What's New?
For the great majority of our members, involvement with IMAPS is not an “Involved at Headquarters Level” involvement, but rather an “attend or participate in the local chapter” involvement. Surveys have shown that many of our members have never attended a Symposium, Advanced Technology Workshop, or other focused national meeting, yet still find value in their continued membership.
Changes in the organizational structure, however, ultimately affect all members of the organization. Whether it is a change in by-laws (pretty infrequent and largely transparent to the majority of the membership), a change in leadership (a yearly event that brings about a change in direction or style, in many cases), or a change in structure (moving from directors to officers, or vice versa), these changes affect us all like a pebble thrown into a pond — the changes will be felt, it’s just a matter of time. The time it takes to reach us depends on how far away from the pebble we are...
However far we are from the epicenter of the disturbance of our pond, it behooves us all as members to carefully consider what changes to our system may mean for us all. As a member of the Advisory Council or AC (members are former Presidents or President of the Boards of the merged IEPS and ISHM societies, as well as the former IMAPS Presidents), I am often privy to plans. However, since we (the AC) only convene annually at the Symposium, and the Executive Council or EC (the President and his current Board make up the EC) meet more often, communication is still fragmented. It’s no one’s fault; you simply can’t condense two days of discussion of pros and cons into a document that’s not so large that it becomes unwieldy!
Our solution to this (and as you can imagine, as former leaders of the Society ourselves, the AC is not a bunch of shy folks) is to ask questions — lots of ’em. Why? Why was this proposed? What are the long term ramifications? Short term? What are the benefits? What are the drawbacks? Who’s promulgating this? What’s the upside? What’s the downside? The timeline? The cost? The logistics? You get the idea...
I am often concerned that a small group of folks are making the majority of decisions for a larger group of folks. I know, that’s ‘how things are done’ in many cases, but it still concerns me. So when I do get a chance to answer a survey, cast a vote, or render an invited opinion, I take that opportunity to ensure that I am comfortable with all the facets and sides of the decision. I would no more go into a voting both and vote for the first candidate in every category than I would answer a survey without understanding what the survey is going to be used for — making a decision? gathering information only? A vote is pretty straightforward, but a survey can be used for many different things ... so ask why the survey is being sent out and what the results are going to be used for.
Finally, if the survey is not well-designed, take the opportunity to use the write-in comment area liberally. Some professional surveys are poorly designed (the most famous being “Do you like the taste of New Coke?” rather than the better question “Do you prefer the taste of New Coke to the Coca-Cola being made now?” fiasco that cost Coca-Cola, Inc., a boatload of money and embarrassment...). Surveys designed by professionals sometimes flop; folks who are doing this as part of a volunteer organization are almost always writing surveys with the best of intentions but without understanding how to extract information or query on preferences. So use that write-in space! Tell them what you are thinking about. Request more info. If they have a contact e-mail or phone number on the survey (and they should), contact them to ask the purpose behind the survey and find out what’s what and what the results will be used for (and by whom). Only then can you make an informed decision. And an informed decision is our best defense against unanticipated consequences.
What’s your opinion? Let me know at isoqsinc@aol.com.
| Table
of Contents | Previous
Page | Next
Page |
