Power With versus Power Over

Graph of "Power Over" (finite, blame, shame, fear) versus "Power With" (infinite, connection, respect, equity and equality) leadership

There are (at least) two ways of thinking about power in interpersonal relationships: Power Over and Power With (sometimes recast as “Power To”).

What’s the difference?

Power OVER is about scarcity, rules, procedures, compliance, competition, rewards and threats, hoarding information, assigning blame, fear and skepticism, exclusion, silos, and control.

Power WITH is about abundance, principles, mission, commitment, creativity, focusing on what’s going right, sharing, being open, trust and confidence, inclusion, working together, questioning, inspiring and clarity.

As I’m sure you recognize, traditional hierarchical organizations rely on Power Over. And I suspect that’s where most of our associations fall. But they don’t have to.

In fact, forward-looking organizations need 21st century leaders.

What are 21st century leadership skills?

  • Communication
  • Emotional intelligence
  • Transparency
  • Authenticity
  • Influence (as opposed to authority)
  • Creative
  • Innovative
  • Inspiring
  • Bias towards action
  • About the “we,” not the “me”

Which of the above two power models seems like a better match for the realities of *today’s* work place? Looking at the lists above, where would you rather work?

How do we get from here to there? It comes down to each and every one of us honestly assessing ourselves and, each day, choosing to walk the talk of power with rather than power over. You’re not going to completely transform your organizational culture over night. But you can lead, even from the middle, by example. Not everyone will get it. Not everyone will come with you. But we have to start transforming the culture of work somewhere.

What type of leader are you? What type of leader do you want to be?

Image source: Sylver Consulting 

Open Letter to ASAE

Monday, January 11, 2021

Susan Robertson, CAE, President and CEO, ASAE: The Center for Association Leadership

Stephen J. Caldeira, Chair of the Board, ASAE: The Center for Association Leadership

 

Finally, a line has been crossed and associations are standing up to say “enough.”

Many of us in the association community have watched in dismay in the past four years as the Trump administration violated civil rights, our democratic norms, and human decency, and our community, too often, was silent. Among the Trump administration’s many violations: 

  • Implementing draconian measures to block travel by Muslims, including US green card holders, to the United States.
  • Forcibly separating undocumented immigrant children from their parents, 545 of whom still have yet to be reunited with their families.
  • Ordering members of the National Guard and other law enforcement personnel to attack peaceful protestors in front of The White House who were speaking out against racially-driven police brutality and affirming that Black Lives Matter in order to stage a photo op.
  • Denying science and willfully mismanaging the response to a global pandemic that has resulted in the death of more than 365,000 Americans, a number that increases daily.

Finally, when Donald Trump incited his radical right wing supporters to attempt to overthrow the results of the November election and encouraged them to commit acts of domestic terrorism against our own government by attacking the United States Capitol, associations spoke out strongly.

The National Association of Manufacturers called immediately for Donald Trump’s removal from office via the 25th Amendment to our Constitution.

They were quickly followed by others, as reported by Politico

  • The Business Roundtable noted that the attempted insurrection “makes clear that elected officials’ perpetuation of the fiction of a fraudulent 2020 presidential election is not only reprehensible, but also a danger to our democracy, our society and our economy.” 
  • North America’s Building Trades Unions President Sean McGarvey demanded Trump either resign or be removed via the 25th Amendment, along with Republican lawmakers who objected to certification, singling out Sens. Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley by name. 
  • Jim Nussle, leader of the Credit Union National Association and a former Republican Member of Congress, announced that he is leaving the GOP, “outraged and devastated by the actions of too many elected Republicans (some I know and served with) and supporters.” 

Mike Sommers, President of American Petroleum Institute, when asked by the Washington Post about Trump’s role, said: “I blame him completely. He has proven himself unworthy of the office of being president.” 

NTEN, the Nonprofit Technology Education Network, immediately sent a letter to members that modeled a proactive problem/solution/support approach, which read in part: 

“President Trump incited an angry mob as part of his ongoing attempt to undo President-elect Biden’s election. NTEN supports the calls for the House of Representatives to impeach President Trump. We also support calls for the Cabinet to invoke the 25th Amendment and remove him from office immediately.

Meanwhile, our immediate challenges continue to need our combined efforts. Even during a coup, nonprofits across the U.S. are providing community members with food, shelter, and health care. It’s alright to feel exhausted and overwhelmed. But you’re not alone in the struggle. We see you. We support you. And we’re here with you.”

In contrast, on Thursday, January 7, 2021, ASAE released, via tweet and an unsigned email to members, a weak and equivocal statement that condemned the “breach by rioters” but refused to name them, call out who was responsible, or take any position on a solution

To quote Washington, DC Ward 6 Council member Charles Allen: “This was not a protest; this was a violent act against our country. It was terrorism, period… [we] will not be safer unless we tell the truth of this moment and name those who foment or perpetuate racial and anti-Semitic terror and white supremacy. This requires collective and individual accountability.” 

It appears that ASAE is trying to skip directly to reconciliation without first doing the hard work of acknowledging who is responsible – Donald Trump, his many enablers in the Republican party and right-wing media, and his supporters – and taking active steps to create restorative justice. 

What would requiring accountability look like? 

To quote ASAE’s Diversity and Inclusion statement

“Building on our 30-year D+I commitment, we are especially concerned with creating space for the difficult conversations, hearing the voices least heard, and providing leadership where it is needed in governance and operations.”

If, even in the wake of the shameful white terrorist insurrection that took place in its own backyard, ASAE is not willing to publicly engage those difficult conversations and provide leadership by taking  substantial and significant action to support racial justice, claiming a commitment to diversity and inclusion is meaningless. 

The path to restorative justice is neither easy nor fast and must engage many more members of the association community than the authors and co-signers of this letter.

One concrete action ASAE could take immediately would be to pledge that APAC will not now or in the future contribute to any candidate or incumbent who supported Donald Trump’s attempt to overturn the results of the election, whether through signing on to the Supreme Court amicus brief, speaking against election certification on the floor of the House or Senate, or voting against certifying any state’s electoral college votes. 

We call on ASAE and our friends and colleagues in the association community to do the hard work of bending the arc of the moral universe towards justice.

 

Elizabeth Weaver Engel, MA, CAE, Chief Strategist, Spark Consulting

Barbara J. Armentrout, CAE

Joan L. Eisenstodt, Chief Strategist, Eisenstodt Associates, LLC, and Past Chair, ASAE Ethics Committee

Dina Lewis, CAE, President, Distilled Logic, LLC, and Member, ASAE Communication Professionals Advisory Council

Sherry A. Marts, Ph.D., President and CEO, S*Marts Consulting LLC

Maggie McGary,CEO & Chief Strategist at McGary Associates

45 additional ASAE member association executives signed onto the letter between January 11-31, 2021. The letter was formally sent to Ms. Robertson and Mr. Calderia on Tuesday, February 2, 2021. If and when ASAE responds, I will update this post.

ASAE responded on Monday, February 8, 2021. You can read a PDF of their letter here: ASAE Response to Feb. 2 Open Letter.

 

Partnership v. Membership: Is There a Membership Role for Suppliers?

Henry Ford quote - people can have the model T in any color they want, so long as it's black

In my previous post in this series, I concluded with the question:

What role, if any, does supplier membership play in this ecosystem?

Lewis responded with a strong statement that suppliers should NOT be association members, because they have “divergent interests and motivations” for their relationships with your association.

I would argue that there is, or at least can be, a role for supplier membership. Lewis actually highlighted the reason why – “shared interest in regulatory or legislative issues.”

Some suppliers are merely looking for customers and want to maintain a limited relationship with the association. They are good candidates for advertising, exhibiting, and event sponsorship, but NOT for membership. Some suppliers want long-term loyal relationships with the association and are deeply invested in the overall good of the profession or industry you serve. They may have aligned advocacy or other interests and can be powerful partners in achieving your association’s mission. They don’t JUST want to sell. They are potential candidates for supplier membership.

Additionally, people increasingly move fluidly across industries throughout their careers. Someone may start her career as a practitioner, freelance part time while her kids are young, then spend some time with a supplier/vendor in your space. That supplier/vendor might go through merger or acquisition, so she might go back to being a practitioner, and perhaps finish her career as a seasoned consultant, running her own shop, either as a solopreneur or leading a small team. She’s likely going to want to maintain a long-term, loyal relationship with your association throughout. Does that relationship HAVE to be membership? No, but it certainly could be. Should she be denied membership because she’s not currently a practitioner? Absolutely not. Should she be denied access all together when she’s running her own small consulting shop? Again, absolutely not (although she’s unlikely to be an appropriate candidate for “typical” corporate offerings of advertising, exhibiting, and sponsorship).

Again, it comes back to the question: Why do people associate? We associate to solve problems and achieve goals that we can do more effectively as a group than we can individually. Are your suppliers going to share all those goals? Probably not, but they will share some (and even your core members don’t share all the same goals).

Which raises another important point. Per the quote above, you have to beware of the Henry Ford issue: You can’t just offer your supplier members the exact same package of benefits as core members. As Lewis points out, they have DIFFERENT interests and goals. (Honestly, you really shouldn’t be doing the “any color you want so long as it’s black” style membership even with your core members, but that’s a separate topic.)

How do you know what those are? How do you know what benefits would be appealing to supplier members?

You have to talk to them to find out. 

As you’re having those conversations, keep the following in mind:

  1. Suppliers need your help to understand their customers’ (your members’) operating environment. For instance, the CFA Institute runs a free online program called Investment Foundations that is designed to help people who aren’t Certified Financial Analysts understand what’s involved in being a CFA and why the certification, which is expensive in time and cost and is difficult to earn, is worth investing in. Your suppliers might appreciate something similar for your profession or industry (and the Investment Foundations program does double-duty, helping the staff members of CFA Institute’s 150+ world-wide chapters better understand their members, too).
  2. Board service is likely to be a sticking point. Your suppliers will likely want to be involved in the volunteer leadership of your association, but board service may not be the best place for that to happen, as they may start pushing an agenda and interests that are peripheral to those of the core membership. There are other ways to deal with this, though. You can reserve one board seat (maybe even a non-voting position) for your suppliers. You can create a special supplier council or advisory group. You can encourage your suppliers to participate in the existing standing committees that are appropriate (ASAE’s Technology Section Council is an excellent example of this). You can make them formally part of your advocacy team.
  3. Supplier membership can be a great entry-point for small firms in your profession or industry that can’t afford pricey exhibit booths or sponsorships, like the solopreneur consultant mentioned above.
  4. Supplier membership needs to be considered in light of your larger revenue and engagement goals. You’re still going to want to offer sponsorships and partnerships, likely at much higher dollar levels than membership, so you need to think carefully about how you construct all those programs so as not to cannibalize yourself (i.e., make sure your programs don’t unintentionally provide incentives for a large-scale corporate partner to downgrade to supplier membership only).

Lewis and I have both alluded to the idea of corporate partnership in our posts so far, but we haven’t really delved into what that is and why it matters, so Lewis is going to address that in his next post.

Image found here.

Associations Respond to Hurricane Harvey

In case you missed it, ASAE’s Collaborate forum (member login required) has recently been hosting a robust discussion of how associations are helping their members and the local community in Houston and southwest Louisiana respond to Hurricane Harvey. With Houston and Louisiana still drying – and digging – out and Hurricane Irma about to strike Florida, I wanted to summarize some good practices that have emerged.

Dues Relief. How this would work will vary based on your association’s dues structure and also how generous you can afford to be (driven by how many members are affected and how large a percentage of your overall revenue is comprised of membership dues), but many associations are extending expiration dates for members in the affected region. Some are doing it automatically, while some are doing it only upon request. Personally, I think automatic is preferable – while people are trying to salvage what they can from their flooded homes and businesses, they don’t need to worry about having to call their membership association to ask for a favor.

Suppressing Marketing Campaigns. Likewise, whether it’s recruitment, renewal, conference, new publication, professional development series, or whatever, many associations are suppressing addresses from the affected regions so they are not targeted by marketing campaigns for the time being. Again, your members don’t need to be worrying about your shiny new webinar series right now.

Have a Space/Need a Space. Some associations are hosting a forum where local members who have spare office space – or even spare bedrooms – can offer them to other local members. This might not work for every association – your members would need to be comfortable with this level of intimacy with each other – but for those who are, this would be a highly valuable service. For manufacturing associations, this could even include donating production capacity to affected members.

Industry/Profession-Specific Fundraising. This can come in many forms. Some associations are planning offer scholarships to events that will be taking place within the next few months to members in the affected areas. Some have launched GoFundMe campaigns to help members cope with uninsured losses. Some are organizing and matching member donations to nonprofit relief agencies (a good practice there is to focus on groups that are both local and already on the ground, like the local food bank or animal rescue organization). Some are focusing on helping members replace destroyed equipment or supplies, such as for teachers who pay out of pocket for many of their classroom supplies and may not be able to replace them on their own right now or firefighters whose handheld radios may have been destroyed.

One organization has tasked volunteers with calling every single member in the affected area (admittedly, it’s fewer than 100) and asking each of them if they need help. Anyone who answers “yes” is getting a check for $1000 immediately and automatically, no (additional) questions asked. While this is not something every organization can afford to do, I would encourage you to think big. It will generate positive feeling and member loyalty within your community and will provide a halo effect for your organization and potentially your entire profession or industry.

Public Service. For organizations whose members serve the public (like doctors, teachers, psychologists), many are providing materials to help their members help the community cope with the aftermath of and losses created by the hurricane. Some have also created materials for the affected communities themselves, like materials for parents to help their children cope.

So how do you know who’s affected? The USPS of course! You have two options: the USPS Service Alerts website and the PostalPro website.

What is your association doing? Join the discussions on Collaborate, or leave your ideas in the comments.

 

This Is Not a Good Look for Us

It’s an open secret that associations are deeply concerned about – and struggling with – our ability to recruit and retain Millennial young professionals, both as members and as association executives and talent in our industry. We’re trying all kinds of things – changing our membership tiers, dues structures, and value propositions; changing our volunteer offerings and opportunities; changing our work and office cultures – to try to attract young people and keep them involved.

Fortunately, there’s a ton of research on this generation – Pew, Project New America, the US government’s Corporation for National and Community Service’s Volunteering in America reports, etc. – and we’re using that research to figure out how to revitalize our organizations to draw them in.

Millennials share many attitudes that differ from their elders. One of the largest differences is around the role the government should play in protecting the environment and preventing climate change. According to a recent Project New America study, 76% of Millennials believe the government should play a larger role in environmental protection, and 69% call for greater involvement preventing climate change.

graph Millennial attitudes on social and economic issues Which makes this recent piece in the New York Times deeply concerning.

The piece addresses regulatory rollbacks under the Trump administration, with a particular focus on environmental rollbacks. I quote:

In many cases, records show that the changes came after appeals by corporate lobbyists and trade association executives…”

I know – and you know – that the majority of associations are not out there lobbying to allow their members to trash the environment for short-term economic gains. But we all also know that there are some bad actors, too.

ASAE has put an enormous amount of resources – time, money, energy – into the Power of A campaign and Associations Advance America, highlighting the good work we do in the world, like responding to the Ebola crisis or providing support for military caregivers.

And then the US Chamber’s Tom Donohue comes out and says, “After a relentless, eight-year regulatory onslaught that loaded unprecedented burdens on businesses and the economy, relief is finally on the way,” to the Times.

I worry that this is going to give our industry a huge black eye generally – “we don’t care who we screw, as long as it’s good for our industry” – is going to undo the good work ASAE has been doing highlight the good associations do in the world, and will make our already challenging task of recruiting and retaining young members and staff even more difficult.

Image found here.

 

Membership 101: Recruitment versus Retention versus Renewal

Uncle Sam World War 2 I want you poster

Three great tastes that taste great together.

Recruitment, retention, and renewal are related, but they aren’t the same thing.

Recruitment is what you do to get people in the door of your association in the first place. It’s at least partially about sales, but it’s also about starting a relationship. When you recruit a member, you are both choosing to start a relationship with each other.

Retention, on the other hand, is about keeping members, nurturing those new relationships over the long term.

To quote Joe Rominiecki from ASAE’s Associations Now membership blog:

“Recruitment requires creativity, but retention demands authenticity. Any number of offers, incentives, or messages can convince someone to try out your association, but once they’ve experienced it for a year, it’s either good or it isn’t. Which makes the decision to renew a lot different than the decision to join.”

Association membership professionals tend to focus a lot of energy on recruitment, and that’s understandable because campaigns are fun, let you be creative, and are time-limited (that is, they have a start and an end). But retention is critical to long-term, sustainable growth. Recruitment, no matter how successful, without a strong retention relationship-buiding program, is like pouring water into a bucket with a hole in it. Pointless.

Renewal is a process. It’s the mechanics of retention, the glue that holds this cycle together. As such, it’s tactical, focused on answering questions like:

  • How many notices are you going to send?
  • When?
  • On what platforms/channels? (DO NOT only send emails.)
  • What offers are you going to make?
  • What messages are you going to use?
  • Who do you need to convince? (Your actual member may not be the only decision-maker.)

Retention is the goal. Renewal is the tactic you use to achieve that goal.

Image found here.

Letter to ASAE – ASAE’s Response

ASAE has officially responded to those of us who expressed concern about the association industry response to the 2016 Presidential election.

Thanks to John Graham and Scott Wiley for allowing me to publicly share their response to the letter that was published on this blog on November 21.

Click through to view the PDF of that communication.

My thoughts:

  • I appreciate the fact that ASAE took the time to respond officially.
  • I also appreciate the fact that ASAE’s response includes a re-statement of the association’s commitment to diversity and inclusion,
  • I commend ASAE for their ongoing work lobbying against the “bathroom bill” in Texas.
  • I am disappointed that ASAE did not address any of the specific requests the author group had made, such as calling on Donald Trump to renounce his divisive rhetoric and the attacks on various groups that have been made – and are continuing to be made – by his supporters, appointing an ombudsman to address questions about issues that might arise from Mr. Trump’s divisive policies, and instituting a more transparent process for forming advocacy and public policy positions.

Should ASAE wish to pursue any of these requested actions, I believe I speak for the entire original author group when I say that we stand ready to assist in any way that we can.

 

Further Election 2016 Association Industry Responses

ASAE has posted further clarification of their position on the incoming administration.

While I am heartened to see ASAE specifically mention “…work[ing] with the new administration in a manner consistent with our commitment to diversity and inclusion…,” I believe it to be, overall, an inadequate response.

I should note that ASAE’s response was published before the Letter to John Graham and Scott Wiley came out on Monday, November 21. So it, of course, is not a direct response to that letter. However, ASAE offers nothing by way of specifics as to how we will go about protecting those who are most at risk among our own employers, our members, and other audiences we serve.

Reasonable people of good will can disagree vigorously on policies that impact both business and the public. This disagreement often produces compromise policies that are superior to the original positions of either side.

However, questioning the fundamental rights and full humanity of our fellow citizens and of the citizens of the world is a moral issue around which there can be no compromise.

My co-authors/co-signers may also wish to weigh in with their thoughts, but I remain firm in my position that ASAE needs to take specific steps to:

  • Ask Mr. Trump to repudiate his rhetoric that is in direct violation of our pillar on diversity and inclusion.
  • Ask Mr. Trump to denounce the hate crimes, attacks, and violence that are being perpetrated by his supporters in his name.
  • Appoint an ombudsman.
  • Pledge to increase transparency around and community involvement in how political and policy-related decisions are made.

Among the other specific steps the letter’s authors requested.

MANY associations are taking strong positions that manage to balance pledging cooperation without compromising on their core principles or attempting to normalize behavior and rhetoric that should not be normalized. The SocialFish blog has an excellent post listing and quoting excerpts from some of those statements, and, as I noted yesterday,  associationvoices.com is collecting more. I urge you to follow @assocvoices on Twitter to keep abreast of that conversation and, if your association has issued a statement, to email it to associationvoices@gmail.com for inclusion in the project.

 

 

Association Industry Response to the Election

As you may have seen in Associations Now Online, ASAE recently signed onto a National Association of Manufacturers-organized letter of support to President-Elect Trump.

While this has been common practice in previous presidential elections and while this letter was arranged before the election to be sent regardless of which candidate won, several of your colleagues were dismayed by the tone of the letter, as many of Mr. Trump’s statements on the campaign trail and some of his actions since the election are in direct violation of ASAE’s “pillar” statement on diversity and inclusion.

We have written a letter to ASAE CEO John Graham and board chair Scott Wiley, expressing our concerns and asking ASAE to take seven specific actions. While we, as an industry, do need to remain engaged in the political process regardless of who is leading it, these actions are intended to ensure we remain true to our core principles at the same time.

Many of you will not agree with us – and that’s OK.

Many of you will agree with us, but, because of your position in our industry or because of the industry your association represents, will not feel that it’s appropriate for you to sign on to the letter – and that’s OK too.

If you would like to do something, here are some options:

  1. Read the letter.
  2. Sign onto the letter.
  3. Share this blog post or the link to the letter (http://getmespark.com/letter-to-john-graham-and-scott-wiley/) with your colleagues.
  4. Speak out in your own words on social media (don’t forget to use the hashtag #assnchat).
  5. Contact John Graham directly to express your concerns at 202.626.2741 or jgraham@asaecenter.org.
  6. Think about what cause is most important to you – freedom of religion, freedom of the press, climate change, immigration, mass incarceration, women’s reproductive rights – and donate or volunteer your time (or both) accordingly.
  7. Share your association’s story via a new project that’s just launching, associationvoices.com. Email associationvoices@gmail.com to tell your own stories about how your association is taking action to support diversity and inclusion, defend the first amendment, or benefit society as a whole.

 

Letter to John Graham and Scott Wiley

Monday, November 21, 2016

John Graham, President & CEO, ASAE

Scott Wiley, Chairman, ASAE

Dear John and Scott:

This letter is a call for meaningful community-wide dialogue and action on behalf of a nation at risk.

One week ago, Associations Now Daily announced that ASAE signed a National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) letter “to the president-elect” expressing a desire to “work productively” with the incoming administration. While we recognize this same letter would have been sent to Secretary Clinton had she prevailed in the Electoral College, many of us read it as an attempt to normalize a candidate who displayed a level of ignorance, intolerance, and indecency unprecedented among modern major party presidential nominees. Mr. Trump ran an intentionally divisive campaign that included:

  • Proposing a religious test for entry to the United States, which is a violation of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. (Since the election, Mr. Trump’s advisors have publicly discussed the implementation of a registry for Muslims, which many see as the precursor to internment.)
  • Indicating that he would require U.S. troops to torture enemy combatants and bomb their non-combatant families, both of which are violations of the Geneva Convention.
  • Bragging about engaging in sexually predatory behaviors without consequence because of his celebrity status, boasts which have since been corroborated by more than a dozen victims.
  • Promising to deport nearly 12 million undocumented immigrants, which would cause great economic cost to the United States and its businesses, and untold human suffering.
  • Openly mocking physical mannerisms of a Pulitzer Prize-winning New York Times reporter who suffers from arthrogryposis, and then denying the incident occurred despite clear-cut video evidence.
  • Threatening to jail his opponent, despite the fact that she has never been convicted of any crime, which is a violation of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

There is no need to elaborate further. The challenge before us is clear.

 For those of us signing this letter, the most important question is what happens next. On January 20, 2017, a new administration will take office, led by an individual whose character, rhetoric, and policy positions place our country’s most vulnerable populations at even greater risk. These diverse communities include association members, volunteers, and staff who are expecting ASAE to hear their voices at this perilous time. The question is whether ASAE, and by the extension the association community it serves, will choose to listen to those voices and take steps to help protect people who are now under direct threat.

Through this letter, we are asking you and the ASAE Board of Directors to recognize the uniquely dangerous moment at which our country finds itself, and answer our call for community-wide dialogue and action on behalf of a nation at risk. We recommend that ASAE take the following steps:

  • Issue a second letter calling on Mr. Trump to publicly repudiate his divisive rhetoric and policy proposals before Inauguration Day. Consistent with the described process of preparing the NAM letter, we would ask ASAE to seek support for this letter from philanthropic, professional, and trade associations; non-profits; and other organizations across the country.
  • Call on Mr. Trump to forcefully denounce the hateful attacks against women, racial, ethnic, religious, and other minorities that have been made in his name since Election Day as fundamentally wrong and incompatible with our shared American values.
  • Communicate both publicly and privately to elected officials at all levels of government that ASAE and the association community will oppose divisive rhetoric and policies that place the lives of Americans at risk, and create a communications toolkit for individual association members, volunteers, and staff to use as part of their own advocacy outreach.
  • Develop a more transparent and inclusive process of organizational decision-making around ASAE’s advocacy and public policy activities.
  • Appoint an independent ombudsman from outside of the current ASAE organizational structure to whom any association member, volunteer, or staff person can raise concerns, pose questions, or seek advice on how to address the personal or professional issues that may arise from Mr. Trump’s (and his followers’) divisive rhetoric and policies.
  • Work with societies of association executives (SAEs) at the local, state, and regional levels to organize a series of town hall meetings to nurture an open and honest dialogue about the future of our country, with the intention of bringing people from across the political spectrum together as Americans.
  • Integrate into the Power of A campaign and ASAE’s Public Policy efforts a much stronger focus on issues affecting vulnerable populations, and gather and share more information on diversity and inclusion, equity, and social justice concerns.

While none of these measures can fully protect our country’s most vulnerable populations from the power of the Federal government under Mr. Trump’s direction, we believe they will build confidence across the association community in ASAE’s commitment to tolerance, fairness, and decency in our national life, and create new mechanisms for resisting the codification of Mr. Trump’s bigoted belief system into dangerous policies with potentially dire consequences for millions of Americans.

Now is an excellent time to show why associations have always advanced America.

We agree with both the substance and spirit of ASAE’s statement of commitment to diversity and inclusion, which begins with the sentence, “[i]n principle and in practice, ASAE values and seeks diversity and inclusive practices within the association management industry.” In this instance, we ask our association to recognize the urgent need for our profession to work together to take constructive steps on behalf of the entire nation and its people.

There is much discussion today about the long-term relevance of associations. At this uncertain moment in our country’s history, ASAE can demonstrate the significant impact associations can make by taking an unambiguous and just stance to preserve the integrity of the democratic process, protect vulnerable Americans, and defend the future of the American experiment. We hope you will concur and will act decisively for what is right.

Signed:

Elizabeth Weaver Engel, M.A., CAE, CEO & Chief Strategist, Spark Consulting

Sherry A. Marts, Ph.D., President and CEO, S*Marts Consulting LLC

Joan L. Eisenstodt, Chief Strategist, Eisenstodt Associates, LLC, and Past Chair, ASAE Ethics Committee

Jeff De Cagna FASAE, Chief Strategist and Founder, Principled Innovation LLC

Shelly Alcorn, CAE, Principal, Alcorn Associates Management Consulting

Dina Lewis, CAE, President, Distilled Logic, LLC

Mark Alcorn, J.D., M.B.A., Attorney, Alcorn Law Corporation

See who else signed.

Edited: A printed copy of the letter and list of all signatories was mailed to ASAE on Monday, December 12.