It has been nearly a month since AFA’s leadership decided to keep this year’s Annual Meeting in Phoenix. I don’t know why, but I kept thinking about the decision that was made. As I read over their rationale on AFA’s website (www.fraternityadvisors.org), I couldn’t help but think that this was a difficult decision to make. As the title suggest, I saw the situation as a lose-lose situation.
For starters, by keeping the Annual Meeting Phoenix, the Association must now face the reality that members will boycott the conference. One member, two members, 30 members, 100 members…no one really knows how many will choose not to attend the meeting. While some may see this as not a big deal because any year presents challenges for members to attend (especially during tough economic times), I see this particular decision as a larger issue. Why? It is because of the audience that is boycotting.
Specifically, a number of the multicultural organizations and its members are publicly stating that they will not be attending. This hurts the Annual Meeting for a couple of reasons. First, while not their intention; does this decision potentially ostracize multicultural organizations? From my vantage point, I already see a limited number of NPHC and multicultural organizations and members attending the Annual Meeting. Second, what message does this send to our students? Don’t we as professionals preach to our students not to be a “bystander” and not to let money or “tradition” get in the way of what is right? If a majority of members disagree with the Arizona Immigration Law but yet allow our Association to hold the Annual Meeting in the state, isn’t there a disconnect?
On the other hand, had AFA’s leadership decided to move the Annual Meeting, there would have been ramifications for that decision as well. As stated in their rationale, AFA’s leadership stated that, “It was in the best interest of the organization to focus on its core mission and not engage in state/local legislative and political issues.” How would the Association draw the line in the future if there were issues similar to Arizona’s Immigration Law? What if there were another perceived “ism” such as sexism violated in a future Annual Meeting state? The decision to remain not engaged was a bold statement by AFA’s leadership.
Another issue to contend with was the financial burden the Association would have faced for cancelling its contract with the hotel. Projected at a six-figure penalty, who would have picked up that tab? General members? Private donors? Financial consideration had to be made but it makes you wonder if the six-figure statement scared people from trying. To put it in context, had the cost of the cancellation cost been $100,000 and the Association had approximately 1,000 members that would equate to $100 per person. Divide that $100 over the span of twelve months and that would have equated to a little over $8 a month. Maybe I’m an optimist but I would tend to think that a general member would make a commitment of $8 a month.
None the less, the decision was difficult. On one side, you are potentially ostracizing the multicultural community while on the other side; you are walking a tight line with what the Association’s purpose is and the financial responsibility the Association has to its general members.
Frankly, I have accepted the decision. I will be at the Annual Meeting and I will support the Association. Yet, there are two comments I need to make here. First, I wish the general membership had a voice in the decision. I’m not saying we needed to make the final decision because that would defeat the purpose of our elected officers. However, I think it is important for the membership to have an opportunity to vote to see just where the general members’ values lie. Don’t you think it would be interesting to see if our colleagues as a whole had a vote of 800 – 200 with the 800 votes being to move the Annual Meeting. Or what if the vote was the other way? I’m sorry but we can’t rely on the online community to be the one location to see where general members’ feelings are on a certain issue or topic.
Second, I was surprised at how naïve some members of the Association were in discussing the issue at hand. Maybe it relates to the notion of privilege and not having to worry about certain things, but as a person of color who has to be genuinely concerned with being questioned in Phoenix, I was surprised with some comments made. I think it reminded me that we are always learning and we must remember the privileges we have been provided…by choice or not by choice.
Lastly, I wanted to end this blog entry with two things. To gain further perspective, I contacted the President-Elect, Monica Miranda Smalls to get her perspective on the issue. See her responses to some Q&A’s below. Also below, I created a twitter poll, to provide an opportunity for anyone who reads this to vote on whether or not they agreed or disagreed with the decision AFA’s leadership made.
Question and Answer w/ President-Elect:
SC: Can you describe the thought process of how the AFA Executive Board came to the decision to keep the Annual Meeting in Phoenix?
MMS: The information on AFA's decision can be found at this link: http://www.fraternityadvisors.org/default.aspx?action=News&Newsid=103
SC: A great deal of professionals will want to discuss this issue in some fashion at the Annual Meeting. How will the leadership of AFA provide an open and welcoming environment for dialogue regarding this issue?
MMS: The Educational Programs Committee, along with the AFA Director of Programs, is in the midst of reviewing all program proposals and ideas submitted by the membership. I am confident there will continue to be an open and welcoming environment at the Annual Meeting for dialogue about any issue that is important to our membership.
SC: This issue has brought about more questions regarding AFA's values and purpose. Can you comment on your vision as the next President for where AFA needs to go? Do you think AFA's values and/or purpose need to be updated or revised?
MMS: AFA is currently in the midst of a strategic planning process that is allowing us to reflect on the Association mission, vision and overall direction. We have received useful feedback from the membership through personal interviews and member surveys as part of this process as well. I am excited to gather again as a Board in just a few weeks to continue work on the strategic plan and will be happy to share more on where the Association is headed once it's launched.
SC: What have you personally learned from this issue?
MMS: I'd prefer not to share my personal thoughts on this issue as they are just that, personal. What I will say is that I respect the differing of opinions on this issue and encourage everyone to not let disagreement hinder important dialogue that should continue.
SC: Are there any other comments or thoughts you would like to share?
MMS: Not at this time. Thanks for asking!
No comments:
Post a Comment