Page 6

NCS Currents Sept 2016

NCS Board of Directors Selection Process: Q&A with NCS Nominating Committee Chair & Immediate Past President Romer Geocadin, MD By Robert Kowalski, MD and Romer Geocadin, MD q&a The NCS is in the midst of selecting four new members for four-year terms on the organization’s 28-member Board of Directors. An initial slate of candidates for these positions was nominated by NCS membership and finalists were selected partly by the Nominating Committee and partly by preliminary ballot distributed to NCS members in July. Position statements of the final candidates were then presented to the membership for a final vote. New board members will be endorsed at the NCS 2016 Annual Meeting in National Harbor, MD during the Business Meeting. Since its inception, the NCS has had a Board of Directors made up predominantly of physicians with primary specialty training in Neurology. For the present selection of at-large positions on the board, the Robert Kowalski, MD Nominating Committee chooses half of the finalist candidates and the NCS membership chooses the other half by email vote. This full nomination and voting process was described in the June 2016 issue of Currents. Something new for the process this year, the Nominating Committee was given the authority to consider advanced practice providers and non-neurologist physicians as a part of the selection process to ensure adequate representation. Romer Geocadin, MD, FNCS, Nominating Committee Chair & Immediate Past President of the NCS has agreed to explain the new board selection process. RK: Could you please explain the rationale behind the board candidate selection process, with some finalists chosen by membership and others identified by the Nominating Committee? RG: The success of the NCS has been in large part due to its ability to embrace members from every specialty and medical-related profession interested in neurocritical care. We strive to capture this diversity at the top leadership, which at the same time respects the wishes of the membership. As such, the membership is given the privilege to select candidates from a broad list of candidates. The candidates with the highest votes are added to the final ballot. The Nominating Committee reviews the results and the composition of the candidates to ensure that the diversity of the NCS is reflected in the final ballot. Based on this, the Nominating Committee finalizes the ballot and presents it back to the general membership for the final vote. You have said there is a need to diversify the makeup of the NCS board in terms of professional background and training. Could you please elaborate on your thoughts on this? The NCS was initially formed by a group of neurologists that practiced critical care. During the early years, efforts were made to be very inclusive of anyone with a professional interest and training related to neurocritical care. The NCS became a more vibrant society with the participation of a variety of medical specialists (e.g., physicians trained in Neurosurgery, Emergency Medicine, Internal Medicine, Pulmonary Medicine, Surgery, Pediatrics, as well as nurses, pharmacists, therapists, researchers and others). The membership composition reflects the nature of neurocritical care practice in the real world. Given that neurologists started the NCS, the majority of members are still physicians with neurology-based training. Because of this majority, the Board of Directors is predominantly composed of physicians with neurology-based training. While those elected are very qualified and deserving of the position, I feel that the NCS will be richer if we are able to harness the wisdom and experience of the diversity of our membership. What specific benefits do you see for broadening the medical specialty and health care backgrounds represented on the Board of Directors? By broadening the composition of the Board of Directors, we will be able to better serve not only the needs of the dominant groups but also the needs of those in smaller groups. As the membership of the NCS is diversifying, we need to understand issues that relate to the specific types of clinical practice, regulatory demands, educational needs, and service needs for each particular group that makes up the society. Could you please give examples of the types of backgrounds you think should be represented on the NCS board and why? The present board is made up of physicians with three nurses and three pharmacists. While all of the physicians on the board have been trained in neurocritical care, the majority have a neurology background. It will be great to have a more diversified board with members from Anesthesiology, Emergency Medicine, Internal Medicine, Surgery, and Neurosurgery. Do you think there is a need to encourage geographic diversity – either within the U.S. or internationally – on the board, and if so, could you explain the rationale for this? Yes, geographic diversity is important and should be encouraged. We have moved the NCS in this direction. We have amended our Romer Geocadin, MD 6


NCS Currents Sept 2016
To see the actual publication please follow the link above