The IT Skeptic - Comments for "Financial transparency of the itSMF: let's have some."

Ken's still there

skeptic — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 20:59:35 +0000

Ken's still there and that's his role. I don't see the link with the CEO question. Or do you mean where is he in some specific governance context, such as the itSMF USA election governance issue?

Thanks Keith So itSMFI has 2

Visitor — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 18:12:09 +0000

Thanks Keith
So itSMFI has 2 CEOs -- both are under contract. One is for Strategy and one is for Operations. So for clarity to the members both must be listed under the appropriate page under the itSMFI About Us page. What is troubling is that it gives the appearance that itSMF UK, who clearly manage the website under contract, have seen fit to include the only the Operational CEO who is a UK Officer. It gives a bad impression -- but I'm sure it actually is a simple oversight and because of the clarity that was promised it will be rectified.
So that there are no future misunderstandings the Governance of itSMF must follow the principle that itSMFI MUST be independent and separate from any Chapter and its operations to ensure that it can deal with all Global issues and Chapters in a level and objective fashion.

(PS What happened to Ken Wendle whose role on the About Page is Governance?)
Thanks

ATTENTION all readers who are itSMF members

skeptic — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 23:32:05 +0000

That is precisely question 4 above. I encourage all readers who are itSMF members (most of you I assume) to ask that and any other questions of your local chapter. Ask them formally and ask your chapter executive to pass them officially to itSMFI for response. If that doesn't work email the chairman direct: chair@itsmf.org.

I'm just a troublemaking nutter living on "the last two rocks before you step off the planet". I can safely be ignored. A groundswell of queries from multiple chapters cannot.

Transparency

Visitor — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 17:19:36 +0000

The itSMFI has always worked in a stealth mode. Information has alway been slow to come from them, and when it does come out, it has been drug out. Keith seems to have opened that door and perhaps can make some changes in the perception that the international is worthy of support. That being said, what's going on and what can be expected it the months before the next AGM?

Aren't elections due this year? Have nominations surfaced, or will they do it the way the US does it, the old fashion Chicago style.

Sure - Clarity and careful are my middle names!

KeithAldis — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 15:26:45 +0000

I'm happy to oblige if in fact you are correct, but you are not. Not sure where you are getting your information from but here are the facts anyhow. I speak from a position of authority on this.

My role is as Company Secretary and Chief Executive Officer for itSMF International. I'm titled as Chief Executive Officer - Operations. The itSMFI has an agreement with the UK Chapter which is for the "provision of services" to itSMFI and this has recently been extended to April 2008. It specifically includes the role of Chief Executive Officer (clause 2.1 to 2.3 - if you are a Board member who has written the commentary above).

itSMFI also employ a consultant under contract, who is helping the organisation to look at strategic development and he often goes under the title of Chief Executive Officer - Strategy.

I have been tasked as Company Secretary by the Chairman, to update and modernise the governance structure. This will be discussed at the Board in July and if approved put to the chapters either at an EGM or at the AGM.

I am also CEO of the UK Chapter.

Am I wasting my time giving you this information?

Yours in ITSM!

Keith

Can we be clear and careful

Visitor — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 10:36:41 +0000

Can we be clear and careful on roles here. Keith is Company Secretary of ITSMF International. He is not CEO of International. He is CEO of itSMF UK. International has a remit to act on global issues that affect all Chapters. It would be interesting to discover what Governance it has in place so that its officers are a) selected in an open and transparent way (for example the recent appointment of the Company Secretary might be a good one to start with...Sorry Keith!!!!) and b) that International Officers don't find themselves in a position of a conflict of interest with their operational roles and financial responsibilities within a chapter.
(Keith I think the confusion arises from the International 'About us page' which notes your position as 'CEO & Company Secretary. Please can you ask your colleagues in UK to amend website to reflect just the role you have in International Board as this is the International Board page? It's causing a bit of confusion and I'm sure you wouldn't want that!! If the Chapter CEOs are to be listed (why not?) then ALL of them should be listed)

Duh make that six

skeptic — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 09:04:26 +0000

there are six global members. Did i see five or did I imagine it...?

So the figure is only out by $80k, not $120k. As a reader has pointed out that pales into insignificance next to the sponsorship funds being handled for the V3 rollout.

Add in five sponsors at over a hundred thousand dollars each

Visitor — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 23:09:59 +0000

No they won't. Turnover will far exceed a million. You have forgotten the V3 rollout. Add in five sponsors at over a hundred thousand dollars each. I imagine they as much as anyone will be looking for better financial reporting this year!!!

My numbers will be $120k too high for this year

skeptic — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 23:04:11 +0000

My numbers will be $120k too high for this year since there are now five global members instead of eight. So a million might be a stretch, but half a million is still probable. So I still stand by the original giuesstimate of "half a million to a million dollars"... assuming everyone pays up.

Much better

Visitor — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 20:51:34 +0000

Hey come on - give the guy a break. We are already getting more information from the new CEO of ITSMF on its activities than we've ever had before. Continual sniping and demanding will not make things happen any quicker. Do not let your behaviour get in the way of something positive - that is just being churlish.

Well done Skeptic and well done Keith. More information still required but keep the blogging up.

Incognito

Visitor — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 17:19:29 +0000

The reality is that they are a corporation in disguise. Money drives them.

Where does that money go? Where do you think, one way or another.

It is high time people saw through this charade and opted for a genuine open route.

We need more

Visitor — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 13:40:47 +0000

Where is the last audited itSMFi financial statement? Why isn't it posted?

I reckon my numbers are pretty close for the current year

skeptic — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 11:49:42 +0000

Perhaps. But I reckon my numbers are pretty close for the current year as the 5% tythe really cuts in, V3 sales take off, new revenue streams come on line, and the global members pay up.

And absolute figures aside, I still think we should see the breakdowns of how it came in and how it went out.

Now! Now!

KeithAldis — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 08:00:24 +0000

Skep.

Beer coaster maths is great but very rarely accurate, and certainly not after a few beers! Have you been drinking again?

itSMFI is a company which has to publish its accounts at the UK's Companies House like any other UK based company. These accounts are a matter of public record and they are be freely available to anyone wishing to pay Companies House the fee for getting hold of them. This is true of itSMF UK and any company based in the UK which is probably why, we have the fairest legal system in the world.

We shall likely put these financial reports onto the website in future, together with the Chairman's report to which you point and this should save you the £10 or so, fee that Companies House charges for producing them for you.

But just to let you know in 2006 itSMFI's turnover was in fact £77,098 (split roughly equally between Global membership and Individual Chapter subscriptions/levies) with administrative expenses of £20,161 and an additional income of £86 for Bank interest. It actually made a small surplus before tax of £57,023. No dividends have been paid and surpluses were planned into itSMFI's 2007 business delivery.

The 2007 recently independently audited accounts (which are going through the process of approval before submission to Companies House as they must - and so, are not a yet a matter of public record) looks like showing a small operating loss.

This seemingly up and down pattern is natural for this type of organisation.