FAQ's

This pages responds to questions that have been asked at various meetings and presentations.

Please send questions by email. I will respond by email and, if the question is of general interest, also post the response on this page.

Q. (From India) After the last years increase in the Annual Subscriptions rate for Student members, I have noticed a steep decrease in the number of student member renewal. Also most of the fresher hesitate to join IEEE.

Q. (From Germany) What is your position on the restriction of IEEE member services and benefits due to the rules of the U.S. OFAC group? What would you do about this if elected?

Q. (Mexico) The IEEE is global, yet all its material is in English. What is your opinion of increasing the number of languages that the IEEE uses to communicate with members and professionals?

Q. (United States) What is your view on expanding the number of eligible members of IEEE, for example, considering IT workers?

Q. (United States) How do you think that IEEE-USA can be more effective? Do you favor IEEE-USA becoming a separately incorporated 501(c)6 entity so that is can more effectively lobby on behalf of engineers in the US?

Q. What is your opinion on H1-B visas?

Q. (From India) After the last years increase in the Annual Subscriptions rate for Student members, I have noticed a steep decrease in the number of student member renewal. Also most of the fresher hesitate to join IEEE.

Response: This question has several important components.

First, it is indeed true that with the increase in student dues there was a drop off in Regions 7-10 and especially in Region 9 and 10.

History: The Board struggled with the question of how best to involve and keep students. At this point students have roughly the same services as regular members and if their university purchases one of our online packages the student may receive better access to technical material than regular members. Yet, when the students graduate they face a steep increase in member dues and little perceived increase in value. This has led to many students not retaining membership. (I should note that most members were students members and so after several years in the profession they appreciate the value of IEEE and rejoin.) Thus the Board felt that raising dues to more completely cover the cost of services to student members and to reduce the shock of regular member dues after graduation was a reasonable step.

I think that we are approaching the challenge of student membership incorrectly. First, we need to make IEEE a presence in every EE, ECE and EECS department in the world. We should have the IEEE logo on every department webpage with a link to appropriate services and and indication of what materials that university purchases from IEEE. We need our brand everywhere! Student, and all electro and information technology professionals should know that the IEEE is integral to every aspect of the profession.

With this branding should be free online access to a variety of IEEE products for students - all students, not just student members. In essence we should have free student membership with access to a select amount of material. We reduce to the cost to IEEE by offering online access (with an option to purchase print). There will need to be some controls but the barrier for student access should be very low (as should the cost to IEEE).

With this level of access for students I think that the value of IEEE as both an organization of fellow professionals and a provider of services would become clear and new graduates would be more likely to become regular members.

To attract new, fresh engineers to IEEE we need to have products and services that they want. We do not do a good job of letting students and new graduates know the power of personal and professional networking offered by the IEEE. We are also not good at developing new products to highlight the work on the latest technology that is being published in IEEE journals. The solution to the latter is more electronic products customized to user needs - alert services, for example. The solution to the former problem is a much greater connection between section and chapter activities and our universities - we need to demonstrate the power of our professional network.

Back

Q. (From Germany) What is your position on the restriction of IEEE member services and benefits due to the rules of the U.S. OFAC group? What would you do about this if elected?

Resonse: I would like to address this critical issue in several ways.

First, as you may be aware, I am the only candidate who has met directly with the leaders of OFAC. I was the lead volunteer pushing them to exempt our publications process from any restriction. With the help of dedicated staff and other key volunteers we received a ruling from OFAC which completely cleared our publication process from any oversight or restriction from OFAC. This was a major victory for the IEEE and its global members and was a major victory for all publishers in the U.S.

For my work on this particular victory I was endorsed for President-Elect both last year and this by S.U.T.A. This key organization of alumni and supporters of Sharif University of Technology is led by Fredun Hojbari who sent the email endorsements both last year and this year.

Second, I have been urging IEEE to push vigorously on the other membership issues which are still considered under OFAC jurisdiction. Current IEEE leadership is pursuing this with dedication and the intent to end any form of discrimination for our members around the world.

I fundamentally believe in IEEE as a global organization. I believe, also, that we should be a ethical and lawful organization in the countries in which we operate. When there is a conflict in these two positions my policy is, first, push as far possible in serving members while staying within the law. If this leads to reducing services then I am devoted to first working to gain exemption or permission for our activities from any restricting organization and if that fails to pursuing more vigorous means to gain services for our members. This includes, in the case of OFAC, to working with leaders in Congress to change the law and to the ultimate filing of lawsuits to challenge the legality of particular rulings.

I consider this a key issue and if elected would pursue the restoration of services to our members with vigor and dedication.

Back

Q. (India) Also I have heard an argument that IEEE provides less printed and online material (which is included with yearly subscription) compares to other professional institutions such as IEE, London. That is other than Spectrum IEEE does not provide any technical material for members.

Response: Although not a member of IEE, I am a member of a number of other professional organizations - e.g. ACM, SIAM, AES, ASEE. The amount of material I receive, for my basic membership, is essentially the same for all the organizations. The type of material is quite different. Most of the organizations provide something similar to the Proceedings of the IEEE as the basic publication. Their material is more highly technical than Spectrum. It has been the experience in the IEEE that the more diverse, topical and magazine-like presentations of Spectrum have the broadest appeal to our members and thus it has become the member publication. This broad circulation also helps the IEEE since the rates that advertisers pay is a function of circulation.

The IEEE, as most of the other professional organizations, offers more detailed technical material. For the IEEE, a wealth of material is available at very low prices by becoming a member of a technical society (also low in cost - I am a member of at least 6 societies). Through the societies we offer more technical material than any professional society I know of - we offer 30% of all the global technical material in our related fields.

It has been suggested that we offer a membership in a technical society as part of the regular IEEE membership. I would support exploring this option.

Back

Q. (Mexico) The IEEE is global, yet all its material is in English. What is your opinion of increasing the number of languages that the IEEE uses to communicate with members and professionals?

Response: I support the use of multiple languages in the IEEE. My approach would be to start with basic website, membership form, and other service related items and to provide them in multiple languages. The challenges are to add languages that support the maximum number of members and to not offend those whose language is not included.

I would begin with Spanish to provide service to Region 9 and portions of Region 8. I would then explore the choices for either Chinese or Japanese to find the best choice for these fast growing IEEE communities.

I would not begin to alter the database of published technical material. However, it is important to consider the addition of multiple languages in our searches.

In short, I believe we are indeed a global/transnational organization and we have to respond with support in multiple languages. This will not be cheap, nor necessarily easy, but we must begin.

Back

Q. (United States) What is your view on expanding the number of eligible members of IEEE, for example, considering IT workers?

Response: I would like to explore the question in a bit more detail. First, let us look at two of the major function of IEEE: professional networking and technical publication.

First networking. My own career has taken different twists and brought me into professional contact with people in law, journalism, medicine, business and government. Many of these people are highly technical, deal with difficult complex problems and were key in multidisciplinary projects I was part of. Having these individuals as part of my IEEE network would be valuable and connecting them to more traditional engineers would be useful for a number of reasons. This would argue for expanded membership.

Next publications: Our publication activities both reflect and serve a broad technical community. There is no requirement on the type of degree necessary to read and gain value from our publications and conferences. Furthermore, the nature of technology is to constantly change. The IEEE needs to respond to that change with different expanded publications and products. This would argue for a large range of potential technology contributors and it would seem, at best ungrateful, to happily publish material from an individual without also inviting them to join!

So, to the details: We simply have locked ourselves into to narrow a range of membership categories. We should consider membership categories that simply want to buy products - subscriptions at lower rates to our publications. There may be other types of membership for participating in technical society activities. And, of course, full membership, with additional privileges for voting and serving in various capacities. We must also consider the changing nature or the technical field and broaden the fields that are accepted immediately as full members.

This may lead to a the addition of IT professionals as members, as well as many others. We should consider how we serve and reflect the profession while maintaining our roots in electro- and information technology. The answer is by changing. I support exploring a wider range of membership options within the IEEE.

Back

Q. What is your opinion on H1-B visas?

Response: I feel that there are two problems with the current program. First, the potential need and allowable levels are not updated yearly (or more often). Second, there should be a very detailed description of the types of jobs that are covered and quotas for those types of jobs. The visa program itself is not inherently bad. However, the current implementation is too static, too hard to change and not specific enough.

It is certainly clear that given the current economic situation in the United States that the levels are not appropriate.

The H1-B and L1 programs should be constantly scrutinized by IEEE-USA and input on their impact brought to the attention of Congress.

Back

Response: First, I would like to say that I believe IEEE-USA is already doing a good job. There has been significant effort in developing policy statements, reports on technologies, recommendations with respect to visa issues. This is in addition to the leadership training that is done at the local level throughout the United States. Given that IEEE-USA is effective, how can we make it more so?

The chief challenge for IEEE-USA is that most IEEE US members are not active in IEEE-USA and more importantly IEEE, and therefore IEEE-USA, has a small percentage of working engineers, in our fields of interest, as members. There are many reasons for this. However, the result is that the United States is one of the few countries without a professional organization, recognized by the government, for electrical and computer engineers, computer scientists and allied professional.

My suggestion is that IEEE-USA immediately explore the idea of having affiliate members. These would be members who are not IEEE members, but only IEEE-USA and are dedicated to a professional organization in US. If IEEE-USA is able to attract a large number of affiliate members, it will have demonstrated its viability, raised its visibility and will already be more effective. At this stage IEEE-USA would be fiscally and organizationally able to become a separate, but related organization in a similar fashion as ISTO. This new organization could be a 501(c)6 and take a much greater role in lobbying for professional causes.

In summary, IEEE-USA is already effective, could become more effective by recruiting affiliate members and with a large number of affiliates could become a sucessful separate but related organization.

BACK

Q. How can IEEE and our profession gain the clout of the American Medical Association (AMA)? How can we change and upgrade the general perception the public has of engineers? What about the perception of engineers in the school system?

Response: (For readers outside the United States, the AMA is the US professional group of medical doctors and has developed an exceptional impact in influencing US policy on medical issues.)

I see these questions as tightly related. First, the public has little understanding of what an engineer does, of the contribution of engineers to the economy, and the importance of engineers and engineering in advancing the quality of life of people throughout the world. This is a travesty. We need to join with other engineering professional societies around the world to upgrade the perception and status of engineers and engineering. To accomplish this we need educational, public relations, policy, historic and economic materials. There are few television shows or movies where engineers play a key and positive role - this should change. The problem is so important that we should consider forming additional groups within IEEE to concentrate on the problem.

These changes will not take place overnight, but we must begin to address this in a serious way. Without a positive public view of engineers and engineering we will never gain the political status of the AMA in any country.

The basic changes in attitudes can best be addressed in the beginning school years. Currently children learn science, but not engineering. We must work with educators, text book writers and others. If we can supply them with appropriate material, ideas, and suggestions much can be accomplished. In areas of the world where there are education standards we should work to include engineering and technology in the standards not just math and science.

Engineers are hard working, generally not very public, and not trained in the level of public relations that we need. However, there are some exceptions and we should recruit these individuals. Furthermore, we are rich in companies that know how to promote their products and technology. The IEEE should partner with companies around the world in a program to promote engineering and engineers. (I want acknowledge and thank those companies that are currently active in this area.)

Back