Identifying MUN Rules of Procedure: THIMUN and Harvard-Style Side by Side

How to Identify MUN Rules of Procedure Before You Register

Check one word on the conference website. If the schedule or rules document mentions a moderated caucus, the conference runs Harvard-style procedure. If it does not, it runs THIMUN procedure. These two families have not converged in decades and they structure every minute of the delegate experience differently. A delegate who walks into a THIMUN committee expecting a moderated caucus wastes the first hour watching the chair explain what a caucus is while other delegates begin lobbying. An advisor who registers a team for a Harvard-style conference without understanding the difference sends students into a room where the speaking order, the document process, and the award logic are all built around a system their training assumed was universal. Here are the diagnostic signs for each family in the order you meet them in committee, a definition of every term a new delegate hears from the dais, and one question you can apply to any conference registration page.

How Debate Begins: Lobbying vs Roll Call

THIMUN Starts With Lobbying

THIMUN procedure starts with a mandatory Lobbying phase. The dais calls the room to order, reads the agenda topic, and then releases delegates into a 45 to 90 minute session where no formal speaking occurs. Delegates move around the room, introduce themselves to strangers, and begin forming blocs around shared policy positions. The chair does not call on individual speakers. The placard signals bloc membership, not a request for speaking time. If you attend a THIMUN conference and wait to hear the chair open a speakers list, you will sit at your seat alone while the room forms coalitions without you.

Harvard Opens With Roll Call

Harvard-style procedure opens with a Roll Call and a Setting the Agenda motion. The chair takes attendance, then asks for motions to set the committee agenda. Delegates raise their placards, the chair recognises a mover, and the committee votes on which agenda item to discuss first. From that moment, the default speaking format is the General Speakers List, where delegates sign up to give speeches of a fixed time on the general topic. The speakers list stays open throughout the session unless the committee votes to enter a different speaking mode. If you arrive after roll call, you will find a queue of delegates waiting to hear their name called and a chair already taking speech requests. Sign the speakers list in the first five minutes. If you do not, every slot will be filled for the next two hours.

The diagnostic question: If the conference schedule includes a Lobbying phase on the first day, it is THIMUN. If it includes a Setting the Agenda motion and a General Speakers List, it is Harvard. If the rules document uses the phrase “moderated caucus” anywhere, it is Harvard. If it does not, it is THIMUN.

THIMUN vs Harvard Procedure: the Speaking Mechanics

How THIMUN Speaking Works

THIMUN speaking is built on Open Debate and Closed Debate. In Open Debate, the dais alternates between speakers who support and speakers who oppose the clause under discussion. Each speaker delivers a timed speech, and after each speech the chair opens the floor for Points of Information. Other delegates raise their placards, the chair recognises one, and that delegate asks a question. The speaker must answer directly. This creates a back-and-forth on the content of each clause, not on the general topic. Prepare a speech that addresses the specific clause being debated. A general policy speech will get you interrupted after the first minute.

How Harvard Speaking Works

Harvard speaking offers three modes. The General Speakers List is the default: delegates give prepared speeches on the broad agenda, and no one can interrupt with questions. A Moderated Caucus is a motionable alternative: the committee votes to enter a timed caucus on a specific sub-topic, with shorter speaking times, and the chair calls on delegates who raise their placards rather than following a fixed list. An Unmoderated Caucus is the third mode: the chair suspends formal debate, delegates leave their seats, and negotiation happens in small groups around the room. The Moderated Caucus is where actual deal-making happens. The General Speakers List is where you deliver the speech you wrote at home. Know the difference.

The diagnostic question: If the rules mention Points of Information after every speech, it is THIMUN. If the rules mention Moderated Caucus and Unmoderated Caucus as motions, it is Harvard. A conference that offers both a speakers list and a motion for moderated caucus is not hybrid; it is Harvard. There is no hybrid system.

How Documents Are Built: Working Papers, Draft Resolutions, and Clauses

The THIMUN Document Path

THIMUN procedure expects delegates to produce Working Papers during the Lobbying phase and then turn them into Draft Resolutions on the floor. A Working Paper is an informal document: preambulatory clauses that state the problem, and operative clauses that propose action. The bloc writes it during Lobbying, submits it to the dais, and the dais approves it as a Draft Resolution. From that point, the committee debates each clause individually. The chair reads a clause, the committee debates it, and the committee votes on it. An amendment can change a single clause. The entire resolution passes only after every clause has been voted on separately.

The Harvard Document Path

Harvard-style procedure also begins with Working Papers, but the path to a Draft Resolution is different. Blocs write Working Papers during Unmoderated Caucus, submit them to the dais, and the dais approves them as Draft Resolutions. The committee does not debate each clause individually. Instead, when the dais calls a Voting Bloc, the doors seal, no delegate may enter or leave, and the committee votes on the full Draft Resolution as a single document. Amendments to a Harvard Draft Resolution are submitted before the Voting Bloc and voted on as a priority before the substantive vote on the resolution itself. The difference is structural: THIMUN builds the resolution clause by clause on the floor; Harvard builds it in private during caucus and votes on the whole package.

The diagnostic question: If the rules say clauses are debated and voted on one at a time, it is THIMUN. If the rules say the committee enters a Voting Bloc and votes on the full resolution, it is Harvard. A conference that requires signatories on a Draft Resolution is using a signatory threshold typical of both systems, but the voting method is the distinguishing feature.

Feature	THIMUN	Harvard (HMUN)
First committee action	Lobbying phase	Roll Call and Setting the Agenda
Default speaking mode	Open Debate / Closed Debate	General Speakers List
Alternative speaking mode	None	Moderated Caucus and Unmoderated Caucus
Interruptions during speeches	Points of Information after each speech	None; yields at speaker's discretion
Resolution construction	Clause by clause on the floor	Full document built in caucus
Voting method	Each clause voted separately, then resolution	Full resolution voted in Voting Bloc
Amendments	Debated and voted on each clause	Submitted before Voting Bloc, voted on then
Awards	No individual awards	Best Delegate, Outstanding, Honorable Mention
Position paper requirement	Required; used in Lobbying	Required; judged for awards eligibility
Crisis committees	Not offered	Offered at most Harvard-style conferences

How to Tell MUN Procedure Type from a Conference Website

Open the conference website and find the Rules of Procedure page or the Schedule page. Scan for the phrase moderated caucus. If it appears, the conference runs Harvard-style or a variant like UNA-USA. If it does not appear, the conference runs THIMUN or a variant like OAS or UN4MUN. This is the one diagnostic question that works across every conference and every committee type. It does not matter whether the conference calls itself THIMUN-affiliated or Harvard-style. The word is the signal.

Conferences That Use THIMUN and Its Variants

THIMUN procedure is the default for conferences run by the THIMUN Foundation in The Hague and by many European and Asian school circuits. NMUN runs a variant that uses moderated caucus but is closer to Harvard than to THIMUN in structure. UN4MUN, which simulates actual UN procedure, uses neither a moderated caucus nor a formal lobbying phase, but prioritises informal consultations and consensus. OAS procedure permits a Right of Reply for personal affronts and defaults to consensus, not majority voting.

Conferences That Use Harvard and Its Variants

Harvard-style procedure is the default for HMUN, NAIMUN, ILMUNC, YMUN, MUNUC, and HMUN India. UNA-USA, which runs at UN Headquarters in New York, uses moderated caucus and unmoderated caucus but votes with a two-thirds majority on substantive matters rather than the simple majority Harvard uses. The difference between UNA-USA and HMUN is in the voting threshold and the awards structure, not in the fundamental caucus system. If the conference website does not list its rules family, email the secretariat and ask: “Does your procedure use a moderated caucus?” The answer tells you everything.

Moderated Caucus vs Speakers List: Which One Matters More

The Moderated Caucus is the single most important speaking mode in Harvard-style procedure and the main reason THIMUN and Harvard delegates have completely different in-room experiences. In a Moderated Caucus, the committee votes on a specific sub-topic and a speaking time, usually 30 to 60 seconds per speaker. The chair calls on delegates who raise their placards, and each speaker addresses the sub-topic directly. Use the Moderated Caucus to introduce your bloc's ideas, attack opposing blocs, and test policy positions. That is how you steer the committee toward your resolution. The General Speakers List, by contrast, is a formal exercise where delegates deliver prepared statements that rarely change anyone's mind. If you spend the entire committee on the General Speakers List without ever entering a Moderated Caucus, you have not participated in the real work of the committee.

In THIMUN procedure, there is no Moderated Caucus. The equivalent of focused debate happens through the Closed Debate format, where the chair alternates speakers for and against a specific clause. The difference is that THIMUN delegates are forced to engage with the clause text, not with a general sub-topic. Give a speech about why climate change is urgent without referencing the specific operative clause under debate, and the chair will rule you out of order. The failure case in both systems is the delegate who prepares for one speaking mode and does not adapt. In Harvard, that is the delegate who writes a four-minute speech for the General Speakers List and does not learn to speak for 45 seconds in a moderated caucus. In THIMUN, that is the delegate who writes a general policy statement and cannot pivot to clause-level debate.

MUN Procedure Families Explained: Beyond THIMUN and Harvard

Five procedure families dominate MUN globally. THIMUN (originated 1968, The Hague) uses lobbying, clause-by-clause voting, and Points of Information after every speech. No moderated caucus. No individual awards. Position papers are required and used during the lobbying phase. Harvard (HMUN) (originated 1953, Boston) uses moderated caucus, unmoderated caucus, General Speakers List, and Voting Bloc. Individual awards are given on criteria that include diplomacy, negotiation, speaking, and resolution authorship. UNA-USA (originated 1975, New York) uses moderated and unmoderated caucus but votes with a two-thirds majority on substantive matters and permits individual delegates as well as school delegations. OAS (Washington, D.C.) uses formal sessions and informal consultations, defaults to consensus, permits Right of Reply for personal or national affronts, and runs in English and Spanish. UN4MUN (originated 2009, UN Department of Global Communications) uses informal consultations as the primary working method, formal meetings only for decision-making, and a consensus-based voting process. UN4MUN gives no awards and rejects competitive evaluation entirely.

For the advisor choosing conferences, the procedure family determines which skills the team needs to practice. A delegation trained in THIMUN lobbying will struggle in a Harvard committee where the resolution is built in unmoderated caucus and the award depends on speaking in moderated caucus. A delegation trained in Harvard caucusing will waste time in a THIMUN committee waiting for a moderated caucus that never comes. The procedure family is not a minor detail. It is the structure of the entire delegate experience.

The Hidden Cost of Getting it Wrong

The most common failure case is the delegate who assumes all MUN conferences use the same rules because their school club trained them on one system. A student who practices THIMUN procedure for three months and walks into a Harvard committee will be invisible. They will sit through the moderated caucus without raising their placard because they were taught that formal debate follows a speakers list. They will not know to submit a Working Paper during unmoderated caucus because they expect the dais to call for it during formal debate. At the end of the weekend, they will receive no award and will not understand why.

The advisor's failure case is registering a delegation for a conference without checking the rules family and then having no one on the team who understands the caucus system. Spend five minutes on the conference rules page. Identify whether the conference runs THIMUN or Harvard. That single check does more for your team than a month of general training. The conference schedule tells you. The rules document tells you. The one question, does this conference use a moderated caucus?, tells you everything else.