Report to the IEEE Computer Society Technical Activities Board (TAB): Regaining Industry/Government Participation


Joseph (Joe) R. Bumblis


Chair, TCCC



Executive Summary


In March, 2005 Stephanie White asked me to consider options and recommendations to TAB to help regain industry and government participation in Computer Society (CS) activities including membership and conferences. Since that time, I have endeavored to perform all possible due diligence to investigate where the CS has been (i.e. history), where it is now (i.e. current view via CS web page), and where we may be going in the near future. I contacted several key individuals I consider to have played a major role in past CS activities including active participation in the IEEE, CS, IEEE Twin Cities Section, and Communications Society (ComSoc) activities. I then proceeded to collect information from CS web sites to form a current-day picture to ‘see’ the CS from an external point of view. Lastly, I attempted to speculate on the future of government/industry/practitioners to understand were membership and current interests may lie.


The following table is a brief overview of my findings regarding a past and current view of the IEEE, CS and ComSoc. Details pertaining to this summarized information are contained later in this report.


Table 1 – Observed view regarding participation and leadership



Academic Representation


InfoCom – 1985 [5]



InfoCom -2004 [5]



GlobeCom – 1985 [5]



GlobeCom -2004 [5]



LCN – 1985 [3]



LCN – 2004 [3]






IEEE Board of Directors (11)

7 (64%)

4 (36%)

CS Board of Governors (21)



CS Executive Committee (17)

12 (71%)

5 (29%)

CS TC Chairs (37):

31 (83.8%)

6 (16.2%)


From a conference perspective, InfoCom, GlobeCom, and LCN have all experienced a dramatic increase in student attendance. This has further decreased conference cash flow since students attend conferences at a rate ranging from 20% - 50% lower than non-student attendees reducing conference surplus with no proportionate decrease in conference cost (e.g. hotel services, meals, proceedings, etc.). Moreover, there is increased pressure from CS academic leaders to fund student travel from world-wide locations increasing negative cash-flow from a society perspective.


From a leadership prospective, the IEEE and CS continue to attract people from academia. I was unable to locate leadership representation from past IEEE Board of Directors, CS Board of Governors, CS Executive Committee, and CS TC Chairs. I would imagine the IEEE and CS could supply such information, but it was not available on the public web pages.


Possible strategies:


The Computer Society is now an academic society:


1.  Accept the fact that the Computer Society is now an academic society. Restructure the financial model with the basic premise that academics do not spend money unless available from research grants. The new CS financial model must take into consideration lower conference surpluses due to increased student participation, and increased pressure from CS academic leaders to fund student travel and attendance at conferences. Moreover, the new financial model must take into consideration a reduction in sales of conference proceedings and CS publications (universities typically purchase one copy for all to use), library services (universities typically purchase a group access license so hundreds of students can search the CS libraries basically for free), and a reduction in cash flow from other CS services since industry no longer sees value in these items. It must also be considered that academic institutions tend to spend money (regarding IEEE and CS services and conference attendance) at a lesser rate than government/industry except when available from research grants. Lastly, save your marketing dollars; any marketing intended to increase revenue will most likely be ignored by most academic institutions.


The Computer Society wishes to be a practitioner society:


1. Restructure the Computer Society to more closely follow the Hot Chips conference model sponsored by TCMM (see: ). This includes the aggressive recruitment of CS/TAB/TC leadership from industry/government, approaching industry/government for direct sponsorship of CS activities, and a commitment from the CS to offer services that contribute to the success of sponsors from industry/government.


2. Work with industry/government to post IEEE/CS activities on corporate bulletin boards to advertise activities. This will only be successful if activities include value-added items as perceived by practitioners.


3. In all conferences the CS sponsors, add a mandatory "Industrial track with 1 or 2 sessions"--too often industry solves problems that are pieces of engineering work and don't get due credit from academics--this way, we may increase motivation for submission and participation by industry. Also, include more interdisciplinary activities (wide breadth) so industry/practitioners gain a maximum amount of knowledge per their investment [6]. Moreover, the inclusion of poster sessions at conferences may attract practitioners since a comprehensive paper is not typically required; perhaps only presentation material. [5]


4. Engage local IEEE chapters and sections worldwide to advertise and solicit local member input and participation regarding upcoming conferences and TC activities


5. Organize conferences jointly with various federal/state/local government agencies in selected locations. Government agencies are often big buyers of technology, and their presence would indirectly make it attractive for industry representatives to network at such events [6].


6. In some of our conferences, we may wish explore adding a "career fair" component--allowing practitioners to mingle more easily with employers and giving our activities a wider coverage. This may not be well accepted by government/industry management, but if done concurrently with a conference, it would be viewed as an adjunct activity as opposed to a mainstream conference activity.


7. Partner with universities to offer continuing/professional education courses that are branded/approved by IEEE. IEEE members should get some discount (e.g., 10-20%) for these course--in turn, IEEE can offer its influence to increase attendance in the courses. This also fits well with current “career growth” activities sponsored by the IEEE

[ ]


8. Regarding the above recommendations, it may also be worth exploring the creation of "educational courses" that would be taught by well-known folks at the various company sites. These courses can really cover more practical material--IEEE should be able to do this cheaper than many for-profit educational bodies--and professors/practitioners can get part of the fees to encourage them to offer such 2-3 day courses.



Findings and Details: Past, Present, and Recommendations


Individual Perspectives


Offered by Mr. Howard Salwen [1] on April 6, 2005:


Howard Salwen is the founder of Proteon, Inc.; a world leader in network routing technology and products during the 1980’s and early 1990’s. While CEO of Proteon, he offered to pay the IEEE membership dues for any of his employees wishing to join the IEEE; no one signed-up. Mr. Salwen had no explanation for this response to his offer to pay IEEE membership dues.


Howard explained that while running Proteon, he and his staff often spent 80% of their time designing routers and network equipment “as they have always done”; but, 20% of their time doing things differently to try new technologies and new engineering methodologies. He feels that during this 1980’s to early 1990’s period, the IEEE/CS/ComSoc played an important role in identifying new technologies and giving him and his team new ideas to try out.


Today, Mr. Salwen is on the Board of Directors of an internet gaming company in the greater Boston, MA area. Howard also is active in IEEE local chapter activities, ComSoc, and CS including the Standing Committee of TCCC. He stated that when flyers are distributed by ComSoc, they often catch his eye and he attends their meetings. The most recent ComSoc meeting was on Software Radio. This caught Howard’s eye because of not only the topic, but also because of a company called “Vanu” that is attempting to produce products based on software radio technology. Howard unfortunately cannot say the same about Computer Society flyers. He often chooses not to attend CS local chapter functions simply because of topics and eye-catching advertisement.


Howard made a few suggestions regarding my question about getting industry and practitioners again interested in IEEE/CS activities, conferences and TCs; they are as follows:

·        Get IEEE/CS activities posted on corporate bulletin boards to advertise activities,

·        Engage local chapters to advertise and solicit local member input regarding upcoming conferences and TC activities,

·        Look at more interdisciplinary activities (wide breadth) so industry/practitioners gain a maximum amount of knowledge per their investment. Remember, corporations not on pay for employees to go to conferences, but they also have an “away-from-the-office” cost. Industry will always look for the ROI,


Offered by Mr. Ellis Nolley [2] on April 5, 2005:


Ellis offered the following as “facts” regarding the IEEE and Societies in general:


1. IEEE, especially Computer Society, has many members employed by major corporations throughout the US and World

2. The role of technology has shifted from essential to company formation and survival to enabling of new products and market success.

3. Technology continues to change rapidly and companies struggle to keep up.

4. Companies struggle with roles of technology in research, product development and marketing.

5. Companies are increasingly shorter-term focused, especially in the US.


Ellis offered the following suggestions that may help to regain industry interest in IEEE/CS activities:


1.Instead of merely performing a driving effort from IEEE to employee to company, try driving effort the other way: IEEE to company to employee.  Think of a triangle with arrows going around. For example, have opportunities encourage companies to honor the accomplishments of the best IEEE members (e.g. Outstanding IEEE employee).  Then, IEEE membership becomes valuable to the employee because the company recognizes it and them. Others see it, and want to participate.

2. Look for ways to enable company success.  Technology training is difficult to perform, companies find it expensive to do, and the IEEE could enable it in the areas we are strong.  Universities are struggling to reach out to companies, we can help form a bridge by enabling IEEE distance learning in certain technologies.

3. Prototyping, integration, identifying promising technologies and research techniques are difficult for companies to do because their viewpoint is so narrow and the issue is so broad, and the IEEE can help.

4. Technology has moved from being US centric to international communities, and companies still tend to invest primarily in their home nations.  Because the IEEE is international, it can engage international technology communities and become a bridge between them and the companies that can use their technologies.  Industry forums are an important way company employees can communicate and share ideas with their counterparts working for competitors.  Also, supplier relationships often form in the technical committees.

5. Companies are constantly looking to hire key technologist who are buried in other companies.  The IEEE can provide a forum for them to be identified, recognized, and recruited.


Offered by Dr. Frank Huebner [3] on 4-28-05:


It is Frank’s opinion that it will be tough to get industry back to IEEE/CS/ComSoc conferences, since not only the conference fee and travel/lodging is viewed as an expense (in an era of cost savings), but also the time out of the office. Only if there is a strong potential for bringing in revenue back to the corporation (new sales leads, etc., with a pertinent conference attendee population, i.e., not only students, etc.) as a result of the conference will industry people be able to attend.



Current CS as Externally Perceived


Research by Mr. Joe Bumblis [4]:


It is my belief that any strategy to regain government/industry/practitioners support of IEEE/CS activities, including conferences and technical committees/councils, requires a value-added view of the current state of affairs as seen by an external observer; especially practitioners. Even current members are most likely viewing information on IEEE/CS web pages as they decide whether or not to renew membership and attend conferences.


I wish to state that any information explicitly indicating names and affiliations is by no means an attempt to imply these individuals are not qualified to perform the duties of their assignments, nor that they don’t have the best interest of the IEEE or Computer Society at the forefront of their thinking. They are listed simply to demonstrate the external view a current or prospective member has when viewing the information.


First, a view of the Computer Society web page ( )

“With nearly 100,000 members, the IEEE Computer Society is the world's leading organization of computer professionals. Founded in 1946, it is the largest of the 37 societies of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE).


The Computer Society's vision is to be the leading provider of technical information and services to the world's computing professionals.


The Society is dedicated to advancing the theory, practice, and application of computer and information processing technology. Through its…”


Several things should be noted from the above quotations extracted from the CS web page. The first is a clear statement that “… the IEEE Computer Society is the world's leading organization of computer professionals.” I am not going to engage in a debate whether or not academia represents “computer professional”; however, the statement can easily be interpreted as industry/practitioner, not researcher. Second, the vision statement “…to be the leading provider of technical information and services to the world's computing professionals.” also appears to speak to industry/practitioners. However, the expression “…leading supplier…” may indicate the need to support focused research in order to provide “…technical information…” Third, the vision statement “The Society is dedicated to advancing the theory, practice, and application of computer and information processing technology.” may be interpreted as a partnership between academia and industry/practitioners; a partnership that is clearly not represented in the CS leadership and TC Chairs. As depicted in Table 2 below, 31 out of 37 (83.8%) TC Chairs have academic/university affiliations while only 6 out of 37 (16.2%) TC Chairs have government/industry affiliations. When viewed externally, the Computer Society Technical Committees and Councils appear to have a strong resemblance to a pure academic community and is probably interpreted as such by external practitioner viewers.


Moreover, from an external viewpoint, the Computer Society clearly appears to be an academic society with regards to the CS Board of Governors (extracted from: )


Term Expires 2005


Oscar N. Garcia – Dr. Garcia earned his Bachelor of Science and master’s degrees, both in electrical engineering, from North Carolina State University. He holds a doctorate in electrical engineering from the University of Maryland.


Mark A. Grant – Dr. Grant  received  a  BS in Engineering (Electrical) with honors from Oakland University,  an  MS  in  Engineering  (Biomedical)  from  the University of Michigan, and a Juris Doctor, Cum Laude, from Santa Clara University  School  of  Law.   He  is  admitted to practice in California, the District of Columbia, before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and before the U.S. Tax Court.  In 2005 he has been admitted to the New York Supreme Court.


Michel Israel - An Outstanding Professor, Dr. Israel, now the Scientific Counsellor of the French Embassy in Tokyo, was Dean of the Faculty of Sciences and chair of the CNRS CS laboratory at the University of Evry. He was the EU chair of an EU-US exchange program (1997-2000), a visiting professor at the University of Toronto (1986), at the University of Galatasaray (1999), Turkey and was one of the initiator of a Japan-France doctoral college.  Israel, a PhD in Computer Sciences from Paris 6 University...


James D. Isaak – Mr. Isaak, an assistant professor at Southern New Hampshire University, has filled software and management roles for 30 years, including at Digital Equipment, Data General, Intel, and IBM. He received a BS and an MSEE from Stanford University and is a graduate of a 2002 Leadership New Hampshire program on developing social capital.


Stephen B. Seidman – Dr. Seidman received a BS in mathematics from the City College of New York, and an MA and a PhD in mathematics from the University of Michigan


Kathleen M. Swigger – Dr. SWIGGER serves on the Board of Governors with a term of 2003-2005 (second consecutive term).  She is also chair of the IEEE Computer Society Web Redesign Committee.  She has previously served as the Ombudsman (2000-2001).  Swigger, a graduate with BA, MA, and PhD degrees from the University of Iowa, is currently a professor of computer science at the University of North Texas in Denton.


Makoto Takizawa – Dr. Takizawa  received his B.E. and M.E. degrees in Applied Physics from Tohoku University, Japan, in 1973 and 1975, respectively. He received his D.E. in Computer Science from Tohoku University in 1984. From 1975 to 1986, he worked for Japan Information Processing Developing Center (JIPDEC) supported by the MITI, Japan.


CS Board of Governors: Term Expires 2006


Mark J. Christensen - Christensen received a PhD in mathematics from Wayne State University and an MS in physics from Purdue  University, where he was a Woodrow Wilson Fellow. Since 1999, Christensen has worked as an independent contractor working on the evaluation and test of software-controlled systems.


Alan Clements - He graduated in electronics at the University of Sussex in 1971 and obtained a PhD in data transmission at Loughborough University in 1976.


Annie Combelles – Ms. Combelles   is  a  1973  graduate  of  the  Ecole  Nationale  Suprieure  de l'Aronautique  et  de  l'Espace  and  a  2001  graduate  of  Hautes  Etudes Commerciales  Management.  She received the 1980 Aerospace and Aeronautics Medal for Innovation in France.


Ann Q. Gates - Gates holds a PhD in computer science from New Mexico State University. Dr. Gates is an associate professor in the Department of Computer Science at the University  of Texas at El Paso


Rohit Kapur - Dr. Kapur is a Scientist at Synopsys Inc. In his current role Dr. Kapur is responsible for working closely with the product development team to design new technologies for IC design and test. Dr. Kapur received a bachelor's degree in engineering from Birla Institute of Technology in Mesra, India in 1985, and master's and doctorate degrees in computer engineering from the University  of Texas at Austin in 1992…


Susan A. Mengel - Mengel, who received a PhD in computer science from Texas A&M University, is an associate professor in the Computer Science Department at Texas Tech University and oversees the master's program in software engineering.


Bill N. Schilit – He received a BA, MS, and PhD in computer science from Columbia University in New York City. Schilit is a principal engineer and codirector of Intel Research Seattle and is part of a small team chartered with defining and driving Intel's ubiquitous computing agenda.



With respect to CS Technical Committees (TC’s), 31 out of 37 Chairs represent academia; only 6 represent government/industry. The individual breakout of TC Chairs is outlined in Table 2 below.


Table 2: Current TC Chairs from:




Bioinformatics (TCBI)

Dr. Vicky Markstein

Complexity in Computing (TCCX) 

Dr. Michael G. Hinchey

NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

Computational Medicine (TCCM)

Prof. Peter Kokol


University of Maribor

Computer Architecture (TCCA)

Dr. Jean-Luc  Gaudiot,

Professor and Chair

The Henry Samueli School of Engineering

Computer Communications (TCCC)

Mr. Joe Bumblis

United Defense L.P.

Computer Elements (TCCE)

James Hughes

Storage Technology Corp.

Computer Languages (TCCL)

Dr. Joseph Urban

Arizona State University

Computer Generated Music (TCCGM)

Dr. Denis L. Baggi

Swiss Federal Institute of Technology

Data Engineering (TCDE)

Dr. Erich Neuhold

Darmstadt University of Technology

Design Automation (TCDA)

John Willis, PhD

FTL Systems

Digital Libraries (TCDL)

Dr. Edward A. Fox

Virginia Tech

Distributed Processing (TCDP)

Prof. Chita R. Das

Penn State University

Electronic Commerce (TCEC)

Dr. Jen-Yao Chung


IBM T. J. Watson Research Center

Electronics and the Environment (TCEE)

June Andersen, PhD

IBM (San Jose, CA)

Engineering of Computer Based Systems (TCECBS)

Dr. Perry Alexander

University of Kansas

Fault-Tolerant Computing (TCFT)

Dr. Jaynarayan H. Lala


Intelligent Informatics (TCII)

Dr. Xindong Wu

University of Vermont

Internet (TCI)

Dr. Arun Iyengar


IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

Learning Technology (TFLT)

Dr. Kinshuk

Massey University

Mass Storage Systems (TCMS)

Mr. Merritt Jones

The MITRE Corp

Mathematical Foundations of Computing (TCMF)

Dr.Andrei Broder

CTO, Institute for Search and Text Analysis

IBM Research Division

Microprocessors and Microcomputers (TCMCOMP)

Mr. Allen J. Baum

? (sponsors “Hot Chips” conference)

Microprogramming & Microarchitecture (TCuARCH)

Prof. Thomas M. Conte


North Carolina State University

Multimedia Computing (TCMC)

Dr. Phillip C-Y Sheu

University of California, Irvine

Multiple-Valued Logic (TCMVL)

Dr. Marek Perkowski

Portland State University

Operating Systems Applications and Environments (TCOS)

Prof. Ethan L. Miller

University of California

Parallel Processing (TCPP)

Dr. David A. Bader                                

University of New Mexico

Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (TCPAMI)

Prof. Kim L. Boyer

The Ohio State University

Real-Time Systems (TCRTS)

Dr. Wei Zhao

Texas A&M University

Scalable Computing (TCSC)

Mark Baker -------------->


Rajkumar Buyya -------->

Marcin Paprzycki ------->

University of Portsmouth,   United Kingdom

University of Melbourne

Oklahoma State University

Security and Privacy (TCSP)

Dr. Heather Hinton

IBM Software Group

Services Computing

Dr. Liang-Jie Zhang


IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

Simulation (TCSIM)

Professor Anup Kumar

University of Louisville

Systems Packaging (TCCP)

Mr. Erich Klink

IBM Systems Group

Visualization and Graphics (vgtc)

Dr. Hanspeter Pfister


Mitsubishi Electric Research Laboratories (MERL)


Dr. Joseph R. Cavallaro

Rice University

Wearable Information Systems (TCWIS)

David Mizell


Cray, Inc.



Another external item viewed by all CS members, and those looking at CS publications, may see COMPUTER Magazine as an academic publication based solely on the publication staff.


Editor in Chief

Doris L. Carver,

From Google:

“Carver is the Associate Vice Chancellor of Research and Graduate Studies and a Professor in the Department of Computer Science at Louisiana State University…and a PhD in computer science from Texas A&M University.  She is a Fellow of the IEEE and the AAAS.”


Associate Editors in Chief

Bill Schilit — Invisible Computing,

From Google:

“Co-Director Intel Research Seattle, Intel Corporation…a Ph.D. degree in computer science in 1995 from Columbia University for studies in location and context-aware mobile computing.”


Kathleen Swigger — Research Features,

From Google:

“…and PhD degrees from the University of Iowa, is currently a professor of computer science at the University of North Texas in Denton, where she does research and teaches in the areas of computer-supported cooperative work, human interfaces, and artificial intelligence, specifically, intelligent interfaces.”


Web Editor

Ron Vetter

From Google:

“Ron Vetter is a Professor and Chair of the Department of Computer Science at the University of North Carolina at Wilmington (UNCW). Vetter received …his PhD in computer science from the University of Minnesota, Minneapolis in 1992.”


Perspectives Editor

Bob Colwell,

No detailed information located on public web pages.


Computing Practices Editor

Rohit Kapur,

No detailed information located on public web pages.



One CS publication that appears to have more of a government/industry focus as perceived from viewing the publications staff is IT Professional Magazine.



Frank Ferrante

Independent Consultant


From Google:

“Frank has had a distinguished 40-year career in the engineering field and holds a Bachelor of Science and Master's degree in Electrical Engineering from Virginia Tech and Syracuse University, respectively, and was awarded a MITRE/Carnegie Mellon University Fellowship in 1986 and 1987. Using his fellowship, Frank was awarded a Master's in Engineering and Public Policy from Carnegie Mellon in 1988.”


Associate Editor-in-Chief

Articles Arnold Bragg

No detailed information located on public web pages.


Associate Editor-in Chief

Perspectives Jeff Voas


No detailed information located on public web pages.



Looking at a broader view, the IEEE is not without perception issues. As extracted from:


“IEEE Vision and Mission VISION


To advance global prosperity by fostering technological innovation, enabling members' careers and promoting community world-wide.




The IEEE promotes the engineering process of creating, developing, integrating, sharing, and applying knowledge about electro and information technologies and sciences for the benefit of humanity and the profession.”


However, as extracted from:


“About IEEE


2005 IEEE Board of Directors*Indicates members of the IEEE Executive Committee


2005 IEEE President and CEO *Mr. W. Cleon Anderson

IEEE President-Elect *Dr. Michael R. Lightner

IEEE Past President *Dr. Arthur W. Winston

Director & Secretary *Dr. Mohamed El-Hawary

Director & Treasurer *Mr. Joseph V. Lillie

Director & Vice President, Educational Activities *Dr. Moshe Kam

Director & Vice President, Publication Services & Products *Prof. Leah H. Jamieson

Director & Vice President, Regional Activities *Mr. Marc T. Apter

Director & Vice President, Standards Association *Mr. Donald N. Heirman

Director & Vice President, Technical Activities *Dr. John R. Vig

Director & President IEEE-USA *Dr. Gerard A. Alphonse


Seven (7) out of eleven (11) (i.e. 64%) top level director represent research/academia




It is my conclusion that the CS (and IEEE/ComSoc) has experienced a loss of government/industry/practitioner participation due partly to the perception that the IEEE/CS/ComSoc have become academic institutions. This can be seen in not only the representation in leadership (i.e. academic as opposed to government/industry), but also in Technical Committee/Technical Council leadership. Moreover, as government/industry has morphed into not only a global community, but also into a more product-centric focus, the value offered by IEEE/CS/ComSoc as perceived by government/industry has not kept pace with these changes. Instead, it appears that IEEE/CS/ComSoc has filled the declining participation of government/industry with academic participants. This is really not surprising considering academic volunteers are typically rewarded by their educational institutions for their volunteer efforts through tenure and advanced professorial positions. Since government/industry no longer values IEEE/CS/ComSoc activities, volunteerism is no longer rewarded as in the past.


I also see the Computer Society having two options; both of which may be mutually exclusive. The first is to accept that the Computer Society has become an academic institution and adjust the business model accordingly. The second is to actively and aggressively reach out to government/industry/practitioners and engage in recruiting leadership from this community to help the “perception” problem. The Computer Society also needs to solicit input from government/industry/practitioners to regain a detailed understanding of value-added activities that would once again attract participation from government/industry/practitioners.



Further Research


As with any paper, this one is not without suggestions for further research. From a historical perspective, I believe the Computer Society should look back on its leadership over the past twenty-five years to establish a trend regarding government/industry/practitioner exodus. This can then be correlated to business trends and Computer Society services to establish how and why government/industry/practitioners perceived less value in the Computer Society. From a services perspective (i.e. membership and conferences), the Computer Society should perform detailed surveys of conference content and attendees to understand the value-added problem. This could take the form of a researcher-practitioner-user model (think of a triangle) that could show current needs and trends between the three. The Computer Society could leverage these findings to add value to membership, services, and conferences. I do not believe aggressive marketing is a viable solution without first considering the perceived value IEEE/CS/ComSoc offers to government/industry/practitioners.



References and Acknowledgements


[1] Mr. Howard Salwen: Founded Proteon, Inc. in 1972 and was Chairman of its Board of Directors until it merged with Netrix Corp. in December of 1999.   Proteon, also known as OpenRoute Networks, Inc.  and  NxNetworks, Inc. manufactured hardware and software for computer network communications. He has also served as Chairman of the Board of UltraNet Communications, Inc. UltraNet was acquired by RCN Corp. Mr. Salwen is a member of the Board of Directors of the Massachusetts Telecommunication Council and was its Chairman in 1996. He also serves on the Oversight Committees of The Museum of Science and the Fleet Boston Celebrity Series. Mr. Salwen is currently a Member-at-Large of the TCCC and is a member of the Standing Committee of the LCN conference.


[2] Mr. Ellis Nolley: Heads a strategic planning firm and positions technology businesses to target markets.  Dynamic, results-focused business leader and developer with an M.S. Degree in Mathematics and over 20 years of broad-based experience in strategic planning, business development, marketing, product management and product development of information systems.  Mr. Nolley served as Chair of the Twin Cities IEEE, Vice-Chair of Market Requirements & Ambassador for the ATM Forum, and General Chair of the IEEE Local Computer Network Conference.  Noted speaker on market changes and technological trends in the information industry. Mr. Nolley is currently the Strategic Planning Chair of the TCCC and is very active in the IEEE Twin Cities Section.


[3] Dr. Frank Huebner: Currently a manager with the Technical Services Analysis group at AT&T Labs in New Jersey. Dr. Huebner is also the current Finance Chair of the LCN conference.


[4] Mr. Joseph (Joe) R. Bumblis: Currently an Information Technology Project Manager/Systems Architect at United Defense (UDLP) in Fridley, Minnesota. Prior to joining UDLP, Joe served as an Assistant Professor at Purdue University in the School of Technology, Department of Computer Technology. He also served as an Adjunct Faculty member in the Department of Computer Science at the University of Minnesota, and as an Adjunct Professor in the Graduate Program in Software Engineering (GPSE) at the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul, MN. Joe's background and experience spans many disciplines which include Systems Engineer/Systems Architect for Control Data Corporation, computer communications design specialist at McDonald Douglass Space Systems Company, a researcher and Senior Member of Technical Staff at MCC, a Development Program Manager at Tandem Computers (now HP/Compaq), an IT Design Specialist at 3M, and as a consultant at Veritas Software specializing in SAN and API development.


[5] Dr. Harvey Freeman: Currently the IEEE Communications Society (ComSoc) TAB Vice President. Dr. Freeman is also a member of a research team in a major consulting firm in Maryland.


[6] Dr. Archan Misra: Currently employed as a Research Staff Member with the Pervasive Security and Networking Department at the IBM TJ Watson Research Center, Hawthorne, NY.  Prior to joining IBM in March 2001, Archan spent 3 1/2 years at Telcordia Technologies (formerly called Bellcore), where he participated in several initiatives in the areas of mobility management protocols for IP-based cellular networks, congestion control, QoS architectures and autoconfiguration of heterogeneous networks. Dr. Misra is currently the Un-tethered Network Technology Chair for the TCCC.