How to Win Best Delegate: Research your Topic

Here's a quick and dirty 4-step guide to researching your topic:

1. Develop an overall understanding of the topic.

Start with the topic paper, but Wikipedia is probably your best source of information. It is generally comprehensive, fact-checked, and updated.

Break up the topic into smaller issues to make it easier to understand.

Also know the players: who's most affected by the topic and who has the most impact on the topic.

Here's a test: if you had to sum up your topic in one sentence, what would you say?

2. Know past actions.

Go to the committee website and look for the most important resolutions, typically those mentioned in the topic paper and on Wikipedia. Heck, just print out all resolutions that have anything to do with the topic.

Realize that your committee is not the only body working on this topic; other committees and countries have probably taken action as well. Find out the most important actions taken with regard to your topic and who undertook them.

Find or develop a timeline of important events and major actions taken on the topic. The BBC generally has good ones.

3. Understand the current situation.

Do a search on Yahoo! News and Google News. Both websites search printed news, online news, and even blogs.

As with any piece of research, however, be mindful of your sources. Great local newspapers such as the Orange County Register won't have the same quality of coverage as the New York Times or Washington Post. It might just be better to go to the wires, or syndicated news sources, such as the Associated Press. And try to read international news such as the BBC in addition to United States-based sources.

4. Determine future outlook.

Look for predictions and trends indicating where your topic is going. Is the situation improving or deteriorating? Are the actions being taken effective or inhibitive?

Put another way, you're looking for critiques of the current situation and recommendations for what to do in the future.

Editorials offer some pretty basic critiques. Better yet are papers provided by think tanks, such as RAND.

Be aware of bias, however. As with any website or source that you use, look out for a slant on the story or a political agenda.

If you can--or more importantly, if you have the time and mental stamina--try looking for academic papers on the topic. Try Google Scholar or, even better, go to your library or local university. Academics probably offer the most depth of any source, but they do get pretty dry and complicated.

MUN and Debate

My freshman year of college, I tried out for both the Model United Nations and debate teams. I never did debate in high school, so it was interesting to learn about the activity and compare it to MUN.

They're both popular high school and college extracurriculars that value research and public speaking. Both also offer opportunities for students to not only participate but organize.

Debate, however, is older, larger, and better established; its beginnings can be traced back to ancient history, i.e. Socrates. MUN, on the other hand, is only as old as the UN itself (although there apparently existed a Model League of Nations).

Debate also seems much more centralized than MUN. Organizations such as the National Forensics League provide a central source of information. From what I've been told, the calendar for major debate tournaments is very concrete. I believe that hosting schools actually coordinate dates amongst themselves.

MUN, in contrast, is very decentralized. As I've declared in a previous post, this website is the first attempt to provide a central source of information on MUN. Conferences are hosted on dates of their choice, meaning that different conferences inevitably take place on the same days; this happened to me my senior year of high school, when another school started a conference on the exact same dates of mine.

Granted, MUNers recognize that certain conferences "own" certain times of year, i.e. Harvard in February, NHSMUN in March, etc. But this is a very informal system that does not prevent any school from trying to "steal" a certain date. And although the United Nations Association has an MUN calendar, it is extremely outdated.

But what interests me most are the different skills that these two activities emphasize. While both stress researching and public speaking, debate values the intellectual, whereas MUN values the interpersonal.

In debate, you make arguments on which you and maybe a partner are judged on substance and style. I've also been told that judges tend to be professionals or former debaters that know what to look for. So policy debaters speak at 100 miles an hour, but that's okay because the audience is already listening for particular points and a specific structure.

What differentiates MUN is that you are not only judged on public speaking, but your leadership skills overall. Forming alliances and writing resolutions in a group require personality in addition to intellect. Public speaking is actually a minor part of MUN for most delegates, when you might give a speech once or twice in a large General Assembly committee.

Indeed, MUN places much less emphasis on intellectual abilities than debate. Deep, philosophical speeches can hardly be made under a one minute time limit. They might even work against you; complicated arguments are much more difficult to understand. My debate friends who started doing MUN in college had a hard time at first; they were loathe to simplify their ideas and make short, slow speeches.

In addition, the debate topics that I've seen start with "Resolved: x is better than y," allowing for a clear distinction between arguments. MUNers, at least in the United States, write their resolutions, which allows for a lot more overlap. It's a common complaint to hear that the opposing resolutions in a committee actually say the same thing; their sponsors' egos is what differentiates them.

Thinking about the different skills emphasized by these two activities led me to think about the kinds of people who do them. The most interesting way to describe the difference is to examine what my friends on the Yale debate and MUN teams do after college.

The Yale debaters tend to go into graduate school and government. This is reflective of their generally brainy personalities. I think it also has to do with their debate topics, which always seem to have some sort of public policy implication, i.e. policy debate.

Yale MUNers, on the other hand, tend to go into finance and consulting. Having gone through the on campus interview process myself, I have come to believe that these kind of firms are look for not just skill but style, i.e. someone who fits into their corporate culture. It should make sense, then, that an activity which values interpersonal skills should lead its participants to positions that value the same.

These are generalizations, of course; debaters also do finance and MUNers also go to grad school. But there exists a trend, nonetheless. MUN and debate value different skills, which attracts certain personalities and leads them to different interests.

So all of this dawns on me three years after trying for both the MUN and debate teams. As you can tell, I made MUN but not debate. I have come to realize that I am not brainy, as much as I try to be. And although I was looking at law school, I now want to do finance. It has also dawned on me that MUN prepares you well for business, but I will save that for another post.

The point of this article is not to declare that one is better than another, but to illustrate differences that I find interesting. MUN and debate present great opportunities to develop your leadership skills--try both!

How to Win Best Delegate: Research your Committee

In my last post, I wrote about researching the conference itself. Now let's discuss researching your committee. For the most part, this means understanding its mandate, history, and membership.

Understanding your committee may seem like a minor part of your research; however, I think it is the most woefully neglected. Have you ever wondered whether your committee can actually carry out the actions listed in its resolutions? Can 1st Committee: Disarmament place sanctions? Can the Commission on Women create a sub-commission? The answers to these questions depend on the power and authority of their respective committees.

Mandate is the most important aspect of researching your committee. If the very goal of the committee is to do something about topics A and B, then you need to know what your committee can actually do.

Understanding the committee's powers and authority is particularly essential to writing resolutions. Operative clauses that take action, such as placing sanctions and establishing sub-commissions, must be based on the committee's mandate.

I get frustrated when my committee tries to do something that it simply cannot. Resolutions that propose such ideas, however, are the easiest to attack. I can say that the resolution is bad because the committee cannot execute a particular operative clause. Making this argument scores me points with the chair and other delegates. It also convinces the committee to support my resolution instead. But first, I need to understand what the committee can actually do. I also need to make sure that my resolution doesn't make the same mistake.

Knowing your committee's history is not as crucial as its mandate, but it is essential background information. Use it as factual ammunition, which can back up your ideas and strengthen your resolutions.

For example, someone could make the following speech to support his resolution in the UN Human Rights Council: "This committee began because its predecessor, the Commission on Human Rights, was defunct, discredited, and dissolved. This resolution represents an important opportunity to show the international community that the UN is no longer impotent and, in fact, can act to protect human rights around the world."

And finally, membership is important because no resolution passes on its own. Knowing which countries will be represented helps you to anticipate alliances and cater your ideas.

For example, the African bloc is always a huge player in General Assembly committees. Delegates always notice the United States; but to pass his resolution, even the US must gain support from the developing countries that make up most of the General Assembly. African countries are particularly important because they are many. Also, their alliance via the African Union makes them more likely to join one resolution--or form their own--as an entire bloc. No matter the US's ideas, he cannot pass his resolution without their support.

So how to find information on your committee's mandate, history, and membership? Your topic paper might help, but chances are it won't. The best place to look is the committee's actual website. But if you want the real deal, find the UN resolution (or equivalent international document) that actually established your committee. Other websites run by think tanks and non-governmental organizations might help.

For example, I started researching the Security Council by checking out its website, where its mandate and membership are clearly described (besides the Big 5, the Council always distributes membership geographically: 1 from Eastern Europe, 2 from Latin America, 2 from Western Europe and "other," and 5 from Asia and Africa). To understand its power, however, I went to the source: Chapters 5, 6, and 7 of the UN Charter. And regarding history, the Global Policy Forum has an excellent page dedicated to the Security Council.

I hope that helps. Next post: researching your topic.

Orange County MUN: Favoritism and Philosophy

When I was in high school, a particular school tended to win a particular conference. Either Huntington Beach High School or Mira Costa High School always won at the Edison High School MUN Conference. When Mission Viejo High School (my alma mater) hosted, either Tustin High School or Santa Margarita Catholic High School won.

This became a problem when students felt jilted out of awards and starting holding grudges. The schools that don't win blame the hosting school for being unfair and showing favoritism.

One student from my school was a funny guy and a good delegate. He felt that he deserved Best Delegate, or at least an Outstanding, at Edison's conference. He got neither. At closing ceremonies, he was called for a Commendation (the equivalent of an Honorable Mention on the East Coast); approached the stage to receive his award; and tore it in front of everyone. Even worse, during our conference, he did not give any Edison students in his committee an award. This student has long since graduated.

This was not an isolated feeling. Everyone blamed one school or another for stacking awards in favor of its "allies." There was even a conspiracy going at one point. Someone theorized that if Edison and Huntington had a deal to award one another at each other's conference to not only increase their winnings but maintain district funding.

I didn't believe this theory, but I nonetheless criticized schools for favoritism. I felt cheated out of awards multiple times. Everyone does; sadly, this is a common feeling in MUN today. But looking back, I realize now that the problem was not favoritism; it was philosophy.

Delegates from Mira Costa, Huntington, and Edison had reputations for being very aggressive. Mission, Tustin, and Santa Margarita, on the other hand, focused on diplomacy. The aggressive and the diplomatic schools did not simply favor themselves at their own respective conferences. They were merely looking for the same traits that they themselves valued.

In other words, an aggressive delegate from Edison will most likely become a chair that views aggression favorably. So it's no surprise if he awards the aggressive Mira Costa delegate; he, too, values aggression.

Of course there were very aggressive and very diplomatic delegates at each school, but nonetheless reputations existed. I now believe they existed because of philosophical differences between MUN programs.

Several years ago, a local paper wrote about the Mira Costa MUN program. Its advisor used the Socratic method to question his students on their topics. They sat in a circle; one student presented his country's policy; and for ten minutes, everyone questioned this one student. At first, this made them all uncomfortable, but they became more and more confident. So, during conferences, Mira Costa students challenged other delegates in the same way that they had been challenged, questioning their ideas and debating their stances. I suspect the other aggressive schools had similar practices. This is part of what made them so aggressive.

The more diplomatic schools (Mission, Tustin, and Santa Margarita), on the other hand, were taught to be likable. That way, other delegates became willing to work with you and give you primary authorship over resolutions. We were still told to be aggressive, but not so much that we became domineering or abrasive. We competed more on personality than intellect.

I share this post because favoritism was a problem and I suspect it still is. I hope someone from Orange County reads this and realizes that their school was not simply screwed over. I do realize, however, that getting screwed out of an award does happen on purpose, so don't discount that possibility. But my point is that it happens less often than people think and not as likely the case when it happens to them.

I just think that the first step towards resolving this problem is to realize that different MUN programs teach differently. This directly translates to delegate styles and, consequently, the awards. If Orange County MUN wants a fairer awards system, then it needs to standardize its awards criteria between all schools, aggressive and diplomatic alike.

I also think that the MUN community as a whole needs to standardize the awards, but I will save that subject for another post. The takeaway point for now is that different MUN programs view and teach MUN differently. I want us to share these differences because they don't have to be problems. Indeed, understanding one other's differences is a major lesson of MUN. Most importantly, though, we must recognize these differences if we are to build a true MUN community.

How to Win Best Delegate: Research the Conference

In my last post, I argued that you should do research. Now, here's how to do it.

There are four areas of research: conference, committee, topic, and country / position. In this next series of posts, I will define these terms and suggest how to research them.

By conference, I mean the conference's philosophy, the characteristics it values in delegates, and the kind of people who staff it, particularly your chair. I also mean the conference's reputation; is it a laidback conference that doesn't care much for parliamentary procedure, or is it a very strict one?

It may seem weird that I list this as a part of your research, and truthfully, it requires the least amount of your time. But if you want to win Best Delegate, shouldn't you know what the conference and, consequently, your chair are looking for?

Think of it this way: you wouldn't walk into a job interview without thinking about how your skills suit you for the position and what the company values. And just like an interviewer, your chair judges you not just on skill, but style.

As a personal example, I was the chair of the Security Council at a major conference last year. The delegate representing the United States in my committee was good but abrasive. His skills were solid; he was on policy, spoke well, and had a lot of good ideas. But he was too aggressive; he included himself on every resolution and alienated the other delegates.

At one point, I spoke with his advisor. Surprisingly, she said that he's actually a very quiet student. But he was acting this way because that's what his research showed him. The US is apparently aggressive in international negotiations. And at the time, John Bolton was the US Ambassador to the UN.

So my dais and I faced a dilemma: should we give him an award? I would normally not award abrasive delegates, but his actions were grounded in solid research; he was so on policy that he was roleplaying the actual ambassador.

To decide, we read the conference's awards policy as printed in the conference guide. It clearly stated that the conference valued diplomacy above all. Only the most diplomatic delegates should receive awards.

So although this delegate had done his research so well he was even roleplaying the actual ambassador, he neglected to research one thing: the conference itself. Based on that, we did not give him an award.

There are two primary ways to go about researching the conference. The first is through impressions. Check out the conference website, topic paper, and conference guide. Is it professional or sloppy? Well-written? Arrogant?

In particular, look for an awards policy. Does the conference value idealism, i.e. diplomacy above all, or realism, i.e. being on policy no matter what? Is it strict on parliamentary procedure?

Admittedly, these are minor things, and again, you should not spend a lot of time analyzing them. But keeping them in mind will help you get an impression of the conference and what to expect in committee.

The second way is through reputation. Speak with the older members of your MUN team, your friends at the hosting school, or even people you know who are organizing the conference. Is the conference known for being tough or laidback? Is it a very prestigious conference, meaning it will be highly competitive, or is it a smaller conference? It its MUN team known for being aggressive or diplomatic? Its members will most likely be your chairs and they most likely value the styles that reflect their own. Every school has a reputation: know theirs and yours.

Finally, let me clarify that I am not telling you to change what kind of delegate you are simply based on what the conference wants. Just like in an interview, yes, you want to prove you have the skills and values the company is looking for, but if that means being fake or lying, then people will see right through you.

Same thing at an MUN conference. If the conference values aggression, and winning Best Delegate means backstabbing another delegate, then don't do it. Winning is not worth changing who you are as a person.

Next post: researching your committee.

How to Win Best Delegate: Making It Up

In my last post, I wrote about choosing "your" committee. Now that you've picked your committee, either the one you want to specialize in or just for this upcoming conference, do enough research and preparation to give yourself the best shot at winning Best Delegate.

But maybe you're asking: why? Perhaps you've been told, "MUN is BS." This implies that winning doesn't require research. And maybe you've seen a friend go into committee having read nothing but the topic paper--if that--and win Best Delegate.

Maybe he won on his personality and charisma. Perhaps everyone in committee liked him and he seemed knowledgeable at the same time, so he won an award. And bravo to him; he can start his own website.

But I bet that he did more research than you think. I don't mean he secretly read UN resolutions on the bus when you weren't looking. I mean that good delegates tend to follow current events, watch the news, and read newspapers, journals, and magazines. Following current events can teach you more than reading any topic paper or UN resolution. So while it seems that your friend is making it all up, he's actually drawing upon a wealth of knowledge and applying it to his topic. That's not BS; that's great.

Regardless, this is still not a consistent way to win. Your friend might win Best after Best until he comes up against someone who's just as funny but actually knows what he's talking about. Your friend's competitive advantage is gone; the other guy will call him out on whatever he says.

But don't forget that the strategy we laid out is to maximize your probability of winning given your circumstances. You can't choose the quality of the other delegates in your committee. They might or might not be funnier or smarter than you. But all things being equal, someone who does some research will probably do better than someone who doesn't at all.

Clearly, you should invest some time in research prior to the conference. The trick is to research only as much as necessary so that a) you don't waste time and b) you don't look like a know-it-all. Plus, research is a skill that MUN can help you develop and will actually help you later in life. So, do some.

Despite that, here's the rub: we all make it up anyway. We're students and we're roleplaying; of course we don't know everything. In fact, the guy who pretends he does will most likely not win. No matter how much research you do, you won't know as much as the guy who's actually paid to sit in the General Assembly Hall. At some point, you have to make inferences, i.e. make up information based on what you do know. Knowing how to do that is also a crucial skill. But don't let that be your only one.

So, do your research. The only reason not to is laziness. Don't tell me you don't have time; make some. And in my next post, I'll lay out the most efficient way to research so you don't waste any.

Apply to Global Classrooms!

I'd recommend everyone check out the United Nations Association (UNA) Global Classrooms Secretariat application. UNA-USA hosts MUN conferences in New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, and other major cities through its Global Classrooms program, which is a curriculum designed to bring Model UN to inner-city middle and high schools. I'm very supportive of the program and I want to tell you why, but first, a story...

I staffed the National High School MUN Conference (NHSMUN) my freshman year, and the staff selects next year's Secretary-General every year. Listening to the candidate's speeches, one issue constantly came up: should NHSMUN offer scholarships to those who couldn't afford to attend? One candidate even described how he came from a humble background, and without the aid of friends or family, he would not have done MUN in high school, nor would he have done NHSMUN, nor would he even be speaking before us that day.

He made me think back to my own high school, and I realized why Orange County MUN was so popular; we could afford it. We had at least five high schools with 200 person clubs that ran their own conferences and had entire classes dedicated to Model UN. We studied history but got extra credit for winning awards; I failed every test and had like 160% in the class. But it also cost $250 to join the club, $25 to attend each local conference, and $1500 for the annual trip to NHSMUN. Ironically, staffing that very conference made me realize how MUN discriminates against those who can't afford it.

But as fate would have it, months after the NHSMUN conference, I staffed the UNA-USA MUN conference in New York City, which introduced me to the Global Classrooms program. Whereas NHSMUN posed the question, Global Classrooms was the answer.

Global Classrooms brings MUN to those who normally could not afford it. The program offers a curriculum that focus on global issues ranging from peacekeeping to international trade, i.e. MUN topics. Global Classrooms consultants help teachers implement the curriculum, which is flexible enough that it can be taught over a month, ten weeks, or a semester. And at the end of the year, the students get to attend their local conference hosted by Global Classrooms--free (as of the time of this writing).

Global Classrooms conferences are held in most major cities across the United States, and it is expanding globally, too. So check out the website to see if it is offered where you live. I've staffed every year for the New York City and Los Angeles conferences and I highly recommend it.

But more importantly, it's these kind of questions that we as an MUN community need to be thinking about. I asked a few in my SCSY XXX opening ceremonies speech. Does MUN discriminate against those who can't afford it? Is there a need for a centralized source of information (like this website, wink wink)? Do we host conferences--or competitions?

As an MUN community, will we be defined by the questions we pose, or the answers we offer? I hope it is the latter.

UPMUNC Review

I had a great weekend, seeing old friends, making new ones, and bonding with the Yale Model United Nations team, but the University of Pennsylvania MUN Conference (UPMUNC) itself was a disappointment.

Committee Experience

I was the Interior Minister in the Iraqi Governing Council. My committee was part of a Joint Cabinet Crisis (JCC) with another committee, United States Central Command (CENTCOM), so the actions taken in one committee affected the other. The topic for both committees was the current political and military situation in Iraq. We also faced two hypothetical (and not so hypothetical) crises: war between Israel and Iran and the Turkish invasion of Kurdistan.

First, let me say that UPMUNC should be commended for attempting this simulation. The Iraq War is obviously a difficult but important subject. Simulating such subjects makes Model UN relevant to current events and thus more useful as an educational exercise. It was especially ambitious to run the simulation as a JCC; it requires an extremely dedicated staff to coordinate two committees. I had high expectations for how the simulation would run. Unfortunately, they were not met.

Serious communication issues plagued the JCC. I would send a message to US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker asking for information. I would receive a response, after which I would inform the Iraqi Council, and we would act on that information. But when Crocker came in to speak to us, we discovered that CENTCOM had made the opposite decision, and our information was completely wrong. Apparently, the crisis staff was writing the notes because CENTCOM was busy with something else; but they made decisions for the delegates anyway without consulting them. This was a failure of communication, and it made me look like an idiot.

Also, necessary information was not available when we needed it. Israel bombed Iran but did not explain why. Turkey invaded Kurdistan and did not state their demands. Shiites started rioting and Sistani did not say anything. This was a problem because after these updates, the committee wasted hours debating whether or not to demand statements from Israel, Turkey, and Sistani; these were obvious responses that should already have been answered by the crisis staff. Someone would walk into committee, say, "Turkey invaded Kurdistan," and leave; we needed more information than that.

Most frustratingly, though, the Iraqi Governing Council had very few options. Perhaps this is realstic, but we would act on one of them, be told that it did not work, and then get blamed by the crisis staff for not acting. In the Israel-Iran crisis, we could not attack Israel because we lacked the force and we could not support Iran because of the American occupation, so we had to play neutral and de-escalate the conflict. Our only possible action was to go to the European Union and Arab League for help; however, they both told us that they would do nothing and that we had to solve the problem on our own.

Essentially, the crisis staff was telling us to do something when nothing could be done. When they realized this, their recourse was to turn the committee on itself. At first, it was entertaining and actually useful. The Minister of Intelligence was a UPenn delegate in disguise who was undermining the committee, and he was arrested. Then the Defense Minister took unilateral actions contrary to the council's decisions, and we censured him. But then it got out of hand; the Transport Minister was labeled a traitor and then killed by the CIA. The Foreign Minister was accused of giving information to CENTCOM. These court intrigues were interesting but ultimately detracted from real debate.

Ultimately, there was nothing left to do except go off policy and destroy the country because the crisis staff was not helpful in creating feasible options. It was both unrealistic and unfair, and I was so upset that I walked out of committee.

I heard of substantive problems in other committees as well. There were chairing issues and weak topics in the General Assembly and Economic and Social Council Committees. The 9/11 Commission could have been cool, but instead turned into a twenty person GA. The Congo cabinet apparently had a weird crisis where a Congolese official impregnated a White House aide, and that was the crisis; not entirely professional--save it for the Sunday session. On a bright note, though, the 24, Russia-China 2020 JCC, and a few GA and ECOSOC committees seemed to go really well. College conferences, however, can make up a poor committee experience with an awesome delegate dance. But that's when things got really bad.

Delegate Dance

We came; we saw; and we could not get in. Around 11 PM, the club was too crowded and the bouncers refused to let my delegation or anyone else enter. We returned to our hotel dismayed after thirty minutes of waiting. We found a slew of other delegates who were also turned away, so we just threw our own party at the hotel.

Apparently, the delegate dance was going to be at the same place as last year, but the club owner switched the venue at the last minute to another "club" he owned, which turned out to be more of a restaurant. There was simply not enough room. I heard afterwards that the people who actually got in could not do anything because it was so packed.

Saturday night was lame, yet somehow it got worse on Sunday. After the morning session, I returned to my room. When I got off the elevator, I found delegates sitting on the floor complaining: the hotel had locked them all out. Checkout was at noon but it was only 11:30 AM. Security was trying to come upstairs but the elevators were clogged.

Fortunately, my roommates had gotten to the room early and so were able to prop open the door before the premature checkout time. I was late in getting to closing ceremonies, but many other people were really late. This situation put another damper on the weekend.

Speaking with a good friend of mine at another school summed up my--and I suspect other's--overall disappointment with the conference. After being turned away from the delegate dance, she returned the hotel extremely upset and started crying. This was the last conference she would ever attend in her eight year MUN career; she did not have a good committee experience and actually quit her position; now, she could not even attend what should have been her last delegate dance. This should never happen at a conference.

Personal Responsibility

I don't know how the UPMUNC Secretariat operates; I don't know what goes on behind the scenes; I wasn't at the Head Delegate meetings. But what I felt from the Secretariat was a lack of personal responsibility.

After taking a break from committee because I was so upset with the crisis, I spoke with someone from the Secretariat and tried to explain my frustration. I think he was trying to empathize with me and heed my suggestions, but ultimately I felt like he was defensive and tried to explain away my frustrations. That is not good customer service.

This happened again when a member of the Secretariat walked into my committee on Sunday. I told him that my delegation was upset that we could not get into the dance. I wanted to hear an apology; instead, I got an explanation.

On top of that, my committee and a few others did not even receive conference evaluations. How can a business expect to improve without hearing directly from its customers?

The only time I heard an apology was at closing ceremonies, when the Secretary-General explained what happened Saturday night, told us this would not happen again, and straight up said, "I apologize." This was followed by applause.

Suggestions

I like UPenn. I have friends on the UPenn team. Every year, I look forward to UPMUNC because it's a good conference that doesn't take itself too seriously. But this year, I was disappointed, and this is my last year.

I want to offer suggestions for improvement, but I don't know enough about how the Secretariat and the organization of the conference to offer anything substantive. I realize that what happened at the delegate dance was somewhat out of their hands, and I trust that they will address those issues. So all I have to offer is one suggestion regarding the substance of their crisis committees.

Have PowerPoint presentations ready that present the crisis precisely. Tell the committee what happened, how other countries have responded, the actions the delegates' indiviudal ministries are automatically taking. Most importantly, lay out the exact options that they need to choose between, and be ready to pursue any of them. A good presentation focuses debate on the kind of strategic discussions that the highest levels of government have, or at least ought to have, instead of leaving delegates to their own distractions.

Conclusion

I have tried to be fair and balanced in my critique. My goal was to lay out an objective framework by which to critique the conference constructively, namely my experience inside committee and outside committee. Of course, there remains a structural problem: my review is subject purely to my experience and what I heard from other delegates, so subjectivity and hearsay are unavoidable. Thus, take it as you will.

I hope that if anyone from UPMUNC reads this, then they might agree with the objective parts of my critique, and perhaps they will make improvements. More importantly, though, I hope the MUN community can learn some lessons from my critique so that all of our conferences might improve. Regardless of who you are, please feel free to comment.

Let me say that I'm very glad I attended UPMUNC. I had a great time this weekend, but it was not due to the conference; it was because of the people. Meeting people, making friends, and having fun are possible regardless of committee experience and the delegate dance.

But I want to have a great time because of the people and the conference. I believe in the conference and the people who run it. UPMUNC has been excellent in the past and can once again be excellent; indeed, the it has a personal responsibility to itself to do so.

Leaving for UPMUNC

I'll be at the University of Pennsylvania MUN Conference in Philadelphia this weekend, so I might not be able to write again until Sunday. At the time of this post, the bus from Yale leaves in 3 hours and I still have to pack, research, and e-mail in my position paper.

Wish me luck!

MUN Online

While looking at my own Google ads, I discovered this forum where people actually do Model United Nations online. Check it out here!

I came across one of these sites a couple years ago, and I think there are actually more of them.

Let me know if you participate in one of these forums, or if you have your own MUN website!

How to Win Best Delegate: Choose Your Committee

Step 1 - Choose Your Committee

In my previous post, I claimed that your strategy for winning best delegate is to maximize your probability of success despite your circumstances. How you prepare for a conference and what you do in committee will affect your probability of success, but before that there is something you can do to impact your circumstances. Thus the first step to winning is not about preparation or tactics; the first step is about specialization. The first step is to choose "your" committee.

Choosing your committee does not mean simply looking at the list of committees that are available to you and picking one. It means specializing in a certain kind of committee and participating in it as often as you can. Specializing improves your circumstances because the knowledge you gain at one conference can be applied at the next. It compounds your expertise and, consequently, your success.

For example, my specialty is Security Council. I have won nearly all of my Best Delegate awards in either Security Council or Historical Security Council. In Orange County, the Los Alamitos MUN Conference was (and still is?) nothing but Security Council simulations. In preparing for the conference my freshman year and studying the situations in Israel-Palestine and Sierra Leone, I realized that I was really interested in international peace and security. Lo and behold, that interest and enthusiasm came through during the conference, and that's when I won my first Best Delegate award.

Afterwards, I tried to do Security Council as often as possible. I found that what I learned at one conference was helpful for the next because I did the same committee at both. I gained a deep and legalistic (for a high school student) understanding of the rules of procedure and how they specifically applied to the Security Council. If I had a good idea at one conference, then I could test it and improve upon it before using it at the next conference. If someone else had a good idea at one conference, then I could give it my own spin and use it at the next conference, too.

I also realized that there was a certain flow to the Security Council. The trick was to start writing the resolution by the first committee session, ask people for more ideas by the second session, and then sign on the entire committee as sponsors by the third session. This was possible because Security Council is a 15-country committee (unless there are observers), so it's small enough to approach everyone. At the end of the conference, the resolution passed easily and unanimously--everybody's a sponsor! It included all of their ideas, too. In the process, I became the committee's leader. And that's how I won Best Delegate.

Finally, I discovered that a core group of the same people also did Security Council as often as possible. After a while, I got to know everyone and many of us become friends--which was great--but I also came to understand everyone's delegate styles. If I beat this core group for Best Delegate at one conference via one strategy, then I could beat them again using the same strategy. If I lost, then I could adjust my strategy for the next conference accordingly.

Not everyone is a Security Council guy. Some of my friends are big committee, General Assembly delegates; they have big personalities and their success grows exponentially with the size of their caucus bloc. Others specialize in children's or women's issues, so they do UNICEF or the Commission on Women. One friend of mine even did the International Maritime Organization because a) he was actually interested in naval issues and b) no one else was. So he looked extremely knowledgeable in a committee full of bored kids, meaning they would sign on to anything he proposed.

At the same time, don't be afraid to experiment with different committees, especially early in your MUN career. Doing different committees is the only way to find out which one is "yours." Until you gain seniority within your MUN club, you probably won't have much of a choice over committees anyway. Just find out what you like. It all depends on your interests and personality.

As a final thought, this idea of specialization has an investing analogy. Warren Buffett would probably advise you to invest within your "circle of competence," the industries and companies that are familiar to you, because then you have some personal insight that will help you make good investing decisions. Buffett himself knew that he didn't know tech stocks, so he didn't invest in them despite their rise throughout the 1990s; as a result, he famously avoided the 2000 stock market crash.

In MUN, you're investing your time and money. If you want the greatest "return," i.e. Best Delegate awards, then invest within your "circle of competence," i.e. the committees that you know best. In other words: "stick with what you know." This applies to personal investing, MUN, and you, if you follow this step-by-step guide.

Next post: Step 2 - Research and Preparation

How Big is MUN?

How many students do Model United Nations in the United States?

I can't find any reliable sources that will answer this question definitively. MUN, of course, is not centralized, so there's no database that can tell me the answer.

Let's turn this into a market-sizing question, one that you might get asked in an interview with a strategy consulting firm like McKinsey or Bain.

Assume there are about 300 million people in the United States. Assume that the average lifespan is 80 and there are an equal number of people in each age group, i.e. the same number of 3 year olds as 73 year olds. That leaves 3.75 million people in any given age group (yes this is straight out of Case in Point).

Now, who does MUN? Mainly students in high school and college. Yes, the number of middle school MUNers is rapidly growing, and yes, there are those people who continue to do MUN after graduating, but I think those are much smaller groups, and ones that will be covered in my estimates. Also, I'm defining someone who "does MUN" as someone who either attends or staffs MUN conferences.

So let's look at high school and college students as two separate groups. High school spans 4 years, so according to our assumptions of 3.75 million people in each age group, that's about 15 million high schoolers in the country. So how many high school students do MUN? Well my high school MUN program had 200 students in a school of 2500; that's 8%. But I come from Orange County, where MUN is crazy intense and there are at least five other schools with 200 person programs, so 8% is probably really high. I also realize that there are many high schools without MUN programs. And I also know that the United Nations Association's Global Classrooms Program is starting MUN programs in every major American city. I think that, in your average 2000 person high school, it's reasonable to assume maybe 10 kids do MUN, which is about 0.5%. But again, given that there are a number of larger programs thanks to places like Orange County and programs like Global Classrooms, bump that number up to 0.75%. Assume that applies to the entire high school population of 15 million students, and that comes out to about 112,500 high school MUNers.

Apply this same train of thought to college. Again, 4 years of college, so 15 million college students. I don't think MUN is as popular amongst college students as it is amongst high schoolers; there seem to be fewer college conferences than high school ones, and there's no Global Classrooms program for college students. At Yale, there are about 50 people who staff our college and high school conferences. In a school of 5,000 undergraduates, that's 1%. But again, I think my school is an outlier; we run two conferences a year, whereas most MUN clubs don't run any. I've visited my MUN friends at UCLA, and there can't be more than 50 MUNers in a school of 15,000 undergraduates; that's 1/3%. So let's place the number of college MUNers at about 0.5%, which comes out to 75,000 college students.

Put those numbers together and we get about 187,500 students in the United States who do MUN. Note that I haven't examined the retention or attrition rate, meaning that there are people who start doing MUN and then quit later in high school or college. But I think there are also a number of people who pick up MUN later in high school or college, so it evens out somewhat. Even so, let's be conservative and round down to 180,000.

There are about 180,000 MUNers in the United States. Does this number sound reasonable to you?

How to Win Best Delegate: Overview

Okay, I'm going to write a series of essays on what I think it takes to win Best Delegate. This is not a definitive guide; it's more of a start to a conversation. I would love to know what other people think, so please post comments, or heck, even write your own essay, e-mail it to me, and I'll post it.

So let me start by claiming that there is no definitive guide to winning best delegate. Every conference, every chair, every delegate differs. Some conferences value realism and sticking to your country policy no matter what; other conferences prize diplomacy and compromise in order to reach a solution. Chairs are inherently subjective in deciding who should win Best Delegate; some are hardcore MUNers who know what to look for, whereas others get duped by that backstabbing delegate who stole the committee's ideas and passed them off as his own. And what works for you in one conference may not in the next depending on the quality of the other delegates. For one conference, you're the most experienced delegate in a huge General Assembly committee; at the next conference, you're sitting on a 15-person crisis cabinet full of head delegates.

Given these dynamics, what can be said with regard to winning best delegate, and winning it consistently? There's still a lot to be said, actually. In fact, it all starts with a prayer:

"God grant us
Serenity to accept the things we cannot change,
Courage to change the things we can,
and Wisdom to know the difference."
- The Serenity Prayer, as used in Alcoholics Anonymous meetings

The dynamics I described above that differ from conference to conference are things that--ironically--you cannot change. But what you can change is your probability for winning Best Delegate, which depends on your actions and choices before and during the conference. Your strategy for winning best delegate, then, is to maximize your probability of success despite your circumstances.

How? That is what this series of essays is dedicated to. Broadly speaking, I think maximizing your probability of success comes down to two objectives: 1) actually being a leader in committee and 2) ensuring that the chair knows you are a leader in committee. Leadership is the constant in MUN conferences; no matter the conference philosophy, the chair, or the other delegates, groups need leaders, and a committee is essentially a group looking for a leader. Be that leader.

So of course those two broad objectives can themselves be broken up into smaller stratagems, and that's how I want to structure these essays. As best I can, and consistent with the assumptions that I've laid out above, I'll try to come up with a step-by-step guide of how to win Best Delegate.

Next post: Step 1 - Choose Your Committee

What is MUN?

Model United Nations, also known as Model UN or MUN, is an extra-curricular activity in which students typically roleplay delegates to the United Nations and simulate UN committees. This activity takes place at MUN conferences, which is usually organized by a high school or college MUN club. At the end of most conferences, outstanding delegates in each committee are recognized and given an award certificate; the Best Delegate in each committee, however, receives a gavel. Thousands of middle school, high school, and college students across the country and around the world participate in Model United Nations, which involves substantial researching, public speaking, debating, and writing skills, as well as critical thinking, teamwork, and leadership abilities.

For example, my senior year of high school, I attended the 2004 National High School MUN Conference (NHSMUN), held at the Hilton Towers Hotel in New York City. My friend, Shebli, and I co-represented the Syrian Arab Republic on the United Nations Security Council. Students from other high schools such as Stuyvesant High School, Horace Mann School, and University of Chicago Preparatory School represented the United States, China, and the other member states of the Security Council. For four days, we debated the security situation in the Republic of Georgia. Every student gave speeches detailing their country's position on the topic and offering possible solutions. Our chair, Dave, moderated our debate; he was a student from the University of Pennsylvania. By day 4, we had written a resolution, a document that described the Security Council's stance on the situation in Georgia and the actions that the committee had resolved to take. The committee voted in favor of adopting the resolution. At the end of the conference, Dave recognized Shebli's and my leadership in committee by awarding us Best Delegate.

Part of what makes Model UN great, though, is that it is rapidly re-inventing itself. Today, many MUN conferences hold simulations that are not UN committees. In addition to simulations of the Security Council and General Assembly, many conferences are running simulations of the US National Security Council, where delegates represent President Bush and Condoleezza Rice. Many conferences feature a Joint Cabinet Crisis, where two or more committees of delegates are linked together, and the actions taken in one committee affect the other. For example, my conference, the Security Council Simulation at Yale (SCSY), held a simulation of the Korean War, where delegates roleplayed the ministers of the American, Soviet, and Chinese cabinets in 1950. Princeton's college conference has taken this idea to an entirely new level; every committee at their conference is part of the same Joint Cabinet Crisis.

With so many changes to Model United Nations over the years, there's a need to not only define MUN but to keep track of its changes. And that's what I hope to do with this website.

Welcome to BestDelegate.com!

If you do a Google search of "Model United Nations," nothing extremely helpful comes up. Maybe you get to the United Nations Association site, or the National MUN conference, or even the Wikipedia article on MUN, but currently there is no website dedicated to Model United Nations as an extracurricular activity.

This website changes that.

The goal of this website is to be the #1 source of information on Model United Nations. I want to have a constantly updated calendar of MUN conferences across the country and around the world. I want to help people who are new to MUN, have yet to attend an MUN conference, or are just starting a club of their own. I want to share tips and strategies with hardcore MUNers who have a number of gavels under their belts. I want to brainstorm best practices with Secretaries-General, Secretariats, Chairs, and Crisis Managers, so that MUN conferences keep improving.

But most importantly, I want to lay the foundation for an MUN community. Those of us who enjoy meeting people at MUN conferences, those of us who like making friends through MUN, those of us who call ourselves MUNers--we are part of an MUN community. And it's about time that our community has a place to call home.

This website is that place.