IAPT - Get a grip!

[Piers Trehane]

IN DEFENCE OF THE IAPT SECRETARY

Dear Vicki and everyone else who has mailed me letters such as that
reproduced below (I have received 18 such letters so far, so my finger
has been hitting the delete button on my e-mailer quite a lot this last
week!).

I must say that I find it most alarming that these messages are being
thrown around the world to those members and non-members of IAPT
fortunate enough to have e-mail facilities.  To find what amounts to an
"internal matter" for IAPT banded around through TAXACOM and other
newsgroups does little to improve the image of our Association.  I would
not mind so much if the facts being presented were facts indeed, but to
read so much misinformation and to perceive so much professional
jealousy, not to mention talk of "revolt" does not give the individuals
within the botanical society a very good image I fear.  Some of us have
made a great effort to restore biological "taxonomy" onto the world
political agenda and this excercise in self-flagellation represents a
slap in the face to our efforts.

I shall copy this letter in e-mail form to TAXACOM and to a few others
who I know do not subscribe to that listerver as well as asking Vicki to
mount the formatted version on the alternative website.

I attended the last Botanical Congress in Yokohama and that is where I
first met Werner Greuter and a number of others with whom I have had the
privilege to work on a number of projects since.  Indeed, when one of
the members appointed to the Editorial Committee for the Tokyo Code was
not able to take up his position, Greuter invited me to partake in the
editorial meetings in Berlin.  Watching Greuter at work in Yokohama and
Berlin was most revealing: what impresses me most is the sheer volume of
work that he continues to undertake to such an incredibly high standard.
As a perfectionist, he expects the same standards in work submitted to
him.  Workaholics such as Greuter, while producing hopefully high-value
output, also have to be careful of how they allocate their time: it
amazes me that he does all the things he does for the international
community while still being director of a major institution such as
Berlin-Dahlem Botanical Garden and Museum.  He must have very
understanding and supporting overlords and IAPT is only one organisation
that benefits from his institution=92s support.  As many will know, the
reason Greuter gets so much done appears to be because his habit is to
work really late, as those who receive e-mails from him can testify by
looking at the time on the documents.  How he maintains his considerable
sense of humour under the weight of his work-load is a cause of
wonderment to me.

Of course there are dangers in allowing any one person to do too much:
ill-health or worse can cause chaos amongst those relying on the output
of that one person.  Whilst we should appreciate the Herculean work-load
that Greuter undertakes on everyone=92s behalf, we should also be careful
with allowing our designated tasks to be carried on the shoulders of one
person.  Before anyone comments "he should delegate the work-load", I
would like to share with everyone the adage taught to me at an early
age: "Delegate, but with supervision".  These were wise words that I try
to remember.  Greuter does this; although some delegatees might complain
about the level of supervision, the results come close to perfection as
those familiar with the publications associated with Greuter will
testify.

This may all sound a bit sycophantic and I should make it clear that
Greuter and I do not see eye-to-eye on a number of issues, but I can
testify to this: if you make a reasoned point with Greuter, he will
accept that point and embrace it wholeheartedly.  I have seen him do
this a number of times and the rate at which he can change tack is=20
quite astonishing.  Of course, he is known not to spend his limited
resource (time) on time-wasting activities, nor does he "suffer fools
gladly" a trait that many of us share and which is not the best feature
of human behavior (even fools have their good points).

Now let me make a few comments which may give a different perspective to
what is going on.  First, some comments on the latest round-robin letter
itself which I reproduce here:

>"Dear friends and colleagues:
>The letter that follows is self-explanatory. Please read it and, if you
>agree that there is a serious problem in IAPT, do two things: 1. Send
>Vicki Funk a message saying that you are willing to have your name
>associated with our protest to Greuter. 2. Forward this message to
>other plant taxonomists who should see it. If you are going to do
>anything, please do it *today*, because time is very short. If we are
>to have any hope of persuading Greuter to allow meaningful choice in
>the imminent IAPT elections, we must show him in the next few days that
>a large number of the members of IAPT are opposed to his entrenched and
>self-perpetuating autocracy. If you have already received this letter
>from another source, I apologize for the duplication.  [signature
>removed by the present author]
>*******************************************************
>
>IAPT ALTERNATIVE WEBSITE
>Update 10 August 1998
>URGENT REQUEST FOR YOUR SUPPORT

>Dear Colleague:
>You may have received a mailing a few weeks ago notifying you of an
>IAPT Alternative Website and asking for nominations for Officers and
>Council members for IAPT.  The response to this request was gratifying
>and this letter is written to accomplish three things.  First, to thank
>you for your input, second, to bring you up to date on what has
>transpired, and third, to make an URGENT REQUEST FOR YOUR SUPPORT.
>
>I.  The Nominations for IAPT Officers and Council.
>One nomination was received for each of the Officer positions and it
>was felt that these individuals constituted a group that has the
>interest and the institutional support necessary to carry IAPT into the
>next century.  Also, many nominations were received for the Council
>positions.  Several drafts of the proposed council nominations have=20
>been circulated, and you may have seen another longer version.  Perhaps
>some explanation of how the list below came about is in order.  There
>are only 10 positions on the Council and if many individuals are
>nominated, there is the possibility that it would split the vote.  As
>it is there are 13 people and it was felt that the number could go no
>higher.  Since nearly everyone nominated was experienced and willing to
>run for Council, the final list was a delicate balance between the
>country of residence of those nominated and their institution.  It is
>regrettable that it was not possible to include everyone on the ballot.
>It seems likely that all nominated individuals will be asked to=20
>serve in some capacity at a future date. Your interest and support are
>appreciated.  It is hoped that you will be able to vote for the
>nominees listed below.
>
>Nominated for:         Name                    Country of Residence
>
>President              Sir Ghillean Prance     (UK)
>Vice-President         Teuvo Ahti              (Finland)
>Secretary              Patricia Holmgren       (USA)
>Treasurer              Marshall Crosby         (USA)
>Admin.  of Finances    Judy West               (Australia)
>Council                Fred Barrie             (USA)
>Council                Steve Blackmore         (UK)
>Council                Herve Burdet            (Switzerland)
>Council                Vincent Desmoulins      (Belgium)
>Council                Enrique Forero          (Colombia)
>Council                Peter Linder            (South Africa)
>Council                David Mabberley         (Australia)
>Council                Anthony Orchard         (Australia)
>Council                Sebsebe D.              (Ethiopia)
>Council                Sy Sohmer               (USA)
>Council                Peter Stevens           (USA)
>Council                Tod Stuessy             (Austria)
>Council                Warren Wagner           (USA)

Comment: Are we quite sure that all these people were members of IAPT =20
when nominated?  A quick check of the membership list published on the=20
"alternative IAPT" website itself seems to show that two names are not
so listed!  Also, are we absolutely certain that all those people have
agreed to be put forward in this manner?

Maybe Vicki & Co should have had written OKs from these people to put
their names up on the website and maybe they should have checked that
the nominees were members in good standing etc.

I could also ask "Which apparently secret group put up these names?  Who=20
decided who were the good guys and who were the not-so-good guys?"  I=20
would really wish to know more about the process whereby the names of
these great and good were chosen.

On another, more emotive point, we will find that people in Europe and
Asia will find this list extremely insulting: it is dominated by 9
Americans who along with 3 Australian residentials alone make up half
the proposed nominations.  Does this seem very credible/democratic for
what is supposed to an international association?  There is a great deal
of traditional taxonomic work being done in the Far East and in Eastern
Europe - not to mention Western Europe.  Is the "alternative IAPT"
attempting to disenfranchise these groups - or is this ad-hoc body just
Americo-centric?

>II.  The Ballot
>The above list was submitted on the 29th of July (nomination of
>Treasurer was on the 31st).  No acknowledgment of the list was received
>from Berlin, but a few days later Dr. Patricia Holmgren received a
>phone call from the Secretary, Dr. Werner Greuter.  He informed her
>that the Officers would not allow anyone to run against him for
>Secretary nor would they allow anyone else to be nominated for
>Treasurer other than his colleague Dr. B. Zimmer, the current
>Treasurer.  As an historical point, while it is true that in the past
>candidates for the offices of the Secretary and Treasurer have often
>run unopposed, it is also true that there have been instances where
>more than one candidate was nominated (Dr. Greuter was an
>unsuccessfully candidate for Secretary in 1975).  Dr. Greuter then
>asked Dr. Holmgren to run for President instead, and suggested that he
>would put three people on the ballot for President (not including
>Prance).

Comment: I sure hope you have the facts right all through here,
otherwise this could be seen as libelous!  [My disclaimer coming up "By
re-circulating the original letter within the text of this reply, I have
no intention of perpetuating any libelous act embodied in the original
letter."]

Also, it has to be the _duty_ of the Executive to ensure that
whoever takes on the Secretaryship (i.e., the working seat of IAPT) is
in a position to fulfill all the commitments that it entails.  Whilst I
am not involved with this election process in any way, common sense
would tell me that such a last minute application would have to be
turned down on the grounds of wise management.  _That_ is why we elect
the Officers - to look after _all_ of our collective interests.

I would like to think that when it comes to the time for the
Secretaryship to "move on", an exhaustive search would be made starting
at least three years beforehand to find another home for the Secretary
and which would ensure adequate funding and security for the position
into the future.  Remember also that due announcement about all the IAPT
elections was made last February in Taxon 47(1): 197. 1998.  The rules
of the IAPT constitution for these elections have so far been followed
faithfully throughout.

>Dr. Holmgren has told us that she has no interest in running for
>President, and she has reconfirmed her willingness to be nominated for
>Secretary.  Dr. Greuter also mentioned that he was trying to finalize
>the ballot form as soon as this week, which would apparently give us
>minimal time to convince him to accept the above nominations for
>Officer.  It seems likely that, unless he changes his mind, the ballots=20
>will not include the names of Prance for President, Holmgren for
>Secretary, and Crosby for Treasurer.

Comment: This is hardly fair! Plenty of time has been made available for
the election process so far and the timetable has been properly
published for all members to see whether they are on e-mail or not (in
TAXON, as above).  The Secretary has to keep an even hand in these
matters and _MUST NOT_ make special cases for those active e-mailers.
Remember, large numbers of paid-up members do not have the "luxury" of
e-mail.

>Further, it appears Dr. Greuter may try to nominate several people for
>the other Officers and Council positions, which may result in a divided
>vote and so reduce the chance of the individuals on the above list
>being elected.

Comment: Oh come on!  As I am sure the other officers will testify,
Greuter does not act alone in scrutinizing nominations for Council and I
am sure that other suggestions for nominations have been duly received.
As for the divided vote, the "alternative IAPT" have already done this
by proposing more candidates than there are places.

>III.  URGENT REQUEST FOR YOUR SUPPORT
>We believe that this reported refusal to nominate Prance, Holmgren, and
>Crosby is unfortunate and indicative of the fact that IAPT is operating
>with no accountability to the membership.=20

Comment: leaving aside the nomination for Prance (President usually
being largely an honorific figurehead), my comments above might
illustrate that the Executive Committee might well be judged as acting
in the best interests of the _total_ membership.

>It is this lack of due process and democracy that has so irritated many
>of the members of IAPT and has likely led to the decrease in
>membership.

Comment: this is highly debatable - one might easily suggest that IAPT
is far too focused on nomenclature (minority interest stuff) and that it
should be seen to be more actively engaged in true taxonomic projects.
Then again it has been argued that "taxonomy" is a dirty word in the
brave new world of molecular biology.  There are a number of other
similar societies and associations which have a more focused membership
rationale.  How many of us wish to belong (or can afford to belong) to
everything?  We all allocate our time and money to activities that most
benefit us as individuals.

>The website was established to increase membership participation in
>IAPT, and in the process it has exposed yet another instance of
>disregard for the wishes of the membership and the lack of any type of
>checks and balances in IAPT (e.g., no nominating committee for officers
>and council members).=20

Comment:  Hey, Hey! Look up Art. 13 of the Constitution.  It explicitly
says (my emphasis) that "it shall be the _duty_ of the Executive
Committee to present for mail balloting by the membership a list of
candidates for the officers and councilorships of the Association prior
to each International Botanical Congress.  The secretary shall
circularize the membership to obtain suggested nominees _for the
guidance of_ the Executive Committee".  This is what I referred to
earlier as had been explained in the February 1998 TAXON.

If you don=92t like the system - fine but don=92t blame the person who is
charged with keeping within the Constitution - get the Constitution
changed through the proper means.

As for the comment "The website was established to increase membership=20
participation in IAPT", it appears to me that the website was set up as
a way of launching a personal attack on Greuter and to give a forum to
those who not like the projects that he is mandated to undertake on
behalf of the botanical community.  To do so in such a public manner,
involving those who have no direct connection with IAPT (as members)
looks pretty damn disgraceful to me. (But then, I am very European!)

>All of the power is in the hands of a few individuals.  Indeed, Dr.
>Greuter alone holds nearly all positions of power (Secretary of IAPT,
>Chairman of the General Committee, Editor of the Association*s journal
>Taxon, Editor of Regnum Vegetabile, Rapporteur General, Secretary of
>the Bureau of Nomenclature, member of the Nominating Committee which
>appoints all other committees and the Rapporteur General, and Chairman
>of the Editorial Committee for the Code), and there is little recourse
>except revolt.

Comment: "Revolt"? what on earth do you mean "revolt"?  Revolution is
for those without the imagination or ability to cause change by
democratic means.  It is an act of desperation by those who see time and
the due progress of any democratic process itself as an obstacle to
their objectives.  No one is holding a loaded gun here.  IAPT _does_
have democratic means for change and accountability within its
constitution.  Use it, or be damned as being undemocratic in your
approach.  This plea for anarchy within an international institution is
well out of order.

Ask yourselves "Who gave Greuter that power?"  Let=92s look at this list
of "power positions" and get it separated a bit (in the order given
above) to put the real-life situation into perspective. I hope I am not
wrong in my facts here - if I am, I=92m sure Greuter amongst others will
correct me pretty swiftly.

Secretary of IAPT,  - Greuter was elected by the membership of IAPT=20
according to IAPT rules.

Chairman of the General Committee, - Greuter was proposed as such by the=20
Nominating Committee, but this is a completely honorific position since
both the Rapporteur-General and Secretary of IAPT are ex-officio members
of the General Committee (See Code, Div. III.2(1).

Editor of the Association=92s journal Taxon,  (actually he is Co-editor) =
-
Taxon is operated by the International Bureau for Plant Taxonomy and=20
Nomenclature (and old-fashioned term for what is effectively the
Secretariat) according to the IAPT Constitution Art. 14.

Editor of Regnum Vegetabile,  All publications of IAPT are run by the
Bureau mentioned above.   Greuter therefore _has_ to supervise such
publications and his personal input is his way of ensuring excellence.

Rapporteur General, - Elected by the Nomenclature Section of
International Botanical Congress upon recommendation of the ad-hoc
Nominating Committee.  Greuter was elected by the Tokyo Nomenclature
Section until the Section meeting in St. Louis (see below).

Secretary of the Bureau of Nomenclature, - No such officer (see Division
III.3 of the Code) This Bureau is appointed by the organisers of the
current Congress with 4 defined officers of which the Rapporteur-General
is one (actually the only one not in fact elected by the current
organising commitee, but by the previous Congress).

Member of the Nominating Committee which appoints all other committees=20
and the Rapporteur General - This is an ad-hoc committee appointed by
the Nomenclature Section at each Congress  to enable a single act to be
carried out (see Taxon 42(4): 923-924. 1993).  It does not "appoint" -
it approves nominations, the elections being done by the Section with
ratification by the Congress.  Greuter was on this Committee by virtue
of being a member of the Bureau of Nomenclature. Note: there is no
current nominating committee established - it only lives for a few days!
(see Englera 14:10 & 248. 1994).

Chairman of the Editorial Committee for the Code, - The Code Division
III.2 (8) explicitly states that the Rapporteur General has to be
chairman.

So Greuter has two elected primary officerships: IAPT members elected
him the Secretary of the Association and the Nomenclature Section (thus
the Congress itself) elected him as the Rapporteur General. Very
democratic!  Two quite different sets of people elected him into two
distinctly separate offices.  This separation is made clear in Division
III.2 (1) of the Code.

To recap: the Secretary of IAPT, as well as being empowered to operate
the day-to-day running of IAPT (that=92s what secretaries do - run
administrative matters), is responsible for all IAPT publications.=20

The Rapporteur-Generalship is a quite separate position charged with
getting the Code prepared and maintained.

>We Ask That You Do Several Things:
>1.  Send a message to V. Funk (contact information below) and ask that
>your name be listed on the website indicating your support for
>competition for all offices in the upcoming IAPT elections.  Even
>better would be to write a short note to be posted on the website.  You
>can also write or email Dr. Greuter directly (wg at zedat.fu-berlin.de).
>[Participation by non-IAPT members is welcome since these issues affect=20
>the whole of taxonomy] 2. Pass this letter along to everyone you think
>may be interested. 3.  Make sure that your dues are paid for 1998 so
>that you can vote in this election. 4.  Vote for the individuals listed
>above if they are on the ballot form. If their names are not on the
>ballot form you should request anew ballot.

Comment: there is no constitutional basis for asking for a new ballot.

>We ignore this situation at our own peril.  At stake is the future of
>IAPT and international cooperation on nomenclature issues.  Time is
>very important because decisions on the content of the ballot form may
>very well be made in the next few days.  Please take a few minutes to
>register your opinion on this most recent example of flagrant disregard
>for the wishes of the membership of IAPT.

Comment: you mean, of course, _some_ of the membership of IAPT.

>Signed:  C. Anderson, W. Anderson, R. Brummitt, V. Funk, and L. Skog

Final comments:  OK, we have a situation which does not work in these
days of instant communication.  We (yes, us that voted) have loaded one
individual with far too much work and responsibility.  Maybe we should
learn from our mistakes.  At the next Congress, those at the
Nomenclature Section should make more effort to see that the right
person is elected to be Rapporteur-General for the following period.
IAPT itself needs to be dragged into readiness for the 21st century and
this can only be done by revising its own Constitution.

Forget "revolution".  The democratic processes are still safely in
place.  Use it as all reasonable human beings should in this day and
age.

And stop this vilification of Greuter and his cohorts.  This guy has
worked hard and long for us: he should damn well be thanked and not
treated in this conniving and disgraceful way.

I  have deliberately not commented on the controversial projects that
Greuter is associated with and I fear that the misinformation being
propagated on these is the _real_ reason behind why this "alternative
IAPT" has been established.  These projects have been criticised by some
in letters on the "alternative IAPT" website.  I plan to comment on
these in another place.

Note: this response is entirely my initiative and I share no
responsibility with anyone else for its content. Please understand that
in making this response, I am making a plea for the democratic process
itself and that I am not making any personal counter-attacks on any
particular individual.

Piers Trehane,
15th August, 1998

--=20
Piers Trehane

Address:
13 Westborough,
Wimborne,
Dorset, BH21 1LT
United Kingdom

Tel: +44 1202 840401
E-mail: piers at indhort.demon.co.uk