You are right JP except that we need to change the other term. If we accept “Member Organisation” as the most appropriate/acceptable term to describe all those organisations that are actually part of WGI then we need a different term for other types of membership. That’s why I suggested “Group Membership” for the latter. This might apply, for example, to a school where a number of members have had our training and want to join as a group. I fully agree with you that there should be a clear difference between these two quite different types of membership. If there’s something here I’m missing in your understanding of these terms I would love to hear abut it.
I believe we need to identify a lesser type of membership for those who simply want to link to us without being actual members and I believe the best word for this is “Associate”. So, for example, a counselling organisation in China might want to become “associates” or even “group associates” with WGI so as to receive news from us and maybe a special access on our website and/or discussions. They would not be accepting our ethics nor would they be administering courses. They simply want to associate themselves with us.
The other issue about multiple organisations in a given region … as I said at the meeting there could be a good reason for such a development. For example, there may be multiple language groups. However, I would think that once WGI acknowledged a given organisation as its “member organisation” in that area, then applications from other groups in the area would need to be studied carefully and with due consultation with the original organisation. Looking at the multiplicity of political and geographical systems around the world I think we need to be flexible.
In fact we already have overlaps. For example, WGII (Ireland) has had a “member organisation” since 1987 but we are also members of EART which is also a “member organisation” of WGI.