Greetings, Peter & Ginny.

In relation to the translation of documents, my essential point was that in
my view, the issue is less one of which language to use and more one of
understanding that North American approaches may not resonate with non-North
American audiences, thereby losing the "attraction" factor and defeating the
purpose of translating in the first place.

In my view, we must seek to understand differences and then strategically
map out a way forward that includes appropriate communications.  Some of
that may mean marketing tools in various languages. That does not, in my
opinion, mean that everything needs to be translated.  Neither does it mean
that nothing should be!

Good idea to have more downloadable publications.  Take a look at what the
ICA, IRMT and various archives sites provides for free.

To the language point...I don't argue the point of English being a lingua
franca (nice juxtaposition, that).  However, I do not that my feeble
Cantonese "hello. I have not time to learn Cantonese, it is so difficult!"
has opened doors to conversations in English that never would have happened
but for my feeble gesture in Cantonese.  That's the point of a few, well
considered communications in different languages.  Don't pretend to meet
everyone's language needs, but give enough to show there's content worth
having so that others come in to join in the professional conversation,
likely in English.  Again, it is not "either--or".  This should be tempered
with the fact that there is a huge Spanish speaking audience in the USA.
French may have better play in Canada and abroad, but that audience is also
huge including many of the old French protectorate and colonial countries. A
European group that contacted me included Italians, Germans, Swiss, etc. and
the language of discussion was French and English. The communication is
sometimes error prone. But there is a world of difference between risking
use of English in an environment in which the errors are forgiven and the
effort made to find understanding, and an environment in which "they" should
learn how to talk. Some inclusion of non-English languages communicates that
ARMA is the former, not latter, kind of environment.  Now the hard
part....is it?

I agree with Peter that alternative means of content delivery should be
used.  We'll be exploring this in our own local education issues - it makes
perfect sense to do so to bridge distance and other gaps for ARMA.  Again,
my essential concern is less about means (though these are important) than
strategy.  The pricing and delivery should be about attraction, raising
awareness, building understanding, etc. so as to increase the market in the
long term. Short term financial payback will not reap the same gains, IMHO.
Also, in terms of attraction, note that international members cannot
participate in post seminar dialogues without some personal cost that North
Americans do not face, or face to a lesser degree.  One approach may be to
say "if they want the content, they have to be prepared to pay--either in
dollars, or by staying up to 3:00 a.m. to contribute their best thinking in
discussions, and to heck with cultural sensitivity, etc."  Another is to do
the hard work of figuring out alternatives to maximize opportunity. It would
be great to see ARMA tackle some of these challenges.  How do we support
that? For members working in multi-nationals, there could be valuable
spin-offs if their companies recognize them as having potential for
international posts. (Of course, this speaks to certain membership
demographics, a matter for a different thread.) Perhaps seeing and
communicating the values is one way to open doors.

The point about US government employees finding it difficult to get approval
for non-US venues is a valid and important one.  Same thing in Canada.
Going to a US conference requires approval for international travel, an even
greater hurdle than out-of-province travel.  Even harder for countries
abroad. Still, it's about accepting the status quo or seeking alternatives
that keep the best of the status quo while expanding the benefits.  The
solution is unlikely to be "either--or" . There is a lot happening in the KM
arena in Singapore, a nascent interest (not without considerable challenges)
in Hong Kong, a burgeoning ERM focus in Australia. This is a region that
offers opportunity.  (But, bear in mind that it can be just as prohibitive
within the region to go to Melbourne or Sydney as to Chicago or Montreal.)

All challenges...that makes for opportunity, right?!  Great to discuss,
forgive any typos pls.  Joi geen! (till later ;-)

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance