"Cilip has around 14000 members" - that is quite shocking. It means that the LA/Cilip has lost 44% of its members since 1997.

Cilip membership:
2013 = around 14000
2012 = ?
2011 = 16014
2010 = 17303
2009 = 17634
2008 = 18490
2007 = 19206
LA membership:
1997 = more than 25000

I asked Phil Bradley in my earlier post to look at the membership figures, and answer this question - "Is there any evidence that this endless decline is due to branding concerns, rather than advocacy and representation failure and an inappropriate fee structure – giving too little for too much?"

He did not reply. Does his silence tell us that Cilip is not interested in these issues, just in a superficial PR exercise that will achieve nothing and cost a great deal more in time, energy, and money, than the £35000 that is due to be wasted on consultants? I suspect that it does.

How many librarians say to themselves, when considering joining Cilip or renewing their membership, "Yes, it's a great organisation, always there for me, fighting for me in the media, tackling politicians who attack my profession and cut my service, and challenging the quangocrats who give them the advice they want to hear. I know if I have a problem at work, Cilip will back me up with strong representation and sound advice. The fees are good value, I'm happy to pay proportionately much more than the highest earners because Cilip does so much for me. They have a great little specialist library and information service. If only they had a better brand and a name whose initials formed an actual word!"

Rather less than 14000, I fear.

Cheers, Aran.


On 7 June 2013 09:05, CHARLES OPPENHEIM <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Please see below replies from CILIP to some of my questions, together with a few comments by me in ALL CAPS within curly brackets

Charles
 
Professor Charles Oppenheim
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Jill Colbert <[log in to unmask]>
To: Charles Oppenheim - UKEIG <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, 6 June 2013, 11:47
Subject: FW: Questions regarding the Requisition for a General Meeting

Dear Charles
 
Thank you for your email, I will try to address all your questions:
 
1              All individual members for whom we have email addresses were sent the Notice of Meeting.  {SHE DOES NOT SAY HOW MANY E MAIL ADDRESSES THEY HAVE ON FILE}
 
2              The Notice will also be posted on a General Meeting web page on Friday.  {NOT UP YET, BUT IT IS ONLY 9AM!} We are unable to include it in Update which would be the normal way of          giving notice because the June issue had already been sent to print (it comes out today). {I WOULD HAVE EXPECTED A SPECIAL PRINTED NOTICE TO BE SENT BY POST TO EACH MEMBER. MAYBE THIS DECISION IS DUE TO COST CONSIDERATIONS, BUT IT DOES MEAN MANY MEMBERS WILL NOT BECOME AWARE OF THE GENERAL MEETING IN TIME}
 
3              CILIP has around 14,000 members. 
 
4              The proxy voting form will be on the webpage on Friday for electronic submission by 1 pm on Wednesday 26 June.  Members will receive an email with a    link to the page.
 
5              Everyone attending the General Meeting will have their membership status checked to ensure they are entitled to vote.  They will each be given a voting paper which they hold up for show of hand votes.  If they are also casting proxy votes for other members, they will receive a different colour voting paper.  The room will be divided into areas, each with their own counter to ensure accurate counting.
 
6              We have not distributed any “polls” for new names.  They have been surveys as part of the wider research on re-branding and not votes.
 
I hope this answers your questions.
 
Regards
Jill Colbert
 
From: CHARLES OPPENHEIM [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 06 June 2013 07:22
To: Jill Colbert
Subject: Questions regarding the Requisition for a General Meeting
 
Although colleagues have received an e mail inviting them to attend the 28 June meeting, I have not.  This raises some questions in my mind:
 
1.  How many people were sent this invitation by e mail?
 
2.  How many members of CILIP are there?
 
3.  How are those members who you did not send e mail invitations to going to receive their invitation?
 
4.  What is the procedure for nominating a proxy and then sending them one's vote if one cannot attend?
 
5.  What arrangements are in place to ensure that no-one votes more than once at the General Meeting?
 
6.  What procedures are in place for ensuring that no one votes more than once in the two electronic polls for new names that have been distributed?
 
Many thanks in anticipation for your responses.  
 
Charles
 
Professor Charles Oppenheim
 
 
 
Message protected by MailGuard: e-mail anti-virus, anti-spam and content filtering.
http://www.mailguard.com.au

Report this message as spam  
 





--
Cheers, Aran.