I E E E F e llo w No mina tio n I E E E I E S F E L L - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

I E E E F e llo w No mina tio n

I E E E I E S F E L L OW NOMI NAT I ON ADVI SORY COMMI T T E E

Outline

 I

ntro duc tio n to F NAC

 Curre nt I

E S I E E E F e llo w situa tio ns

 I

E E E F e llo w No mina tio n Pro c e ss

So me I E E E F e llo w Sta tistic s (Ja n 2019)



# o f I E E E Me mb e rs: 429,825 # o f I E E E F e llo ws: 7,862



# o f I E E E Se nio r Me mb e rs: 43,928



# o f I E S Me mb e rs: 7,463



# o f I E E E F e llo ws in I E S: 187 (3% o f I E S me mb e rships)



# o f I E E E Se nio r Me mb e rs in I E S: 1,445



Co mpa re d to o ur pe e r siste r so c ie tie s: PE S, I AS, PE L S, RAS, CSC

 PE

L S: 3.8%

 PE

S: 4.65%



No te tha t so me o f o ur me mb e rs a re a lso me mb e rs o f o the r so c ie tie s, a nd vic e ve rsa

Curre nt I E S F e llo w Situa tio ns

 I

E S me mb e rs a re unde r-re c o g nize d

 We ha ve so ma ny hig hly q ua lifie d, I

E E E F e llo w wo rthy me mb e rs. Ye t, ma ny o f o ur c o lle a g ue s a re to o mo de st o r to o b usy to a pply fo r this I E E E F e llo w re c o g nitio n.

 So me time s, ho w to e ffe c tive ly na vig a te the no mina tio n pro c e ss

c a n b e a fa c to r.

 T

his c o mmitte e wo uld like to pro mo te a nd a dvise o ur I E S me mb e rs e ffe c tive wa ys to b e e le va te d to I E E E F e llo w whe n re a dy.

I E E E I E S F e llo w No mina tio n Adviso ry Co mmitte e (F NAC)

 I

E E E I E S F e llo w No mina tio n Adviso ry Co mmitte e (F NAC) is NOT“F e llo w E va lua tio n Co mmitte e (F E C)”

 F

NAC a nd F E C a re two c o mple te ly inde pe nde nt fro m e a c h o the r – a vo id c o nflic t o f inte re st

I E S I E E E F e llo w Applic a tio n Pro c e ss

 T

ypic a lly, I E S me mb e rs inte re ste d in b e ing e le va te d a s a n I E E E F e llo w

 Se e ks a no mina to r  Se e ks re fe re nc e s  Pre pa re the pa c ka g e  T

he c a ndida te do e s mo st o f the wo rk  So me o the r a ppro a c he s

 A no mina to r b e lie ve s tha t a n

I E S c o lle a g ue de se rve s the I E E E F e llo w re c o g nitio n, the n no mina te s the pe rso n

 T

he no mina to r wo rks with the c a ndida te to se e k re fe re nc e s a nd to pre pa re the pa c ka g e

E le vation to IE E E F e llow Gr ade

T he fo llo wing info rma tio n a re e xc e rpte d fro m I E E E F e llo w We b pa g e :

http:/ / www.ie e e .or g/ fe llows

F e llow Gr ade Qualific ation

 Unusua l distinc tio n in the pro fe ssio n, a n o utsta nding re c o rd o f

a c c o mplishme nts, a dva nc e me nt o r a pplic a tio n o f e ng ine e ring , sc ie nc e , a nd te c hno lo g y, b ring ing the re a liza tio n

• f sig nific a nt va lue to so c ie ty

 A c o mpe titive pro c e ss a s I

E E E Byla w I

• 305.6 de fine s the ma ximum numb e r o f e le va tio ns

tha t c a n o c c ur in a c urre nt c a le nda r ye a r a s 0.1% o f I E E E vo ting me mb e rship, in the pre c e ding c a le nda r ye a r.

 As suc h, no t po ssib le to de fine a pre c ise c lo se d se t o f c rite ria tha t e nsure s e le va tio n.  No te the 0.1% e le va tio ns c a p is a pplie d a c ro ss I

E E E a s a who le , a s pe r I E E E Byla ws; it must

no t b e inte rpre te d a s a pe r-So c ie ty ma ximum o r g uide line .

Wr iting an E ffe c tive IE E E F e llow Nomination

 T

he No mina tio n F

• rm is a c ritic a l do c ume nt during the F

e llo w e le va tio n pro c e ss, a nd a s suc h, its c o nte nt is ke y to the suc c e ss o f the no mina tio n.

 Re vie we d a nd Asse sse d b y T

HRE E se pa ra te a udie nc e s: 1. F e llo w Gra de Re fe re nc e s (3-5 I E E E F e llo ws) 2. So c ie ty/ T e c hnic a l Co unc il F e llo w E va lua ting Co mmitte e (F E C) me mb e rs E va lua to rs) 3. I E E E F e llo w Co mmitte e me mb e rs (Judg e s)

F lowc har t for IE E E F e llowship E le c tion

NOMINATOR Get Information for the candidate and complete Fellow Nomination Form Identify 3‐5 Referees Identify Endorsers (optional, 3 max.) Send Form to Referees and Edorsers Send Form to Fellow Committee (March 1)

 FELLOW COMMITTEE 

Send Nomination Form to Society /Technical Council Evaluation Committee( April 15)



Scoring for Complete nomination package of candidate with weighted scores in priority order of ‐ Individual contribution ‐ Society Evaluation ‐ Referee ‐ Professional Activity (August 31)



Average score of Group Judges



Serial the list of approved Fellows



Fine‐tune citation



Forward recommendation list to Board of Directors (September) BOARD OF DIRECTORS  Announces newly elected Fellow (November/December) REFEREES  Complete Referee Form  Forward to Fellow Committee (March1) ENDORSERS  Complete Endorsement Form  Forward to fellow Committee (March 1) SOCIETY/COUNCIL EVALUATION COMMITTEE  Fill Evaluation Form  Serial ranking of Candidates with Pass/fail groups  Fine‐tune Citation if necessary  Forward to Fellow Committee (June 15)

T he Nomination F

• r

m

T

hre e funda me nta l a spe c ts:

• 1. T

he individual te c hnic al c o ntributio n(s) to the fie ld ma de b y the No mine e

• 2. T

he impac t fro m the se c o ntrib utio ns, whic h must ha ve a lre a dy

• c c urre d a nd b e e vide nt
• 3. T

he e vide nc e suppo rting the c a se .

Re me mb e r: Co ntrib utio n + I mpa c t + E vide nc e = Suc c e ss!

Individual Contr ibutions (Se c tion 5 of the Nomination F

• r

m)

 T

he No mina to r must de sc rib e in this se c tio n the

• ne

(o r two ) mo st distinc tive c o ntrib utio n(s) ma de b y the No mine e .

 a

b rie f de sc riptio n

• f wha t the

No mine e ha s inve nte d, c re a te d,

• r

disc o ve re d a nd the la sting impa c t o f the c o ntrib utio n.

 impa c t must ha ve a lre a dy o c c urre d, a nd spe c ula tio n o n the No mine e ’ s

po ssib le future impa c t is no t he lpful to stre ng the ning the No mine e 's c a se .

 a vo id ja rg o n, de fine a c ro nyms, a nd b rie fly e xpla in the sta te o f the a rt

b e fo re the No mine e ’ s c o ntrib utio n.

Applic ation E ngine e r / Pr ac titione r (AE / P) - 1

Wha t pro duc t de ve lo pme nt, a dva nc e me nt in syste ms, a pplic a tio n o r

• pe ra tio n, pro je c t ma na g e me nt o r imple me nta tio n a c tivity, pro c e ss

de sig n

• r

impro ve me nt, ma nufa c turing inno va tio n, c o de s

• r

sta nda rds o rig ina tio n a nd imple me nta tio n, e tc ., I n the a re a s o f te c hno lo g y a pplic a tio n we re the dire c t re sult o f the No mine e ’ s individua l c o ntrib utio ns? I f c o ntrib utio ns we re ma de a s pa rt o f a g ro up suc h a s a Sta nda rds Co mmitte e , wha t is the c ritic a l ro le the No mine e pla ye d?

Applic ation E ngine e r / Pr ac titione r (AE / P) - 2

 Wha t inno va tio n a nd/ o r c re a tivity ha ve b e e n de mo nstra te d?  Wha t ha s b e e n the

impo rta nc e

• f the

imple me nte d te c hno lo g y de ve lo pme nt, a dva nc e me nt, o r a pplic a tio n?

 Wha t is the mo st impo rta nt ta ng ib le a nd ve rifia b le e vide nc e o f the

No mine e ’ s c o ntrib utio ns inc luding , if a ppro pria te ?

  Re le va nt sig nific a nt te c hnic a l pub lic a tio ns (pa te nts, re po rts, a rtic le s)

a nd pre se nta tio ns?

Applic ation E ngine e r / Pr ac titione r (AE / P) - 3

E xample :

• Mr. Ande rsso n inve nte d a pro c e dure to ide ntify a nd lo c a te ho t spo ts in a

tra nsfo rme r winding insula tio n. Suc h ho t spo ts o fte n o c c ur b e fo re tra nsfo rme r fa ilure . T he pro po se d pro c e dure ha s b e e n imple me nte d b y T ra nsfo rme rX I nc . I n the ir tra nsfo rme r mo nito ring e q uipme nt a nd ha s b e e n e mplo ye d c o nse q ue ntly b y se ve ra l le a ding utilitie s wo rldwide . I t is e stima te d tha t this pro c e dure ha s sa ve d utilitie s o ve r $500M b y ide ntifying tra nsfo rme rs re q uiring ma inte na nc e b e fo re the y fa ile d. Po ssib le e vide nc e : pa te nts, a rtic le s, c o nfe re nc e pre se nta tio ns, te c hnic a l re po rts, sta nda rds, c o mpa ny fina nc ia l sta te me nts, me dia re po rts.

E duc ator (E )

 Wha t uniq ue a nd inno va tive c urric ula o r c o urse s ha s the No mine e

pe rso na lly de ve lo pe d tha t ha ve influe nc e d te a c hing o utside the No mine e ’ s ho me institutio n? Wha t inno va tive a nd uniq ue c o ntrib utio ns ha s the No mine e ma de to e ng ine e ring e duc a tio n a s a n a dministra to r?

 Ha s the No mine e writte n Wha t impa c t ha s the No mine e ’ s c o ntrib utio n

ha d o n e duc a tio n in the fie ld o f inte re st o f the I E E E ?

 A pio ne e ring te xt in his/ he r a re a s o f pro fe ssio na l spe c ia liza tio n?

E duc ator (E )

E xample :

Pro f. Ba le wa ha s de ve lo pe d a c o mpre he nsive unde rg ra dua te c urric ulum o n Dig ita l Sig na l Pro c e ssing a pplic a tio ns. I t inc lude s a se t o f c o urse s b a se d o n his te xtb o o k “F unda me nta ls

• f Dig ita l Sig na l Pro c e ssing ” a c c o mpa nie d b y a se rie s o f la b o ra to ry e xe rc ise s, Ma tla b

ro utine s, a nd de mo nstra tio ns. His c o urse s ha ve b e e n a c ruc ia l fa c to r in do ub ling e nro llme nts to the e le c tric a l e ng ine e ring pro g ra m a t his unive rsity during the la st de c a de . His b o o k a nd c urric ulum ha ve b e e n a do pte d b y se ve ra l unive rsitie s in the No mine e ’ s c o untry a nd g lo b a lly. Po ssib le e vide nc e : b o o ks, a rtic le s, ha ndb o o ks, c o nfe re nc e pre se nta tio ns, te stimo nia ls, unive rsity’ s a nd ra nking a g e nc ie s’ da ta , a nd e duc a tio n a wa rds.

R e se ar c h E ngine e r / Sc ie ntist (R E / S)

 Wha t inve ntio ns, disc o ve rie s o r a dva nc e s ha ve b e e n ma de b y the No mine e in the

sta te -o f-the -a rt

• f

the sc ie nc e a nd/ o r te c hno lo g y? Ho w do the y de mo nstra te inno va tio n a nd c re a tivity?

 Wha t is the impo rta nc e o f the re se a rc h re sults a nd impa c t o f the c o ntrib utio ns in

a dva nc ing the sta te o f the industry o r te c hno lo g y?

 Ha ve the y ha d a sub sta ntia l influe nc e o n the sub se q ue nt re se a rc h lite ra ture ? Ha ve the y

fo und a pplic a tio ns in the industry o r b e e n imple me nte d in pro duc ts o r syste ms?

 Ha ve the y b e e n c o mme rc ia lize d o r use d b y o the r o rg a niza tio ns?  Wha t pa te nts, re po rts, re fe re e d jo urna l pa pe rs, re se a rc h mo no g ra phs, c o mme rc ia l

so ftwa re pa c ka g e s a nd o the r ta ng ib le a nd ve rifia b le e vide nc e ha ve re sulte d fro m the No mine e ’ s R&D a c c o mplishme nts?

R e se ar c h E ngine e r / Sc ie ntist (R E / S)

E xample :

• Dr. Che n wa s the first pe rso n to de ve lo p a n a lg o rithm fo r re a l-time sta te e stima tio n fo r

po we r tra nsmissio n syste ms. He r 1990 pa pe r o n the to pic ha s b e e n c ite d o ve r 200 time s in the pa st 25 ye a rs a nd is re c o g nize d a s o ne o f the se mina l a rtic le s in this a re a . He r a lg o rithm ha s b e e n inte g ra te d into se ve ra l c o mme rc ia l e ne rg y ma na g e me nt syste m so ftwa re pa c ka g e s, inc luding E nSa ve r a nd MyE ne rg y. Po ssib le e vide nc e : pub lishe d jo urna l pa pe rs, pa te nts, te c hnic a l re po rts, a nd na tio na l o r inte rna tio na l a do ptio n o f lic e nse -pro te c te d so ftwa re .

T e c hnic al L e ade r (T L )

 Wha t o utsta nding

e ng ine e ring syste m imple me nta tio n, a pplic a tio n o r sc ie ntific a c c o mplishme nts ha ve re sulte d fro m a te a m o r c o mpa ny-wide e ffo rt le d b y the No mine e ?

 Wha t te c hnic a l inno va tio ns, b usine ss a nd fina nc ia l b e ne fits a nd o the r

a dva nta g e s ha ve b e e n a c hie ve d?

 Wha t te c hno lo g ic a l a nd o the r c ha lle ng e s a nd pro b le ms, e .g ., ma rke t

a c c e pta b ility, imple me nta tio n diffic ultie s, a nd fina nc ia l risks ha ve b e e n fa c e d a nd re so lve d?

 Wha t

we re the c ruc ia l te c hnic a l c o ntrib utio ns a nd te c hno lo g ic a l inno va tio ns pro vide d b y the No mine e ?

T e c hnic al L e ade r (T L )

E xample :

• Ms. Da s se rve d a s Chie f T

e c hno lo g y Offic e r fo r Po we rNo w I nc . fro m 2002-2009. During his time with the c o mpa ny, Ms. Da s le d the e ffo rts to e na b le po we r distrib utio n a uto ma tio n in o ve r 500 sub sta tio ns in So uthe a st USA using the te c hno lo g y he ha d c o -inve nte d, de ve lo pe d, a nd pa te nte d with his Po we rNo w te a m. I t ha s b e e n c o nfirme d tha t the se upg ra de s sig nific a ntly de c re a se d the numb e r a nd dura tio n

• f the lo ss o f po we r fo r c usto me rs in Ge o rg ia during Hurric a ne K

a trina . Sinc e 2009, Ms. Da s ha s se rve d a s a c o nsulta nt to se ve ra l utilitie s to mo de rnize the ir distrib utio n syste ms. He c urre ntly se rve s a s the c ha ir o f the PE S sub sta tio ns c o mmitte e a nd spe a rhe a de d the de ve lo pme nt o f the sta nda rd C57-12.92-2010. Pre se nte d e vide nc e inc lude s: pa te nts, sta nda rds, re po rts, a rtic le s (inc luding tho se o n the we b ), ke y c o mme rc ia l indic a to rs.

E vide nc e of T e c hnic al Ac c omplishme nt/ Par t 1 (Se c tion 6, Par t 1 of the Nomination F

• r

m)

 L

ist the thre e mo st impo rta nt ite ms o f ta ng ib le a nd ve rifia b le e vide nc e o f the te c hnic a l a c c o mplishme nts pe rta ining to the ke y c o ntrib utio n(s) spe c ifie d in the se c tio n “I ndividua l Co ntrib utio ns” o f the No mina tio n F

• rm. T

he re sho uld b e o nly thre e ite ms in this Pa rt 1, no t thre e c ate go rie s.

 T

he se sho uld c o nstitute spe c ific e vide nc e o f the c o ntrib utio ns ma de b y the No mine e . T he No mina to r’ s c ho ic e o f the se thre e ite ms se rve s to fo c us the re a de r’ s a tte ntio n to the thre e mo st impo rta nt pie c e s o f e vide nc e suppo rting the No mine e ’ s individua l te c hnic a l c o ntrib utio ns.

 An ite m o f e vide nc e ma y b e (b ut is no t limite d to ) a jo urna l o r c o nfe re nc e a rtic le , a

b o o k, pa te nt, re po rt, sta nda rd, po lic y, pro duc t, se rvic e , de mo nstra tio n, o r insta lla tio n. T he thre e ite ms sho uld re fe r dire c tly to the No mine e ’ s distinc tive c o ntrib utio ns. . I f a rtic le s a re use d a s e vide nc e , it ma y b e he lpful to inc lude c ita tio n indic e s a s we ll, pre fe ra b ly fro m a so urc e suc h a s Sc o pus o r We b o f Sc ie nc e .

On the Use of Public ations as Ite ms of E vide nc e

 Pro vide c le a r info rma tio n o n the pe rso nal pub lic a tio n c o ntrib utio ns o f the No mine e ,

pa rtic ula rly whe n jo int wo rk with c o -a utho rs, c o lla b o ra tive te a ms, sta nda rds c o mmitte e s, supe rvise d po st-g ra dua te s, e tc ., is invo lve d. T his ma y ta ke the fo rm o f a se nte nc e o r two fo llo wing e a c h ite m,

 De sc rib ing the No mine e ’ s pe rso na l c o ntrib utio n into the ide ntifie d a c c o mplishme nts,

a nd ho w it suppo rts the na rra tive in the “I ndividua l Co ntrib utio ns” se c tio n. T his is pa rtic ula rly impo rta nt b e c a use no t a ll I E E E c o mmunitie s use the sa me c o nve ntio n re g a rding the o rde r o f a utho rs’ na me s.

 A fre q ue ntly ma de mista ke is to list ite ms tha t a re to o re c e nt (this is a lso re le va nt to

pa te nts a nd o the r type s o f e vide nc e ) a s it is o fte n ha rd to de mo nstra te tha t the c o ntrib utio ns ha ve ha d a la sting so c ie ta l impa c t (whic h typic a lly wo uld re q uire a re la tive ly e xte nde d pe rio d – so me time s a de c a de o r e ve n mo re ).

On the Use of Pate nts as Ite ms of E vide nc e - 1

 T

he No mina to r sho uld c la rify:

 Whe the r the pa te nt is c la ssifie d a s De sig n o r Utility pa te nt (US pa te nts o nly). Utility

pa te nts typic a lly de sc rib e func tio na l use e ithe r b y struc ture , me tho d, o r a c o mb ine d se t o f the se type c la ims. De sig n pa te nts typic a lly a re o rna me nta l, la c king func tio na l c o mpo ne nts. An e xpla na tio n o f why a De sig n pa te nt is inc lude d a s e vide nc e is hig hly re c o mme nde d

 Whic h pa te nt c la ims (inde pe nde nt o r de pe nde nt) we re c o ntrib ute d so le ly b y the

No mine e , in the c a se the re is mo re tha n o ne inve nto r a sso c ia te d with a pa te nt?

On the Use of Pate nts as Ite ms of E vide nc e - 2

A summa ry sta te me nt de sc rib ing the e xpe c te d use o r sa le o f pa te nt I P sho uld a c c o mpa ny e a c h pa te nt c ite d a s e vide nc e . Ge ne ra l q ue stio ns the No mina to r sho uld a ddre ss a re :

• Ha s the pa te nt b e e n so ld o r lic e nse d to a third pa rty fo r use ? I

f ye s, wha t re ve nue s is it g e ne ra ting ?

• I

s the pa te nt impo rta nt fo r the a ssig ne e to re ma in o n the c utting e dg e o f the te c hno lo g y a re a b e ing de sc rib e d? I f ye s, ple a se e xpla in the c o mpe titive e dg e the pa te nt de sc rib e s.

• Ha s the pa te nt initia te d ne w b usine ss fo r the a ssig ne e ? I

f ye s, ple a se de sc rib e the ne w b usine ss ve nture in te rms o f ho w it is b e ne fitting the a ssig ne e a nd the so c ie ty a t la rg e .

• Ha s the inve nto r pub lishe d a re fe re e d te c hnic a l pub lic a tio n in a dditio n to the pa te nt? I

f ye s ple a se spe c ify whe re the pub lic a tio n ha s a ppe a re d.

• Ha s the pa te nt b e e n o fte n c ite d?
• Ha s the pa te nt b e e n de e me d e sse ntia l to pro duc ts o r sta nda rds?
• Wha t is the spe c ific c o ntrib utio n o f the No mine e to the pa te nt?
• Ha s this pa te nt sub se q ue ntly c re a te d a ne w fa mily o f I

P? I f ye s, a b rie f summa ry o f the fa mily o r fa milie s c re a te d wo uld b e pro vide d a nd/ o r suppo rte d b y a Re fe re nc e o r E ndo rse r.

E vide nc e of T e c hnic al Ac c omplishme nt/ Par t 2 (Se c tion 6, Par t 2 of the Nomination F

• r

m)

 No mina to r must no t list mo re tha n F

I VE a dditio na l ite ms, whic h ma y b e sub divide d into

• ne o r two distinc t are as o f c o ntributio ns tha t c o rre spo nd to the c o ntrib utio n a re a s

indic a te d pre vio usly. I nc lude o ne o r two se nte nc e s o n ho w the se a dditio na l ite ms pro vide e vide nc e o f impa c t.

 T

he se a dditio na l ite ms sho uld furthe r stre ng the n the ide ntifie d ma in te c hnic a l a c c o mplishme nts o f the No mine e . T he y ma y a lso pre se nt re sults o f diffe re nt c a te g o rie s

• f te c hnic a l a c hie ve me nts linke d to the ma in c o ntrib utio n.

 F

• r pub lic a tio ns, it is impo rta nt to sho w a susta ine d impa c t o f the m in a spe c ific a re a –

no t just tha t the No mine e is a pro lific a utho r. One e ffe c tive a ppro a c h is to c ho o se e vide nc e tha t do c ume nts a time line o f the e vo lutio n o f the No mine e ’ s c o ntrib utio n to the fie ld.

Othe r Major Se c tions of the Nomination (most ar e se lf-e xplanator y, de tails in the IE E E F e llow we bpage )

 IE

E E Ac tivitie s (Se c tion 7 of the Nomination F

• r

m)



Non-IE E E Ac tivitie s (Se c tion 8 of the Nomination F

• r

m)



Awar ds (Se c tion 9 of the Nomination F

• r

m)



Guide line s for the pr

• pose d c itation (Se c tion 10 of the Nomination F
• r

m)



Guide line s for IE E E Soc ie ty/ T e c hnic al Counc il (Se c tion 11 of the Nomination F

• r

m)



E ndor se me nts (Se c tion 12 of the Nomination F

• r

m)

R e fe r e nc e s



T he No mina to r must se c ure a t le a st thre e , b ut no mo re tha n five ,



Re fe re nc e s fro m I E E E F e llo ws who a re a b le to a sse ss the No mine e ’ s c o ntrib utio ns a nd the ir impa c t. T he se Re fe re nc e s a re c ho se n b y the No mina to r to a dvo c a te fo r the No mine e a nd pro vide info rma tio n a b o ut the va lue a nd impa c t o f the No mine e ’ s c o ntrib utio ns. T hus, the Re fe re nc e s sho uld b e e xpe rts in the spe c ific fie ld o f the No mine e ’ s c o ntrib utio ns.



T he No mina to r sho uld c o mmunic a te in a dva nc e with e a c h po te ntia l Re fe re nc e to a sc e rta in the ir le ve l

• f suppo rt. I

f a po te ntia l Re fe re nc e is no t c o mfo rta b le to o ffe r a stro ng po sitive re c o mme nda tio n, the No mina to r ma y c ho o se to a ppro a c h a no the r po te ntia l Re fe re nc e . A me dio c re le ve l o f q ua lific a tio n in a Re fe re nc e F

• rm is no t vie we d fa vo ra b ly b y the Judg e s.



A g o o d pra c tic e fo r the No mina to r to fo llo w is to c ho o se Re fe re nc e s tha t a re no t a ffilia te d with the No mine e b ut kno w a nd unde rsta nd the No mine e ’ s wo rk. T he se Re fe re nc e s stre ng the n the No mina tio n a s the y pro vide a n inde pe nde nt o pinio n a nd ve rific a tio n.



Re fe re nc e s fo r No mine e s in I E E E Re g io n 9 ma y b e sub mitte d b y Se nio r Me mb e rs o r F e llo ws. F

• r

No mine e s in a ll o the r Re g io ns, a ll Re fe re nc e s must b e F e llo ws.



T he No mina to r sho uld ma ke Re fe re nc e s a wa re o f the e xiste nc e o f the I E E E F e llo w Co mmitte e Re c o mme nda tio n Guide o n “E ffe c tive Re fe re nc e s a nd E ndo rse me nts”

T hings to avoid - 1

 Do no t intro duc e mo re tha n T

WO a re a s o f impa c t.

 Do no t pro vide ite ms o f e vide nc e tha t d o no t dire c tly suppo rt the a re a s

• f impa c t. Pie c e s o f e vide nc e tha t c a nno t b e c o rre la te d with o ne o f the

impa c t a re a s a re supe rfluo us. F

• r e xample , a pape r that has many

c itatio ns may no t be re le vant if it do e s no t suppo rt the ide ntifie d are a o f impac t.

 Do

no t ne g le c t c le a rly fo c using

• n the

ma in c o ntrib utio n(s) o f the No mine e – pro lific a utho rship do e s no t indic a te impa c t.

T hings to avoid - 2

 Do no t sub mit a No mina tio n to o e a rly. Ca re fully c o nside r whe n mig ht b e the rig ht time

to pre pa re a No mina tio n, ta king into a c c o unt the No mine e ’ s c a re e r pro g re ssio n a nd a c hie ve d a c c o mplishme nts. Allo w time fo r the No mine e ’ s impa c t to b e re c o g nize d a nd a do pte d a s we ll a s fo r the te c hnic a l a c c o mplishme nts to b e imple me nte d a nd utilize d.

 Do no t use the E

duc a tio n c a te g o ry unle ss the No mine e ha s b e e n truly fo c use d o n impro ving te c hnic a l a nd e ng ine e ring e duc a tio n a nd a c hie ve d ta ng ib le sig nific a nt re sults in the fie ld. Be ing a g o o d te a c he r o r a c a de mic a dministra to r do e s no t c o nstitute suffic ie nt g ro unds fo r I E E E F e llo w e le va tio n.

 Do no t use the T

e c hnic a l L e a de r c a te g o ry unle ss the No mine e c o ntrib ute d with c re a tivity a nd te c hnic a l inno va tio n to re so lving the c ha lle ng e s o f the pro je c t, a nd b o th his/ he r le a de rship a nd te c hnic a l ro le we re c ruc ia l to the suc c e ss o f the pro je c t. A T e c hnic a l L e a de r is no t so le ly a ma na g e r, e ve n if a suc c e ssful o ne . T hus, o rg a niza tio na l po sitio ns a lo ne c a nno t b e use d a s so le e vide nc e o f a c c o mplishme nts.

R e fe r e nc e s

 Re fe re nc e s a re hig hly va lue d whe n pro vide d b y e xpe rts in the spe c ific

fie ld o f the No mine e ’ s c o ntrib utio ns, so do no t c ho o se the mo st fa mo us Re fe re nc e s in the fie ld if the y do no t kno w the No mine e ’ s wo rk a nd a re no t a b le to a ddre ss the No mine e ’ s spe c ific a c c o mplishme nts.

 Do no t c ho o se Re fe re nc e s fro m o nly o ne re g io n o f the wo rld.  Do no t c ho o se to o ma ny Re fe re nc e s fro m a sing le a ffilia tio n o r a ll fro m

the sa me c o mpa ny.

 Do no t c ho o se o nly Re fe re nc e s who ha ve c o lla b o ra te d with the

No mine e .

F ur the r R e ading

 F

• r furthe r de ta ils o n the no rma tive re q uire me nts fo r the I

E E E F e llo w No mina tio n a nd E va lua tio ns pro c e ss a s we ll a s the e lig ib ility re q uire me nts o f a ll the pa rtic ipa nts in the I E E EF e llo w pro c e ss, ple a se se e the I E E E F e llo w Co mmitte e g o ve rning do c ume nts a nd Re c o mme nda tio n Guide s po ste d a t http:/ / www.ie e e .o rg / fe llo ws.

 Also , ple a se no te tha t this Re c o mme nda tio n Guide do e s no t re pla c e

the He lp Guide fo r using the F e llo w no mina tio n we b a pplic a tio n