The grade of Fellow is conferred by the IEEE Board of Directors upon an IEEE member with an extraordinary record of accomplishments in any of the IEEE fields of interest. The Fellow grade recognizes extraordinary individual technical or educational accomplishments, in line with the IEEE Certificate of Incorporation that states that the purposes and objects of the Corporation are “to engage exclusively in scientific and educational activities.” An effort to review the Fellow elevation process was started by the IEEE Board of Directors back in 2020, culminating today in a proposal that drastically changes many aspects of the elevation process. Several concerning issues with this proposal were identified by multiple stakeholders, such as the 2021 Fellow Strategic Planning Subcommittee (FSPS) and several Societies and Technical Councils who expressed their strong objections to the proposal. This article provides an in-depth analysis of the proposal and concludes that the proposed changes derive from a misunderstanding of the current Fellow processes and are based on a misidentification of the root causes of the perceived shortcomings in the current practice. Furthermore, the proposed changes lack an evidence-based rationale for justifying making such drastic changes while the available evidence points to their ineffectiveness at addressing the stated goals. The objective of this article is to help IEEE members and decision makers better understand what is at stake and make informed decisions on a difficult and complex topic.

中文翻译：

---

对 IEEE Fellow Elevation Process 拟议变更的分析（特邀论文）

Fellow 等级由 IEEE 董事会授予在任何 IEEE 感兴趣的领域取得非凡成就的 IEEE 成员。院士级别认可非凡的个人技术或教育成就，符合 IEEE 公司注册证书，该证书声明公司的目的和目标是“专门从事科学和教育活动”。早在 2020 年，IEEE 董事会就开始努力审查院士提升过程，今天最终提出了一项提案，该提案彻底改变了提升过程的许多方面。多个利益相关者确定了与该提案有关的几个问题，例如 2021 研究员战略规划小组委员会 (FSPS) 和几个社团和技术委员会，他们对该提案表示强烈反对。本文对该提议进行了深入分析，并得出结论认为，提议的变更源于对当前研究员流程的误解，并且基于对当前实践中感知缺陷的根本原因的错误识别。此外，提议的变更缺乏基于证据的理由来证明做出如此剧烈的改变是合理的，而现有证据表明它们在实现既定目标方面无效。本文的目的是帮助 IEEE 成员和决策者更好地了解面临的风险，并就困难和复杂的主题做出明智的决定。本文对该提议进行了深入分析，并得出结论认为，提议的变更源于对当前研究员流程的误解，并且基于对当前实践中感知缺陷的根本原因的错误识别。此外，提议的变更缺乏基于证据的理由来证明做出如此剧烈的改变是合理的，而现有证据表明它们在实现既定目标方面无效。本文的目的是帮助 IEEE 成员和决策者更好地了解面临的风险，并就困难和复杂的主题做出明智的决定。本文对该提议进行了深入分析，并得出结论认为，提议的变更源于对当前研究员流程的误解，并且基于对当前实践中感知缺陷的根本原因的错误识别。此外，提议的变更缺乏基于证据的理由来证明做出如此剧烈的改变是合理的，而现有证据表明它们在实现既定目标方面无效。本文的目的是帮助 IEEE 成员和决策者更好地了解面临的风险，并就困难和复杂的主题做出明智的决定。