< Back to RSS Governance Review
In this section

Themes from member consultation and resulting actions

Following Council’s approval of the proposed changes to RSS governance, members were consulted in April/May 2026. Twenty-eight members responded to the consultation, and a summary of the themes, and the action taken, is set out below. 

Feedback was collected via MSForms and structured in line with the following themes of the review: effectiveness/accountability, advice/input, inclusivity/community, clarity/consistency, efficiency/impact, and data science. A prompt was also included for any other comments. 


Overall sentiment 

Overall, feedback was strongly supportive, with a mean member rating of 4.23 / 5 in response to the question: how well do you feel the proposed future governance arrangements reflect the needs of the RSS today. Respondents commonly welcome a smaller, skills-based Board, clearer separation of governance/advice, improved clarity of roles, and the move to introduce the Chartered Data Science Professional (CDSP) qualification.

The governance review appears thoughtfully framed and addresses key challenges around accountability, clarity, member involvement, and long-term relevance. The most critical factor for success will likely be clear, consistent communication, well-planned implementation, and continuous engagement with members to ensure that the new arrangements stay effective, responsive, and inclusive.’

Feedback flagged four themes that could undermine confidence: 

  1. Democratic accountability and member voice: concern that an advisory Council could be seen as tokenistic and trustees insufficiently accountable to members. 

  1. Representation breadth: concerns about UK-centrism/international members, and perceived gaps (education, publications) in addition to worries about concentration of power in a smaller board. 

  1. Implementation detail and resourcing: strong emphasis on the need for a clear scheme of delegation, selection pathways, transition clarity (including CDSP), and adequate staff support—otherwise benefits may not materialise. 

  1. Professional standards/credentialing: especially the perceived meaning/value of post nominals and accessibility/recognition issues around GradStat pathways. 

The following section explores the feedback and agreed actions in more detail.


Your feedback and agreed actions

1. Democratic accountability and member voice 

Your feedback: 

  • Members support “a leaner, skills‑based Board enabling faster, higher‑quality decisions and clearer accountability.” 
  • ​Clear separation between governance and advisory roles is positive, but only if member influence is transparent.  
  • Some worry proposals reduce member sovereignty and want simpler, clearer routes to contribute meaningfully. 
  • Professional engagement structures could be more accessible and influential. 
  • Members want Council influence to be visible and meaningful. 

We will: 

  • Add a directly elected member trustee to the Board to strengthen democratic legitimacy. The trustee will also serve as a general member of Council.  
  • Publish a Member Voice in Governance statement clarifying what Council advises on, what trustees decide, and how advice is captured and responded to. 
  • Introduce visible feedback loops through governance updates after each Board meeting, showing where member and Council input influenced decisions where relevant. 
  • Trial an annual open Board session with structured Q&A. 
  • Share more detailed plans for professional engagement groups and engagement mechanisms, and articulate how these relate to Sections and Local Groups. 
  • Embed transparency measures in the Scheme of Delegation. 

2. Representation breadth 

Your feedback: 

  • A smaller Board may reduce representation.
  • ​Governance appears too UK‑centric despite global membership. 
  • Education and Publications lacked clear “ownership.”  
  • AI and advanced data science should be explicit governance competencies. 

We will: 

  • Include representation principles (geographic, sectoral, professional) in our updated regulations. 
  • Implement the plan to include a designated international general member on Council. 
  • Include consideration of mechanisms of engagement with international membership as part of the future RSS international strategy. 
  • Consider mechanisms for engaging members from different geographies (non-UK based and UK-based outside of London) as part of forthcoming review of RSS sections and local groups. 
  • Reconfirm that the Vice President for public understanding, engagement and education is responsible for education, and will oversee strategy and delivery in this key area. 
  • Change proposed role tiles to include a Council Representative for Publications and clarify reporting lines and responsibilities in role descriptions. 
  • Include AI/data science as a named trustee skill and ensured AI/data science appears regularly on future Board and Council agendas. 

3. Implementation detail and resourcing:  

Your feedback 

  • Members want clarity on accountability, and delivery responsibilities. 
  • Concern about volunteer overload and staff capacity. 
  • Members emphasised trustee duties, financial scrutiny, and risk discipline. 

We will: 

  • Publish a summary Scheme of Delegation (who decides / who delivers / who is accountable) and strengthen other governance documentation to reinforce accountability and oversight. 
  • Clarify how strategy-and-delivery groups work in a non-executive trustee model through clear terms of reference and role descriptions.  
  • Continue to discuss the resource impact of the planned changes, and support for volunteers and staff, at governance meetings to support the implementation of the review. 
  • Publish a phased implementation roadmap with clear transition milestones and clarity on what changes for members, including clear pathways around elections and appointments. 

4. Professional standards/credentialing: 

Your feedback 

  • Chartered Data Science Professional (CDSP) is strongly welcomed as a credibility and standards lever. 
  • Concerns about GradStat eligibility pathways and international recognition. 
  • Desire for clearer standards, post‑nominals, and fairness in certification. 
  • Proposals to include tiering of membership grades or redefining Fellowship criteria and reestablishing post-nominals for Fellowship. 

We will: 

  • Address comments around differentiation between existing data science awards, and transition routes from other RSS professional pathways, in preparation for the launch of the Cchartered Ddata Sscience qualification (subject to member vote and Privy Council approval). 
  • Propose that the updated Charter and Bylaws are future‑proofed for potential changes to membership grades. 
  • Consider comments on membership grades and standards as part of other ongoing work: 
    • research into the options for membership grades and use of post-nominals is planned in future, aligned with current work on understanding of member need and value. 
    • a review of RSS statistical standards is planned for later this year, and pathways to certification and evidence routes will be reviewed alongside this to ensure international recognition and fairness and reduce unintended exclusion.