ECF Governance and conflict of interests

Debate directly related to English Chess Federation matters.
Angus French
Posts: 2149
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 1:37 am
Contact:

Re: ECF Governance and conflict of interests

Post by Angus French » Mon Jul 12, 2021 10:24 pm

Paul McKeown wrote:
Mon Jul 12, 2021 10:18 pm
Roger Lancaster wrote:
Sun Jul 11, 2021 1:41 pm
Consider a selector who has to choose between two juniors with more or less identical records, one of whom he knows personally. S/he has to make a choice but, if that choice is the junior whom s/he knows, there's the risk of being accused of being unduly influenced by this - but it's equally 'unfair' to reverse the process and choose the other junior instead.
Surely the correct procedure for the selector is to recuse themselves from the process in such a case?
That's what I thought.

User avatar
Stephen Westmoreland
Posts: 447
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2021 4:55 pm
Location: Holmfirth

Re: ECF Governance and conflict of interests

Post by Stephen Westmoreland » Tue Jul 13, 2021 8:10 am

One solution I have used was to increase the boards. Of course that needs opposition agreement and is something of a local league solution. It got several juniors games though.
HDCA President

Joseph Conlon
Posts: 339
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2019 4:18 pm

Re: ECF Governance and conflict of interests

Post by Joseph Conlon » Tue Jul 13, 2021 9:29 am

Paul McKeown wrote:
Mon Jul 12, 2021 10:18 pm
Roger Lancaster wrote:
Sun Jul 11, 2021 1:41 pm
Consider a selector who has to choose between two juniors with more or less identical records, one of whom he knows personally. S/he has to make a choice but, if that choice is the junior whom s/he knows, there's the risk of being accused of being unduly influenced by this - but it's equally 'unfair' to reverse the process and choose the other junior instead.
Surely the correct procedure for the selector is to recuse themselves from the process in such a case?
I feel that in junior chess though, there will be an approximation where people 'know' a very large number of juniors and that shouldn't itself require recusing

In an academic context, similar issues arise with committees that award grants or prestigious fellowships. The community is small enough so that, on some level, everyone knows everyone else, but there are still degrees of separation.

One example of rules here is that panel members who are (a) at the same institution or (b) the PhD or postdoctoral advisor or (c) are co-authors must recuse themselves, but not beyond that. One could see potential analogies in chess - e.g. a coach or member of the same club maybe should recuse themselves, but not beyond that (so e.g. I wouldn't suggest Paul would have to recuse himself simply because someone had once entered a Richmond Rapidplay, but for a member of RJCC perhaps yes)

User avatar
John Upham
Posts: 7162
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:29 am
Location: Cove, Hampshire, England.
Contact:

Re: ECF Governance and conflict of interests

Post by John Upham » Tue Jul 13, 2021 9:55 am

Joseph Conlon wrote:
Tue Jul 13, 2021 9:29 am

In an academic context, similar issues arise with committees that award grants or prestigious fellowships. The community is small enough so that, on some level, everyone knows everyone else, but there are still degrees of separation.
When I undertook a viva voce examination of my University of Sussex D. Phil. thesis "Monte Carlo Simulation of Cluster Ion Fragmentation Peak Shapes" I undertook a gruelling half day interrogation by an external examiner who knew of my work as we had attended the same conferences.

It was probably the most stressful experience of my life up to date. He definitely did not hold back and was a leading expert in the field of molecular beams and mass spectrometry.

Perhaps I should have objected to him on grounds of conflict of interest?

Scientific papers that I "co-authored" (or had my name on) were subject to peer review from persons who knew my work and possibly myself.
British Chess News : britishchessnews.com
Twitter: @BritishChess
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/britishchess :D

Roger Lancaster
Posts: 1906
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:44 pm

Re: ECF Governance and conflict of interests

Post by Roger Lancaster » Tue Jul 13, 2021 12:44 pm

Angus French wrote:
Mon Jul 12, 2021 10:24 pm
Paul McKeown wrote:
Mon Jul 12, 2021 10:18 pm
Roger Lancaster wrote:
Sun Jul 11, 2021 1:41 pm
Consider a selector who has to choose between two juniors with more or less identical records, one of whom he knows personally. S/he has to make a choice but, if that choice is the junior whom s/he knows, there's the risk of being accused of being unduly influenced by this - but it's equally 'unfair' to reverse the process and choose the other junior instead.
Surely the correct procedure for the selector is to recuse themselves from the process in such a case?
That's what I thought.
Sorry, guys, I didn't make the issue clear enough. Supposing there are half-a-dozen juniors applying for something, it's almost inevitable that each of the selectors will know at least one of them. And any selector who knew none of them is unlikely to be familiar with English junior chess which probably means they shouldn't be on the panel in the first place. [There's a secondary issue about your answer - how well does a selector need to know a junior to have to recuse himself? Eg. Previous coach? Member of same club? Same county? Same union? Friend of selector's son? ].

Paul Cooksey
Posts: 1519
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm

Re: ECF Governance and conflict of interests

Post by Paul Cooksey » Wed Jul 14, 2021 8:08 am

Paul Cooksey wrote:
Mon Jul 12, 2021 8:31 am
In passing, I note that the way I am using conflict of interest is different to what I see in the official documents. So I will try to be more precise when I have thought about it.
As I understand it, conflict of interest is used in ECF documents a bit more narrowly that I have been using it. Since I think the ECF is using a definition from company law, I should probably think of a different way to express myself.

I would like ECF executives to treat all organisations they deal with fairly, which is a bit more that their obligation to act in the best interests of the ECF as defined as a company.

I am finding the EJCOA threads problematic, since I am not convinced they are lobbying for fair process, but rather processes which give them the outcome they want. Maybe Tim Wall has influenced me overmuch, and his "with or against us" mentality is not representative of the other members. But equally I think I'd being naïve if I did not acknowledge that people who make their living from chess, wholly or partially, want to influence ECF decisions in their favour.

User avatar
John Upham
Posts: 7162
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:29 am
Location: Cove, Hampshire, England.
Contact:

Re: ECF Governance and conflict of interests

Post by John Upham » Wed Jul 14, 2021 8:44 am

Paul Cooksey wrote:
Wed Jul 14, 2021 8:08 am
But equally I think I'd being naïve if I did not acknowledge that people who make their living from chess, wholly or partially, want to influence ECF decisions in their favour.
Up and down this land there are many people who want to see an increase in chess playing, participation, clubs, leagues, tournaments, public events, education, sponsorship, number of titled players, media coverage, educational establishments partaking, prize funds, championships, public recognition, improved legal status etc.

A proportion of these good people work tirelessly as volunteers and another proportion work for chess whilst earning revenue from it.

I suspect most if not all (regardless of generating revenue, small or large) would be keen to see the ECF making decisions that lead to the above goals.
British Chess News : britishchessnews.com
Twitter: @BritishChess
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/britishchess :D

NickFaulks
Posts: 8452
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: ECF Governance and conflict of interests

Post by NickFaulks » Wed Jul 14, 2021 9:03 am

John Upham wrote:
Wed Jul 14, 2021 8:44 am
I suspect most if not all (regardless of generating revenue, small or large) would be keen to see the ECF making decisions that lead to the above goals.
To be clear, you're saying that the ECF currently does the opposite?
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.

User avatar
John Upham
Posts: 7162
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:29 am
Location: Cove, Hampshire, England.
Contact:

Re: ECF Governance and conflict of interests

Post by John Upham » Wed Jul 14, 2021 9:15 am

NickFaulks wrote:
Wed Jul 14, 2021 9:03 am
John Upham wrote:
Wed Jul 14, 2021 8:44 am
I suspect most if not all (regardless of generating revenue, small or large) would be keen to see the ECF making decisions that lead to the above goals.
To be clear, you're saying that the ECF currently does the opposite?
To be clear, No, I am not but maybe you are?

I am referring to the goals and aspirations of many people who work for chess either voluntarily or paid.
British Chess News : britishchessnews.com
Twitter: @BritishChess
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/britishchess :D

NickFaulks
Posts: 8452
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: ECF Governance and conflict of interests

Post by NickFaulks » Wed Jul 14, 2021 9:18 am

John Upham wrote:
Wed Jul 14, 2021 9:15 am
I am referring to the goals and aspirations of many people who work for chess either voluntarily or paid.
Sure, you're in favour of all that is virtuous. People don't generally bother to say that unless they are at least hinting that others aren't.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.

Paul Cooksey
Posts: 1519
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm

Re: ECF Governance and conflict of interests

Post by Paul Cooksey » Wed Jul 14, 2021 5:40 pm

John Upham wrote:
Wed Jul 14, 2021 8:44 am
Paul Cooksey wrote:
Wed Jul 14, 2021 8:08 am
But equally I think I'd being naïve if I did not acknowledge that people who make their living from chess, wholly or partially, want to influence ECF decisions in their favour.
Up and down this land there are many people who want to see an increase in chess playing, participation, clubs, leagues, tournaments, public events, education, sponsorship, number of titled players, media coverage, educational establishments partaking, prize funds, championships, public recognition, improved legal status etc.

A proportion of these good people work tirelessly as volunteers and another proportion work for chess whilst earning revenue from it.

I suspect most if not all (regardless of generating revenue, small or large) would be keen to see the ECF making decisions that lead to the above goals.
NickFaulks wrote:
Wed Jul 14, 2021 9:18 am
Sure, you're in favour of all that is virtuous. People don't generally bother to say that unless they are at least hinting that others aren't.
I suppose the other instance in which they say it is when they think someone else might be hinting that they are not virtuous themselves.
I found John's clarification a bit gnomic. But I am going to assume that was his intention since it helps me expand on my position.

Yes, indeed, I agree. Most people in the EJCOA are undoubtedly people working hard for the benefit of chess, whether they are paid or not. But the problem is that the various groups of people working for the benefit chess disagree on the best way to do it. I have a vision of English chess where the ECF is how different groups come together to coordinate their efforts. I don't think that makes me too much of a dreamer, although I will admit it is an imperfect mechanism for doing so.

I get frustrated when the ECF decision making process is to try to work out who are the good virtuous guys working for the benefit of chess, and who are the scoundrels working for some other nefarious objective. On the whole it is virtuous people on both sides of the debate and the difference is how they want to achieve their goals. Do we want to be more successful internationally? Yes, we all do. Should we raise membership fees to do it? Opinions vary.

In my model the EJCOA is one of the players when decisions need to be made by the Junior Director, so it can't decide how the referee is appointed. Apart from anything else, if it does this cycle repeats with some other party considering itself the one unfairly treated.

My first though was the the ECF Governance committee appoints referees. But maybe I am looking for something else such as bids process as Mike Gunn proposed. I particularly care about processes when people are paid because I think that makes it more important that it is done correctly.

Post Reply