TDWG has not been effective in communicating its work within its potential community of interest. Users of TDWG standards need quality software and documentation. Organisations working with natural history information / biodiversity must also be aware of the significance of TDWG’s work.

While TDWG does have an internationally significant role, it has been marginalized within its client community. The lack of effective communication is a key cause. The TDWG Infrastructure Project has invested heavily in improving communications but even the best technologies do not guarantee effective communication.

The project has built a collaborative environment and attempted to improve communications, but that project ends this year. How will TDWG continue to build its reputation? I suggest that it is by the quality of our outcomes and the effectiveness of communicating those outcomes to our clients.

The obstacle is however the extremely small ratio of membership to activities. At the time of writing, TDWG has 17 individual members, 18 institutional members and at least 16 groups and 18 standards in various forms. This situation cannot assure quality outcomes. TDWG must therefore either build membership and/or focus on fewer core areas.