It must be re-emphasized that this is a voluntary system. It requires a significant amount of time that is uncompensated from people who tend to be very busy with clinical and academic responsibilities. There is a widely held misconception that we could increase the motivation of academics to serve on IRBs by formally recognizing the contributions they make in terms of time and commitment. Certainly, they should get compensated in salary and release time. But this alone will not accomplish the desired ends.
People choose academic careers because they want to do research and they want to teach.
The true coins of the academic realm lie in recognition by peers of their academic accomplishments. In a certain vitally important sense nothing can compensate them for the time and energy devoted to committee work. They should at least have a sense that they are doing something important and that they are appreciated for doing it. One aspect of the report that merits correction is the perception given that IRBs are conflicted in conducting their duties. This observation implies that IRBs regularly have the institutional interest at heart at the expense of those of research subjects.