August 2017: Developments to the Eitingon Model
Virginia Ungar



Dear Colleagues,

I want to take the opportunity to share with you all directly an important decision taken by the previous Board in Buenos Aires on 23 July 2017. 

This was an “in-principle decision to permit a frequency of ‘3 to 5 sessions per week’ in the IPA’s Eitingon Training Model, and to delegate to the Executive Committee the authority to review and approve any amendments to the Procedural Code that are required to reflect this change.” 

At my first Board meeting as President of the IPA on 31 July there was a discussion on how to give reality to this decision. 

The Board noted that the IPA’s current training procedures would remain in effect until the Board agreed specific concretisations of the previous Board’s in-principle decision.

It was agreed to create a Task Force that would take forward the Board decision, with a view to having the group report at the Board’s January 2018 meeting.

The Executive Committee then met on 1 August and agreed to constitute Task Forces in two separate stages:

i)               initially, four Board members (a Chair, plus one rep from each region) would be appointed and tasked with presenting proposals for Procedural Code amendments by the time of the January 2018 Board meeting;
 
ii)              after the Procedural Code amendments are agreed, 6 additional non-Board members (2 from each region) will be appointed and this group will be tasked with developing proposals regarding how the IPA can work with its Constituent Organisations in the light of these new minimum standards.
 
The initial Task Force will be requested to make any recommendations to the Executive Committee by the end of November, in time for review and for any proposals that may require Board approval to be made to the Board meeting scheduled for January 2018.

Further details on the scope and membership of task forces will be proposed and communicated over the coming months.

I was not a voting member of the Board until 30 July. However, past President Stefano Bolognini very generously allowed Sergio Nick and I to be part of the executive and officer meetings over the last 12 months.

I am therefore very aware of the range and depth of discussions and representations which have taken place on this issue.

I know too that this is a matter which colleagues feel very strongly about and which has had the potential to be deeply conflictual. 

I am encouraged, however, by our capacity both at the Board and in the wider conversations with Society Presidents to disagree and yet create a container for reflection and constructive debate.

In recommending membership of the two task forces, I am keen to ensure we benefit from diversity and balance in hearing the many perspectives, wisdom and insights that must shape making the decision, for which there was a large majority in favour, a reality.

I want to assure all colleagues 

1)     that at this moment absolutely nothing has changed about the minimum standards acceptable under the IPA’s rules. 
 
2)     that we will move forward in a spirit of sensitivity and transparency seeking a solution which will blend harmoniously the differing needs and realities.