A summary of discussion and comments by ICA Associates staff in a staff meeting: not meant to be read as a “position” or consensus
Concerns:
- This seems to be a step toward specialization
- Is there the energy to do it? Money, time, commitment?
- Monitoring
- The intellectual property of ToP / ICA methods is a pillar of ICA, and is its business
- The quality, use, and dissemination of methods is the responsibility of ICA, since they are its intellectual property
- ICA could lose its heart if the methods are separated from the organization
- Changing the world is ICA’s mission – communities as well as organizations are avenues to do that
Strengths of the model:
- Separates charitable work from fee-for-service work, clarifying focus
- ToP International would empower people globally to do ToP methods and develop them, not just within their own country or region
Dangers:
- A top-down organization may inhibit local initative and energy
- Tension between local ICA’s and ToP facilitators and the global organization may be a structural implication
Recommendations out of this discussion for thinking further (not necessarily our complete consensus):
- It needs to be clear that the organization is part of ICA International
- The new organization could take the form of an association, either a for- or a not-for-profit
- Create the organization bottom-up rather than top-down – start with the people, not with the organizational form
- Put the emphasis on “ensuring quality”, not on “fee-for-service” – let the organization ensure quality in both our community and organizational applications
- For example: the first paragraph on p. 3 could read: “ICAI proposes the establishment of a new international association focused on ensuring the high quality and development of ToP methods, expansion of ToP training and providing facilitation services to communities and organizations.”

2  out of 2 found this valuable. Do you find this valuable? Do you?