heheheh* and my professional page, Twitter, Facebook and what ever other network channels that you may use.
Shout Out! don’t be shouted down through SHRM’s Censorship.
RMSJr said this on September 3, 2012 at 6:56 am
Will Do.
Here is what I posted on SHRM Gen and OT boards today.
Casting a vote in any election for which I am eligible goes beyond my rights and speaks to my character.
By exercising my right through casting that vote I become responsible and greater yet I have participated in the process that gives credence to my voice.
I voted, therefore I count. I can render an opinion, whatever it may be. I’m participating in the dialogue.
If I don’t vote. If I quit. My voice is lost. Any opinion, then, that I render is just a powerless complaint.
As a member, I have exercised the invitation to vote for the SHRM BOD. It does not matter for whom I have voted. What matters is that I did.
[Thanks - I just had to get this off my chest]
Tom Fabian said this on September 3, 2012 at 1:52 pm
[...] as squabbling, charges and counter-charges, and less than gentlemanly behavior. (This blog post by the maine hr cafe provides an independent view of a lot of the election back-and-forth that has been going [...]
SHRM Board Elections: This Week, the Battle Comes Down to the Wire said this on September 4, 2012 at 12:38 pm
I have little more to add than to say that I echo and underscore the sentiments of the above respondents. [And I thank you, Bob, for including in this blog post my original post (#2 above) that was earlier deleted by the HRTalk/SHRM moderator.]
HotpeppeR said this on September 5, 2012 at 9:03 pm