Good catch, Jim.
I had an industry insider tell me what’s going on here. They said that essentially Jeffries is talking about efforts which center around communicating to IAF meeting participants (i.e., reps of the Accreditation Bodies) what key positions will be AHEAD of meetings, so that essentially there’s no opposition DURING the meeting. This is common in the US, and the TAG 176 — which Jeffries is also on — does the same thing. They inform members what official positions are likely to be so that when everyone shows up, there’s no discussion. They then brand this as “informing” the members, but it’s actually just to keep everyone in line.
Remember, it was Jeffries who distributed a survey on ISO 9001 standards development among her pals and then pulled it when I opened the survey up to actual users and the public. She is allergic to anything having to do with the unwashed masses.
So Jeffries’ cheery disposition may be hinting at something more nefarious. When she talks about “discussion” points, this is to give the proceedings a sheen of democratic process where, in fact, there is none.
Also, and I wrote about this before, IAF takes a different view on what “User Advisory Committee” means. It doesn’t mean getting advice FROM users, it means ADVISING users. So the actual name should be “Advising Users Committee.” But if you squint, it’s sort of what the committee’s name is saying.
But if you look at Jeffries’ rising star status, this kind of thing is exactly what they reward people for.