Several points have been raised in this thread that should be urgently addressed:
- annual re-election terms
- monetary compensation for performing the role
- conflict of interest due to competing affiliation
In fact these are all symptoms of a core issue that has not been sufficiently addressed.
Please consider that the roles we are discussing here could plausibly direct on the order of BILLIONS of USD worth of funding.
Please sit with that for a moment.
I’m hearing people propose their candidacy for this role as a side hustle.
Which candidates are proposing that they will resign from their current job, and focus full time on their MGRC role?
How can anyone be asked to do that for a 1 year gig?
With no established compensation?
Finally, to suggest that this role could be assumed as a personal sacrifice casually implies that only those with a sufficiently lucrative main hustle are eligible.
Let’s reconsider the gravity of the role. It seems feckless to me to leave open the possibility of volunteer, or even part time roles.
I move that we immediately and decisively resolve the following:
- MGRC roles are paid positions
- MGRC roles are fulltime positions
- MGRC terms are not less than 3 years
This structure is appropriate to the critical responsibilities to be assumed with the role… anything less will result in significantly sub-optimal performance.
.
.
.
Leaving these issues ambiguous makes it impossible for many parties to consider candidacy… which is against the “diversity” value I hear so much lip service to.
IMHO 