This is an open letter on the ASAE-ASAE Foundation-GWSAE-The Center for Association Leadership proposed merger to the association community that I am reading during the June 22, 2004 airing of Inside Associations on the Association Internet Radio Network.
Dear Colleagues:
In a matter of just eight days, we will arrive at what I consider to be a watershed moment in the history of the association community. The final member vote on the proposed ASAE-ASAE Foundation-GWSAE-Center for Association Leadership merger will be completed and announced at a special meeting on the evening of June 30. Unfortunately, my schedule does not permit me to attend this meeting, and my standing as an association business partner does not afford me a vote even if I were able to attend. But as someone who cares deeply about the future direction of our community, I feel compelled to share with you my final thinking on the merger proposal. To the extent that anyone listening today or in the days ahead finds my perspective informative or useful as he or she strives to decide how to vote on the merger, I’m glad. But mostly, I’m sharing my thoughts today with you, my association colleagues, because I care what happens to you, your organization and our community, and I’m hoping that my words can help to re-frame the dialogue in which we are currently engaged and that we will continue to have about the future of our profession going forward.
Before I dive into how I’m thinking about the merger proposal today, I believe it is important for me to establish the context of my thinking from the outset of this process. Like many people in our community, I learned at ASAE’s Annual Meeting in Honolulu last August that ASAE and GWSAE had formed a joint leadership team to open the channel for dialogue between two organizations that had been competing pretty hard against each other for just about ten years. It was only through my network of contacts in the community that I began to put together, piece by piece, the real story about what was under consideration in those discussions. To me, at that time, the notion of consolidation or merger or whatever was anathema. As someone who had worked twice for GWSAE, is an ASAE Fellow and an active contributor to both organizations, it was crystal clear to me that the very idea was a grievous strategic error. And it was precisely that message that I delivered in a one-on-one conversation with Susan Sarfati last fall, months before the actual merger proposal was approved in concept by the four boards and subsequently announced to the community.
I must confess that on the day of the merger’s initial announcement back in January, I was deeply disturbed by the news. I sent Susan and John Graham a tersely worded e-mail with ten questions about how the decision to move forward was reached that read more like a set of interrogatories you might receive from an attorney in a lawsuit than a meaningful inquiry designed to better understand the process. My frustration with the possible merger grew after I attended the January 28 Town Hall meeting at the Ronald Reagan Building. Let’s just say that I did not feel that meeting presented the idea in the most complete and forthright manner possible. The overarching message of the presentation that night seemed to be, “Trust us, we’ve thought of that, and we’ll take care of it.” At that particular point in time, I was not ready to accept the wisdom of the merger as an article of faith, and I was not alone. Although I chose not to speak up during the meeting, others did, both those in favor of the idea and those expressing reservations. It was the beginning of what I think has been a necessary and frequently difficult conversation for our community.
Over the ensuing months, there have been further Town Hall meetings, further requests for input from the community, further work on the merger proposal by the staff-led Integration Steering Committee, and further discussions of the Joint Organization Leadership Team (JOLT) and among the four current boards. There has also been much reported on the process by the community’s media outlets, some of it based on facts and information, some of it grounded primarily in rumor, innuendo and gossip. Political issues and agendas have been playing themselves out and advocates on both sides of the issue have sought to position themselves and frame the choice on the merger in ways that are suitable to their desired outcomes. Of course, none of this comes as any surprise to me, and I sure to not to any of you either.
What has come as a surprise to me is that over this same period of time, I have changed my mind about the merger. While for many months I thought it was, quite simply, a terrible idea, I now believe it is the best opportunity we have to change the future of an association community that has deep emotional equity invested in sustaining its past. I don’t think there is any assumption or hyperbole in saying that many associations face an uncertain future. The fundamental and rapid change we are experiencing along multiple dimensions today strongly suggests that our organizations must get on with the business of re-thinking why we exist and how we create value for our members, customers and stakeholders and for society. To challenge ourselves to move beyond the tried-and-true, the well understood and the familiar, we must create the conditions for original thinking and innovation in our community. Although the ASAE Foundation, GWSAE and, more recently, the Center for Association Leadership have sought to play this role and enjoyed some success along the way, their efforts have gone neither far nor deep enough. We need something more and I believe that the merger gives us the best chance to bring forward that intangible “something more” in the months and years ahead.
Now, let’s be clear about something. Like many people in our community, I’m not satisfied with the merger proposal as it is written. I think it is a flawed document, the result of what was certainly a highly political negotiation process. But the fact that it is flawed doesn’t make it bad by definition. Sure, I wish the proposal included a more complete discussion of how the merged organization will relate to other societies of association executives around the country and around the world. Absolutely, I wish the proposal was more clear in recognizing the profound difficulty of cultural change in the merged organization, and more specific on how that work will be pursued. Certainly, I wish the merger proposal contained that one really big idea that made everyone say, “Oh, of course. Why didn’t we think of that before?” But none of those things, and I’m sure many other things we wish we it had, are in the document. At first, I was concerned about these omissions, but I have since decided that it is okay, because it sets the table for what must come next in this process.
So what’s next? Well, for me, what’s next is also the reason why we need to re-frame the terms of the merger discussion. For me, what’s next is building a genuine shared commitment among everyone who cares about the future of the association community to make the merger work should it be approved. This is a critical point. Part of the reason why I’ve changed my mind about the merger is the realization that WE should not be ones relying on John and Susan to make the merged organization great, but that John, Susan, the staff and the boards should be the ones relying on us to invest our time, attention, energy and intellect to make sure that the new ASAE and the new The Center for Association Leadership achieve greatness far beyond our wildest dreams. It’s the recognition that only through our efforts as positive contributors can we transform a flawed document into a flourishing reality. It’s the understanding that “the big ideas” will come from those who devote the passion and the vision and the commitment to the task of bringing them forward for collective consideration and action. In short, whether the merged organization ultimately achieves everything I know we want and need from it will depend primarily on US and not on someone else. Whether we like it or not, we ARE this merger. At this time and in this place, there can be no more “us and them.” There must only be we.
Now, of course, there is alternative path that the community can choose to pursue. The merger could be rejected on June 30 and, presumably, we would be right back where we started. It is a path, however, that I hope we will avoid. In my view, the rejection of the merger proposal will have profoundly negative if unintended consequences for our community. It will send a powerful signal that association leaders are unwilling to embrace change, and that they are more interested in politics than in possibilities. I am concerned that the defeat of the merger will set off a chain reaction of criticism and recrimination that will distract us from the important work we have to do. In short, I do not believe our community can afford the setback that rejecting this proposal will deal to the four organizations and their leaders.
So, instead, I urge us to capitalize on this opportunity to announce what we’re for, rather than what we’re against. I’m not claiming that this idea is perfect and that it doesn’t contain significant risks. Indeed, I would admit that it is profoundly imperfect, which is what makes it so powerful as a platform for engendering our commitment. I would also admit that approving the merger is a risky proposition, but then again, so is defeating it. All that’s left, then, is trust and faith. But it isn’t trust and faith in others or in circumstances. It is trust and faith in ourselves, in our abilities and in our desire to prevail. If it is to work, we will make it work together, because that’s the only way it can. I hope everyone will join me in supporting the ASAE-The Center merger proposal, for the good of both our community and our legacy.
Thank you,
Jeff De Cagna
