At Agile 2008 I agreed to take the reins of the Gordon Pask Award from Brian Marick, who had stewarded the award through its first four years. Laurent Bossavit and I have agreed to administer the award for the foreseeable future, although I promise Laurent that I will do most of the work. I have quite strong personal feelings about the award, since the committee awarded it to Jim Shore and me in 2005, and I also have some strong feelings about public recognition in general, so I felt it wise to canvas the public a little to find out what they think about the award. In the past month, a handful of you have responded, and I have organized those responses into a few categories. I wanted to share them with you in the hopes that more of you would provide some input, even if just “me, too”.

Most of the respondents said that the Gordon Pask Award helps them know whom they should talk to. I consider this the primary mission of the award: to shine a light on the people the community ought to pay attention to and even push to greater heights. I also consider this the award’s greatest strength, and I will encourage the selection committee to keep this point uppermost in its collective mind when it meets to select the 2009 winners. What problems do you believe this approach will create?

A few respondents said that they look at the award winners as models to emulate. One person said that seeing someone win the award made him think he should “get off (his) ass and add value.” Another said that the winners’ actions serve as a model to him. A third said that the award “breathes new life” into the community. I consider this to be an important part of the award’s influence: a kind of call to action to the rest of the community. I felt especially proud of Arlo Belshee’s call to action: come back to Agile 2009 and tell us what you’ve invented in the past year. I believe this kind of rallying helps the community grow, although I remain concerned about the award’s effective on people’s intrinsic motivation. I have read Kohn’s Punished By Rewards and I find it important to dampen the negative effects of the award on the community. I don’t want people to do things expressly hoping to win the award, and a part of me believes that karma will stop those people from winning, anyway. What other problems do you believe the award will create?

A couple of respondents pointed out the importance of knowing on what basis people nominated others, and especially on what basis we chose the winners. I understand the desire for transparency, but I fear that if we act too transparently, then we will lose our opportunity to be flexible and dynamic in our choices. Our selection committee meetings take long enough already and as the committee expands to include two more winners, I imagine the complexity will only increase. To add things like precedents and worry about how this group of people who react to choosing Person X over Person Y… frankly, if that starts to happen, then I will walk away from the program entirely. On the other hand, I do counsel businesses to be uncomfortably transparent, so I don’t know how to take my own advice here. I don’t know how to balance transparency with freedom to make choices without undue recrimination from the agile community. Do you have any advice for us on that front?

Someone suggested we publish a collection of references to the award winners’ work shortly after we present the award as a starting place for learning about the award winners and their work. I really like this idea and I plan to invite Kenji Hiranabe and Arlo Belshee to help me prepare an anthology of sorts for them. I encourage you to suggest references to their work as well by email.

One person commented about how easily one could see the award winners become a clique, meaning that one would need to belong to an inner circle to win the award. This represents by far my greatest fear for the Gordon Pask Award. Given that the previous winners get together with Brian Marick, Rachel Davies and Big Dave Thomas to select the next winners, and given that the nominating process has progressed somewhat haphazardly so far, I can see the risk of becoming another Old Boys Network. I don’t know how to deal with this potential problem, except to keep it in mind as the selection committee works towards selecting new winners, as well as working with you to make the nomination process more open. I want desperately to avoid turning the Gordon Pask Award into American Idol! I don’t want the public the vote and I especially don’t want to see effects like “Vote For The Worst” infiltrate this award. This might mean less transparency, but I remain open to other suggestions. If you feel concerned about the award winners becoming a closed circle, what might we do to allay your concern?

One person commented that no woman has yet won the award. On this point, I must remain firm. I will influence the selection committee as much as possible against letting issues of gender, religion, sexual orientation, or any similar issues directly affect the choices we make. I do not want to give the award to a woman in 2009, an Eastern European in 2010, then someone fitting some other particular “type” in 2011. Anyone can win the award. A diverse group selects the winners, and that group grows more diverse each year. I don’t see anyone trying to keep the award away from women, gays, or the handicapped. I especially don’t care to dispute the notion of ‘proper terms’ for groups of people. On this basis, I see no need to encourage the selection committee to consider any particular group of people for the award. We consider anyone and everyone.

No-one yet has taken the time to tell us that they want us to discontinue the award. If you happen to feel that way, I really want to hear from you, because those opinions will tend to differ from mine the most. I need those opinions to have a balanced view. Please don’t hold back.

Finally, if you have any suggestions related to the questions above, please tell me about them, otherwise I will simply choose the suggestions I like and change nothing else. Thank you for your time.