(Adopted July 27, 2000, Amended February 4, 2002 and February 20, 2009)

ACM Editors-in-Chief are expected to be leaders in research, with a vision for the future of their field. In addition to being outstanding researchers, they should have a strong record of service. In addition, ACM has formally defined Evaluation Criteria for Editors in Chief which it applies when considering both appointments and re-appointments. The process used in each of these cases is as follows.

I. Appointing a New Editor-in-Chief

1. For a new journal
   
   
   Generally, the proposal author/champion of the new journal is asked to become the EiC. The Publications Board will ask the candidate for a c.v. Members of the Board can make informal inquiries of colleagues regarding the candidate's qualifications for the position. At some point during the proposal evaluation cycle, the appropriate SIG(s) will be contacted, and feedback on the candidate solicited. With this information, the Board will decide whether to appoint the candidate. Staff will follow up on preparing paperwork.
   
   
2. For an existing journal
   
   
   One year prior to the end of the incumbent EiC's term, HQ will notify the PB Chair. The Board will then create a small (3-5 member) ad-hoc Search Committee, with at least one member coming from the SIG community and at least one member coming from the Board (not as chair), the latter to provide liaison with the Board and provide quick answers to the committee regarding ACM policy and Pubs Board strategic directions. If the journal has a formal Advisory Board, then representation from that Board will also be sought. (Alternatively, the Board may ask the relevant SIG to convene the committee themselves, and include a representative from the Pubs Board and journal Advisory Board.) The current EiC should be consulted by the Search Committee to provide input, but should not be a member of that committee. The Search Committee shall issue a public call for nominations for the new EiC, to appear at least on the ACM home page and on the home page of the journal. The Search Committee will have four months to forward a recommended candidate, along with supporting documentation (a CV for the nominee, a vision statement from the nominee, and a brief statement from the committee describing the process they used to select the nominee) to the Board. With this information, the Board will decide whether to appoint the candidate. This schedule allows approximately six months for overlap between the outgoing and incoming EiCs. Staff will follow up on preparing paperwork.
   
   

One year prior to the end of the incumbent's term, HQ will notify the PB Chair, and the Board will decide whether to initiate Procedure I-2. If not, HQ will ask the incumbent whether s/he is interested in serving another term. If so, HQ will notify the PB Chair, and, at the same time, request from the incumbent a summary of the status of the journal, any significant events/milestones achieved, and the incumbent's future plans for the journal. The incumbent will be asked to provide this within a month. This document will be circulated to stakeholders within the SIG community for comment. The Board will review this document, the feedback provided from the SIG community, as well as information provided by HQ on the performance of the incumbent, and decide on reappointment. Staff will follow up on preparing paperwork.