All Fellow nominations are due May 1. Any submissions received after May 1 will be held for the following year’s cycle.  Please refer to the following documents for details.

Policy G02 02 Advancement to Fellow

Appendix A – Fellow Matrix of Requirements

Appendix B – Fellow Nomination Form

Basic Requirements

  • Fellows must be nominated by a member unit (section, forum/division or International Chapter).
  • A Fellow member must first be a Senior member for at least the past five calendar years.
  • Nominee must be a current member in good standing (i.e. dues have been paid).

Requirements for Fellow Nomination are:

  • Must be a Senior Member for at least the past five calendar years
  • 15 calendar years of active experience in quality related fields
  • Attain Distinction (outstanding contributions) in six proficiency areas:
    • Quality related work activities (technical experience)
    • Occupational work responsibility
    • Technical publications (Paper presentation, books, journals, etc.)
    • ASQ activities (Contribution, leadership role, etc.)
    • Professional affiliation other than ASQ (Leadership Role, Contribution)
    • Teaching quality related courses (outside of job responsibility)

Outstanding quality professionals are named Fellows by ASQ after a thorough evaluation by the Society’s Examining Committee and a vote by its Board of Directors.  The rank of Fellow is the highest honor the Society can bestow on its members.  (Honorary Member status is reserved for acknowledged eminent services to the quality profession and requires unanimous approval of the entire  Board of Directors.)

ASQ Fellow: More than just a Member Grade

Fellow Membership is an honor bestowed by other ASQ Members. An ASQ Fellow is an individual who has an established record of contributions, both to the quality profession and to the Society.

An Individual member of ASQ, representing the highest level of the quality profession,. deserving recognition for years of dedication and practice as a quality professional, and long-term involvement with ASQ may be nominated for Fellow Membership by their section, forum/division or International Chapter. Fellow may be attained only by advancement from Senior member through the process of nomination, and may not be attained by application.  A Fellow member must first be a Senior member for at least the past five calendar years.

A total of 28 points is the minimum for recommendation for advancement to Fellow. Points are scored in six proficiency areas, with a minimum required in each area, as follows:

  • Technical competence (4 points).
  • Occupational responsibility (3 points).
  • Publications (2 points).
  • ASQ activities (2 points).
  • Professional affiliations other than ASQ  (1 point).
  • Teaching (for nonprofessional teachers) or consulting (for professionally employed teachers) (2 points).

Nominations may be forwarded to ASQ Headquarters at any time, but must be sent with sufficient lead time to be received no later than May 1 for the candidate to be eligible for advancement the following year.

Click on the following link to download the Fellows Nomination Form, Fellows Matrix of requirements and ASQ Policy G 02.02 on Advancement to Fellow Membership.

http://asq.org/members/account/the-fellow-nomination.html

Fellow nomination process

Ref: http://asq.org/members/account/fellow.html

Requirements:

  • Fellows must be nominated by their section, forum/division or International Chapter.xxx· A Fellow member must first be a Senior member for at least the past five calendar years.

PLEASE NOTE: the submission date for Fellow nominations is  May 1.

Related Documents

The Fellow Nomination

Roughly 50 percent of the nominations for advancement to Fellow are not accepted by the Examining Committee for reasons that are not readily understood by the submitting member unit and member leaders. It is not in anyone’s interest to turn away a nomination, but it is the Examining Committee’s responsibility to ensure that the nominations conform to established requirements.

We are not soliciting suggestion to change the process, but are offering information to help others understand the requirements of the policy and understand the process. A number of short paragraphs, in the coming weeks, will be submitted explaining common pitfalls that cause non-acceptance of nominations.

Policy G 02 02, the Fellow Matrix of Requirements, and the newest version of the nomination form can be found on the ASQ Web site at the links below:

http://asq.org/about-asq/how-we-do/doc/g-02-02-fellow-nomination-form.doc

http://asq.org/members/account/fellow.html

Fellow Nomination VS Application

Fellow Nominations are peer recognition that a members’ commitment to the quality profession has been exhibited beyond that of the average member. Nominations are not intended to be applications submitted by a member through a member unit.

The policy requires demonstration of activity in 6 areas of proficiency. Failure to achieve the minimum score for any of the six areas will result in non-acceptance of a nomination. Dedication to the quality profession in one or more areas does not lessen the requirement to achieve the minimum score in all six areas. Additionally, in-depth involvement and dedication to one project or area of involvement cannot be used to cover multiple areas of proficiency.

For example, working on a committee developing a national or international standard cannot be used to cover requirements of multiple areas such as: “ASQ Activity”, “Technical Experience” and “Publications, Papers and Presentations”. This defeats the intent of having a multi-faceted background of involvement.

Members units (Local sections, divisions. etc.) should seek out those members that have exhibited above average commitment to the quality profession in the areas outlined in the Fellow Nomination Policy G 02.02 and assist them in attaining the background appropriate for a successful nomination.

Policy G 02.02, the Fellow Matrix of Requirements, and the newest version of the nomination form can be found on the ASQ Web site at the links below:

NOTE: This newest version of the nomination form must be used.

The Fellow Nomination – Evidence vs. claim

Each item in a Fellow nomination consists of two parts: 1) claim of performance or claim of credentials and 2) the proof or objective evidence to support the claim. Each item entered on the nomination form (claim) should be supported by objective evidence or proof to support the claim. The objective evidence should not be a restatement of items claimed in form of a typed list.

Curriculum vitae are restatements of claims for items that should already be listed on the nomination form. It is not proof or objective evidence to support the claim. Do not include curriculum vitae in a nomination. This is unnecessary, undesired, and hinders review of nominations by the Society Examining Committee.

Objective evidence must be something that is not prepared (typed or written) by the nominee or one of the endorsers. See the ASQ Matrix of Fellow Requirements for examples of objective evidence required.

Nominations — stand-alone documents

Everything needed to evaluate claims made on the nomination form must be contained in the nomination package when it is delivered to ASQ. If something is claimed on the form, objective evidence must be included to support that claim.

Alternate memberships used in lieu of the five-year requirement for Senior must be accompanied by documentation that explains the other organization, its purpose, and the levels of membership and how they are attained.

The Examining Committee does not look for information in any source outside the nomination package, including the ASQ Web site, to verify claimed certifications, etc. The proof must be included in the nomination package.

Nomination — examination process vs. dialogue

All nominations are delivered to the Society Examining Committee in one group, immediately after the nomination cutoff date. No changes are allowed after the nomination review process has started. No communication (phone, FAX, e-mail, etc.) is allowed between the nomination endorsers or nominee and members of the Society Examining Committee regarding any nomination until the president of ASQ has notified those being elevated to Fellow

Consulting and Teaching

Full-time consultants cannot claim credit for consulting work done while employed as a consultant. Consultants can claim credit for teaching classes that are not taught as part of a consulting assignment.

Anyone employed as a full-time professor or teacher cannot claim credit for teaching done while employed as a professor, assistant professor, associate professor, teacher, instructor, etc. Teachers can only claim credit for consulting.

A. Proof of Training

Class or seminar schedules are not used as evidence that training or teaching was performed. Schedules are plans to do something in the future, not evidence that something took place.

Be concise but complete. Including pages of a PowerPoint presentation is not evidence that the nominee developed or presented the material and is not proof that the training was actually done. Extraneous material of this type makes it difficult to find the real evidence to support the claims made.

Letters from companies where the training was done, indicating the dates the training was completed, are acceptable; letters from the colleges where the training was done indicating the dates the training was completed and the fact that the training was paid by the college or university is acceptable. The SEC does not need to know how much was paid.

Proof must be offered for each class or seminar taught. The number of valid classes or seminars determines the amount of credit that is given. Refer to the Fellow Matrix of Requirements for specific details.

B. Proof of Consulting

Provide letters from the firm, for which consulting work was done, showing the dates and duration of the consulting work.

Check stubs or proof of payment as a consultant can be accepted. The SEC does not need to know how much was being paid. That can be blacked out.

Proof must be offered for each consulting job for which credit is being claimed. The number of clients and duration of the consulting work determine the credit that is given. Refer to the Fellow Matrix of Requirements for specific details.

Signatures of Endorsement

The signatures required on a Fellow nomination form have been reduced to two, referred to as endorsers. What constitutes a valid signature can be found in Policy G02.02 or the Fellow Matrix of Requirements.

The signatures on the Fellow nomination form are meant to indicate that those endorsing the nomination have reviewed the complete nomination package, know the nominee well enough to understand their involvement in and commitment to the quality community and the community at large, and feel that this individual possesses the qualities appropriate for elevation to ASQ Fellow.

The signatures also indicate that the nomination has been reviewed and the requirements for submission, including objective evidence to support the claims on the nomination form, have been included and are adequate.

Adding additional signatures to a nomination will not ensure approval of a nomination, no matter whose signature it may be.

Signatures of elected officers of ASQ at the national level, including that of the president, past-president, or president-elect are not valid for endorsement of Fellow nominations. Signatures of members of the ASQ board of directors are invalid unless they are also elected officers of a member unit as defined in policy G02.02. Signature of an ASQ employee is not valid for endorsement of a Fellow nomination

Nominations Submitted vs. Accepted

In the past 5 years, 48.7% of the members nominated for Fellow were recommended for advancement by the Society Examining Committee, and all recommended nominees were elected Fellow by the Board of Directors.

Many nominations have been submitted multiple times, with some corrected and resubmitted nominations receiving favorable recommendation after 2nd, 3rd, and 4th nomination! 42.7% of all nominations examined were resubmissions. A failure of acceptance on the first submission does not mean rejection. The results of nominations submitted can be found in the following table.

Percent of Successful Nominations Number of Times Submitted
73 1
18 2
8 3
1 4

In other words, 73% of the nominations were accepted the first time, 18% of the nominations were accepted after 2nd nomination and so forth.

Why are the nominations being returned without a favorable recommendation to the Board of Directors?

% of Examined Nominations Area of Nomination Resulting
in Non-Acceptance

21.6

Consulting or Teaching
15.1 Professional Affiliations other than ASQ
10.6 Publications, Papers and Talks
10.0 ASQ Activities
7.5 Occupation Responsibility
6.5 Technical Experience
5.5 Valid endorsing signatures
5.0 Senior member for 5 years
4.5 15 Years in quality related positions
2.5 Improperly Formatted Electronic Submission (CD)
2.0 Low Overall Score
1.0 Pre-scoring by member unit

The above table should be considered by all who prepare nominations for submission. The requirements for nominations are spelled out in Policy G02.02 and the Fellow Matrix of Requirements. Failure to comply with requirements results in nominations being returned to the submitters.

Each item in the above table is subject for an article in Friday Facts Facts. A number of these topics have already been elaborated on. More will be appearing between now and the cut off date for submission.

Five Year Senior Requirement

A common barrier to the review of nominations is the requirement for nominees to be a Senior member for at least five years.

The requirement states that a nominee must be a Senior member for five full years prior to January 1 of the year in which a nomination is submitted. For the nomination examining cycle that begins May 1, 2010, a nominee must be a Senior member for five years before January 1, 2010, i.e., they must have become a Senior member before January 1, 2005.

Three years (36 months) of Senior membership can be satisfied through equivalent time as a Senior member or comparable membership in another recognized professional association or ASQ affiliate. To be considered as equivalent time, the nomination must include a description of the other association, the levels of membership available, and the requirements to attain the level of membership to be considered.

Senior or Fellow membership in some organizations occurs automatically after a preset number of membership years. This is not equivalent to ASQ Senior membership. Obtaining “life” membership in an organization by prepayment of an amount of dues based on the age of the member is not the equivalent of ASQ Senior membership.

Advanced membership obtained when initially joining an organization is not the equivalent of ASQ Senior membership. All equivalency must be explained with attachments to the nomination.

It is in the best interest of all membership units to encourage regular members who may be future candidates for Fellow to upgrade to Senior membership now. The leadership team of member units should make it a routine task to review the unit’s membership roster and identify regular members who are eligible to become Senior members at present or in the near future, whether intentions are clear about becoming a Fellow, and encourage them to become Senior members.

Nomination Scoring

Pre-Scoring Requirement

Pre-scoring of nominations is required for acceptance of the nomination by ASQ and the Society Examining Committee. This requirement is stated in Policy G02.02, paragraph 2.1.4. Lack of a pre-score indicates a lack of knowledge by the endorsers of the nomination, the nomination process, and the nominee. How can anyone endorsing a nomination know if the nomination meets the minimum requirements if it has not been reviewed and scored?

The purpose of the pre-scoring is to ensure that the nomination has been reviewed, that adequate evidence is present to support claims made in the nomination, and the nomination meets the minimum required score for each section as well as the minimum overall score. Those affixing their signature to the nomination as endorsers are responsible for this review. If a nomination has not been scored by the member unit(s) endorsing the nomination it may not be accepted for further processing and examination. This is stated in Policy A26.01 paragraph 3.1.2.

Point Scoring

When scoring, only one point level can be used for each proficiency area. The highest point level for which objective evidence has been provided is the score that is used for that proficiency area. Points are given for the level, not for each item claimed in the nomination.

For example, assume that a nomination is for someone who is an ASQ Certified Quality Engineer (6 points), an ASQ Certified Reliability Engineer (6 points), and is also an ASQ Certified Six Sigma Green Belt (4 points).

1)If the nomination includes copies of ASQ-issued certificates or wallet cards for each certification, the nomination will be scored at six points for technical experience. They will not be given 10 points for satisfying the four-point and six-point levels. They will not be given 12 points for having two certifications at the six-point level. They will not be given 16 points for having two certifications at the six-point level plus one at the four-point level.

2)If the nomination did not include the certificate or wallet card for ASQ CQE or ASQ CRE, but did for ASQ CSSGB, the nomination will be scored four points for technical experience.

3)If the nomination does not include copies of any ASQ issued certificates or wallet cards, the nomination will be scored 0 for technical experience.

NOTE: As explained in a previous article, the Society Examining Committee does not refer to ASQ records or Web sites to verify anything claimed in the nomination. Objective evidence must be included with the nomination. Professional Affiliations Other Than ASQ

Step 3 at the beginning of the Nomination for Advancement to Fellow, section V, requires nominations to “Include an explanation of purpose and relevance to quality for each organization“.

Simply providing evidence of membership in another organization is not sufficient. It is not intuitive that an organization has a relevance to quality. Objective evidence to support this linkage must be provided. Do not provide links to web sites that contain the information. The Examining Committee does not refer to web sites or documentation that is not included with the nomination package.

The nomination should include a charter, mission statement, articles of incorporation or other document that indicates the relevance of the organization to quality.

The categories for this area of proficiency, in which points are awarded, are determined by

1. The organizations relevance to quality.
If the organization cannot be shown to have an influence on quality, it should not be included in this section. If an influence on some aspect of quality can be shown, provide the explanation and include it in this section.

2. The nominees position in the organization. Being a member of another organization is awarded fewer points than being a committee member; being a committee member is awarded fewer points than being a committee chair, etc. The level of influence in the organization should be specified and objective evidence of the position must be included.

3. If the nominee is responsible for ASQ’s influence on the organization, the details of how ASQ is influencing the organization must be spelled out. Being an ASQ member or committee chair as well as a member of another organization does not demonstrate that someone is responsible for ASQ’s influence on the other organization. Objective evidence must be provided.

4. If appointed to a position in another organization to formally represent ASQ, provide a letter from a Section Chair, Division Chair or other officer of ASQ indicating the appointment and representation.

Refer to the ASQ Fellow Matrix of Requirements for examples and explanation of items that can provide the required information.

Publications, Papers, and Presentations

For all categories of documents covered by this section, the subject must be quality related. If the subject is of general interest and not directly related to quality, it will not be awarded points in this category.

Publications

Claims of publications must be accompanied by evidence that the document was, in fact, published. Preparing a document without proof of publication is not awarded points. The document must be published for points to be awarded.

DO NOT include the complete publication with a nomination. Do provide copies of the cover, title page, table of content or equivalent that contain the date of publication and by what organization it was published. Simply provide evidence that the document has been published. DO NOT include web site addresses where information can be found. The Examining Committee will not peruse the internet searching for evidence. DO NOT provide print-outs of publication lists or curriculum vitae. The objective evidence of publication must be provided with the nomination.

Papers

Proof of papers being published in a trade magazine should show the article cover page with the name of the trade publication and date of publication. The first page of an article published in Quality Progress shows the publication and date on the page bottom.

If a paper is published in a meeting transaction, provide the proof of publication with date and organization that published the paper and conference at which the paper was presented. Refer to the ASQ Fellow Matrix of Requirements for specific objective evidence that can be provided for each point level.

Presentation

Conference schedules, meeting notices, etc. cannot be used as evidence that a presentation or talk was given. Schedules are plans to do something in the future, not evidence that something actually took place.

A photo of someone standing in front of a group of people, or a group photo, cannot be used as evidence that a presentation was made.

Be concise but complete. Including pages of a PowerPoint presentation is not evidence that the presentation or training was actually done. Extraneous material of this type makes it difficult to find the real evidence to support the claims made.

Letters from leaders of local groups where the presentation was made indicating the dates the presentation was made are acceptable; letters from the schools or companies where the presentation was made indicating the dates the presentation was done are acceptable.

Proof must be provided for each presentation given. The number of valid presentations or talks determines the amount of credit that is given. Refer to the Fellow Matrix of Requirements for specific details.

ASQ Activities

Lack of objective evidence for involvement in ASQ activities has been the fourth highest reason for nominees failing to be recommended for advancement to Fellow.

Anyone nominated for Fellow must be a Senior member of ASQ, which meets the one-point level of scoring. Fortunately, the date of Senior membership is checked by ASQ before nominations are forwarded to the Examining Committee. Unfortunately for nominees, the one point awarded for being a Senior member is not adequate to meet the minimum score for this proficiency area. The requirement for achieving more than one point in this area of proficiency indicates that something more than being a Senior member and paying dues is required.

An organization chart or local newsletter listing a nominee’s position in a section or division committee or leadership team should be readily available. Do not include Web site links as objective evidence. Legible print outs from a Web site showing the organization chart or photocopies of organization charts or newsletters with the nominee’s name shown in the position occupied will be accepted. Alternately, a letter from the current section chair, division chair, or nominating chair listing the position or committee involvement should be included with the nomination. The letter should be included as evidence for this proficiency area and not included as an endorsement at the front of the nomination. Letters of endorsement are not needed and are not used in awarding points in a proficiency area.

The same information cited above cannot be used alone to prove involvement in interest groups or national committees. The requirement for this area is for active involvement. Proof of active involvement requires objective evidence that the nominee has attended meetings, been included in committee teleconferences, etc. Minutes of meetings or discussions showing the nominee’s participation over time are acceptable if the documents specifically name the ASQ group in which involvement is claimed. Alternately, a letter from a committee chair and listing times/dates of meetings and position/participation by the nominee can be accepted.

Credit for involvement in editorial review committees/boards can be proven with a copy of a publication showing the name of the nominee as a member of the committee/board. The publication copy must show the publication name and date, and it must be an ASQ publication or ASQ-sponsored publication. Involvement in non-ASQ publications is not accepted for credit in this area of proficiency

Employment

The Society Examining Committee relies on the résumé included with the Nomination for Advancement to Fellow as proof of occupational proficiency. This is the single area of proficiency where additional documentation is not required. However, a résumé is required. Curriculum vitae are not substitutes for a resume. Letters attesting to employment are not accepted in lieu of a resume.

Only the highest level of management or influence is used when assigning a point level to this area of proficiency. The information provided in the resume is evaluated by the Examining Committee, based on the information given, to assign a point value in this area of proficiency.

Multiple Sites

When an occupational area included responsibility for multiple locations, it must be stated in the résumé. Multiple location responsibility affects the point rating assigned by the Society Examining Committee.

Level of Management

A position title does not convey the scope of supervision or influence. A title of vice president or director does not imply supervision of any personnel or influence over more than one location. The resume should indicate the level of supervision and number of locations influenced. Titles used in education are self-explanatory and are awarded points as indicated in the ASQ Fellow Matrix of Requirements.

National or International

Employment by a national or international company or organization does not indicate the level of supervision or influence. The position level within an organization, if not specified in a resume, can be indicated on a supplementary organization chart.

Statement that someone was vice president of an international corporation does not mean that person had responsibility beyond the site where their office is located. Scope of management and influence must be indicated in the resume.

Consultants

Consulting firms can be as small as one person operating out of their home, or multi-national with hundreds of clients.

Refer to the ASQ Fellow Matrix of Requirements for the type of objective evidence looked for in a resume

Technical Experience

This area of proficiency must score 4 points or higher. No explanations will be offered for levels scoring below 4 points since lower scored items cannot be added together to achieve the required score.

Each item is scored individually without regard to any others. The highest scored item with objective evidence determines the score for this area of proficiency.

Certifications

Many levels offer alternate ways of achieving the score. The simplest way to achieve a score for levels 4, 5 or 6 is to provide evidence of ASQ certification, RAB certification, or professional licensing such as Registered Professional Engineers, etc. Objective evidence of certifications or registrations must be copies of the certificates or wallet cards. A list of certificate numbers or a print out of information listing certifications is not acceptable. A single certification is all that is required to reach the score for that level.

Achievement

The 4 point level may be reached by provide proof that the nominee has achieved useful or significant results through the application of quality-related concepts. Objective Evidence: They key is to provide documentation that explains the usefulness or significance of the results. Indicate several examples of the techniques used – e.g. design of experiments, SPC, etc. and the results achieved – reduce scrap by 5%.

The 5 point level may be reached by providing proof of development and implementation of significant new applications of quality and improvement related concepts. Objective Evidence: They key word in the requirement is new. Proof must be offered that the application is new, and not something that has been copied from another source. Describe the technique and what makes it new or unique. If it is a refinement of existing techniques, indicate what it was based on. Indicate the results achieved using the new application.

The 7 point level may be reached by making significant contributions to the development, understanding, and application of theoretical concepts and methods of quality and business related disciplines. The key to objective evidence is that the contributions must be shown to be significant and that the concepts are theoretical. Recognition of the significance can be shown through copies of awards, & citations, and background or description of each organization granting the recognition.

The 8 point level may be confused with the 7 point level. The key is that formal recognition must have been awarded and proof must be provided that that recognition is for truly outstanding experience.

15 Years in Quality Related Positions

Nominees must have 15 years (180 months) of active experience in quality-related positions. The alternate time measurement, months, was added to simplify the calculation of active experience time and to insure that partial months were counted.

The quality related positions do not need to be consecutive, but must total 180 months.

Objective Evidence

The 180 month requirement is substantiated by the resume that is required in section II of the nomination form. Alternate objective evidence can be provided as letters from employers explaining the quality-related nature of the position and the length of service. NOTE: A resume is still required to substantiate Occupational Responsibility, proficiency area II of the nomination.

Quality Related

If the position title is not self-explanatory, a description of the position indicating its relationship to quality must be provided, either in the resume, letter from employer, or in section II of the nomination form. It is not sufficient to assume that quality plays a part in any position.

Time periods that do not indicate active experience in quality-related positions are not counted towards the 180 month total.

Time Accumulation

The quality-related experience must have been accumulated prior to January 1st of the year in which a nomination is submitted. For nominations submitted in 2010, 180 months must have been accumulated in quality-related positions prior to January 1st, 2010.

If a nominee is still employed in a quality-related position that started in a prior year, only the time employed prior to January 1st of the year of nomination submission will be counted.

Time Allowance

When a resume is evaluated for lengths of service, the starting and ending dates are used to determine the length of service for each position. If only the month and year is given, the length of service will be calculated as starting on the last day of the beginning month and ending on the last day of the final month.

If the specific dates are given, the elapsed time will be determined as months and portions of a month by dividing the number of active days by 30. If a resume gives a starting date of January 13th, the elapsed time for that month will be 0.4 months.

Electronic Submission

In 2006, a policy change allowed submission of nominations in electronic format. The format is explained in section 2.1.8 of policy G02.02. The nomination must be on a CD. Six CD copies and a single hard copy must be submitted to ASQ.

Electronic submission by e-mail will not be accepted.

Directory or Folder Contents

The CD must hold eight directories or folders. If less than eight directories or folders are contained on the CD, it will not be accepted for evaluation.

Each section of the nomination form and the objective evidence to support that section must be contained in the same directory or folder of the CD.

The pages of the nomination form for the specific section should be included as the first document in the directory or folder. Following the pages of the nomination form, objective evidence to support the claims made on the nomination form pages should be included.

It is preferable to link the items on the form to the documents offered as objective evidence. Alternately, the items claimed on the form should be given a reference number that matches the file name of the document used for objective evidence of that claim.

As an example: If six points are claimed for being an ASQ Certified Quality Engineer, that item could by identified with a number “1F”, then a copy of the Certificate or wallet card would be in a file named “1F” or “Exhibit 1F”.

Signature Page

The policy requires all pages prior to Section I to be included in the BASIC directory or folder. Page 3 precedes Section I and is the page for signatures of endorsers. Previously this page was the last page of the nomination form.

The signature page will be accepted in the BASIC directory or folder or in the ENDORSERS directory or folder until the policy is formally changed.

The signature page must include the signatures of the two qualified individuals endorsing the nomination. The signatures must be on the single hard copy of the nomination form that must accompany the CD’s.

Letters of recommendation are not substitutes for the signature page.

Low Overall Score

Meeting the minimum score in each of the required proficiency areas will not be adequate to meet the required minimum overall score. If the minimum score is met in each proficiency area, the overall score will be 14, which is one-half the required minimum overall score of 28.

Areas to Review

When preparing a nomination, it is essential to find the highest scoring item that a nominee has reached, if there is objective evidence to support that item. Since the scoring for Occupational Responsibility is based on the resume contents, nomination preparers should concentrate on the other 5 areas of proficiency.

Highest Scoring Level

When nominations are examined, the highest scoring level that has been claimed is reviewed first. If that level is supported by adequate objective evidence, that level determines the score given for that area of proficiency and the examination of that area of proficiency is complete – lower scoring levels are not examined. If the highest level is not properly supported by objective evidence, the next lower level containing a claim is reviewed. If that next lower level is properly supported by objective evidence, that score is the score given to that area of proficiency. This process continues until all the items in the area of proficiency are exhausted or a level is found with adequate support objective evidence.

Supporting Multiple Levels

It is in the best interest of the nominee and those preparing the nomination to find as many items as possible in each area of proficiency that a nominee has accomplished, that can be supported by objective evidence. A claim made and evidence supplied for 7 or 8 points may be questionable. It is advisable to claim more than one item in each level if it can be supported by objective evidence. It is also advisable to provide something in levels below the highest level claimed if they can be supported by objective evidence.

Single Level Claims

Providing a claim and evidence for one scoring level in each area of proficiency is not advisable, unless the objective evidence is clear and indisputable, i.e. copy of the Certified Quality Engineer certificate. Failure of one such item can result in a nomination that does not meet the minimum overall score, leading to a nomination returned to the preparers without a recommendation for advancement to Fellow.

CONTACT

Navin Dedhia
Audit & Advancement

Please contact for additional information.
CONTACT