RCT Structure Status Update FY14 BOD3 Update Ellen McIsaac March 7, 2014

RCT Task Force Recommendations FY14 Adoption Status Removed all business items from RCT roles Bylaws EINs Financially struggling sections Sections not in good standing Developing synergy between RCT and CLCC Previously operating separately despite sharing many of the same goals Discouraging role sharing between individuals – distribute workload Proposed bylaws amendments to change structure to 1 RCR/1 RCCE failed twice Page 2

Climate for RCT Structural Changes Role recommendations being adopted, but speed of adoption varies by region Training came later than expected this year with the transition to CLI and new training system Even after socialization, strong resistance to 1 RCR system from many collegiate leaders Global Advisory Board recommendations may impact collegiate structure

Recommendations No additional changes to RCT structure recommended for FY15 Continue to implement recommended changes to RCT roles Integrate faculty advisors/counselors to ensure success of collegiate sections Train and utilize the Lt. Governors for RCT support Offer RCT training earlier in FY15 Continue to utilize CLCC Take advantage of region leadership summits Work with current/past RCTs Work with region mentoring programs Work with Global Advisory Board to see how RCT structure fits into vision for Society structure Consider graduate roles Consider TF “future structure” recommendations

RCT Role Breakdowns Proposed by RCT TF Reference RCT Role Breakdowns Proposed by RCT TF

Revised Responsibilities for RCR RCR Role Regular communication Lead all calls/meetings Send emails to presidents Answer general questions Society structure Facilitate professional/collegiate interaction SWE Ambassador Best practice sharing Representation Region Council (voting member) Conflict resolution Assist sections with conflict resolution through assistance from Region leadership Page 6

Revised Responsibilities for RCCE RCCE Role Reporting communication Blog Social Media – Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, etc Data management Compile section reports (To RCT Region Lead – Lt. Gov., Gov.) SWE Ambassador Representation Region Council (voting member) Time management Ability to manage report submittals Page 7

Revised Responsibilities for RCS RCS Role Representation Senate SWE Ambassador Time management Society goals vs RCT goals Page 8

Revised Relationship with CLCC CLCC Role CLCC and RCR completing many of the same tasks Reduce redundancy between groups Increase communication Require CLCC region lead to be part of the RCT Report sections that CLCC has contacted and provided services Mentor sections not in good standing (coordinate with HQ) Page 9

Future Structure Ideas Proposed by RCT TF Reference Future Structure Ideas Proposed by RCT TF

Future Structure 1. ‘Girl Scout’ Badge System Individuals earn ‘badges’ within leadership areas Membership Communication Finance Group individuals based on skills from ‘badges’ to have a source for SWE members to go to for assistance Have different levels within badge groups Entry Moderate Expert After training for the ‘badge’, individual needs to show from example the skills they have learned Mentor a struggling section Lead committee/sub-committee Page 11

Future Structure 1. ‘Girl Scout’ Badge System - continued Create a ‘community’ of knowledge individuals in each badge area (i.e. online searchable database) Individuals list experience/ways they can help People can find mentors for specific situations Find the right people for the right positions Page 12

Future Structure 2. Full Integration of Collegiates/Professionals Region structure remains the same but collegiate able to run for positions Governor (P) Lt. Governor (P) Treasurer (P or C) Internal Secretary (meeting minutes) (P or C) External Secretary (social media/blogs) (P or C) Section Coordinator (P or C) Provides a more inclusive organization Collegiate and Professional section needs are very similar Main difference is professional development needs for Professionals Focus on people that are capable of tasks vs. just SWE experience Page 13

Future Structure 3. Collegiate Interest Based Group collegiate sections based on their interests/struggles/goals for the year Section size – small/medium/large Membership retention Fundraising Outreach Each group consists of 10-12 collegiate sections Each group lead by an RCR type collegiate or young professional member Page 14