President's Perspective
"... it is very difficult to change the 'status quo' ..."
As with many organizations, AMA has developed by a process of evolution rather than revolution. It is an organization that has served aeromodeling well over the years, and it has become the premier organization of aeromodelers in the world. While the organization has changed slowly over the years through evolution, it has had its share of revolutionaries; it's just that most of those revolutionaries either faded away or became part of the "establishment." In fact, that last bit describes a couple of people you might just recognize.
Way back in 1974, AMA's Executive Director, John Worth, wrote of "those vocal dissidents in Ohio," and was referring to yours truly and my predecessor as AMA president, Don Lowe. The point is that most of us who have arrived on the scene as revolutionaries have gotten a big shot of reality once we tried to change things. Most often, you end up finding that things make a lot more sense after you have heard all sides of the matter than they did when you first arrived.
Another thing you learn quite quickly is that sometimes what seems so obvious to you is not only not obvious to others, but they think you are way off base. Occasionally you try again and again to convince others, but they still refuse to see the light. It happens, and when it does, you have little choice but to accept the will of the majority and get on with life. Not supporting the will of the majority and fretting over it will only give you ulcers. Supporting the majority over the long run gets you labeled as one of the "good old boys." In case you didn't realize it, this is not a compliment.
The bottom line is that it is very difficult to change the "status quo" in an organization like the AMA. This is not at all bad, as it is in the best interest of any organization to make it difficult. The flip side of this is the fact that in many cases, the "status quo" is no longer serving the membership as the needs of the membership change more rapidly than the organization does.
Further exacerbating the problem is the fact that there can be, and typically is, a significant difference between the needs of the membership as a whole and the desires of individual members. This statement will probably get me into a bit of hot water, but it is true. I believe this is why the structure of most successful organizations employs a board of directors made up of professionals to guide the organization. The membership elects these board members at an annual meeting by voting. A major factor in these elections is that it is very common for the chairman to hold enough proxy votes to virtually appoint the board members. In most such systems, either the members are encouraged to appoint the chair as their proxy, or the chair acquires those proxies by default. The result is that if the membership, as a whole, becomes unhappy with the performance of its organization's leadership, it can replace those leaders, but a dissident group can only take over if they convince the true majority of the members that they can do a better job.
The irony of this system is that while it may seem to dilute the effect of a single member's vote, it really ends up ensuring that the majority of members are involved.
"An organization needs to be constantly rejuvenated by the infusion of young blood. It needs smart, young people with imagination and guts to turn everything upside down if they can. It also needs old fogies to keep them from turning upside down the things that ought to be right side up. Above all, it needs young rebels, and old conservatives who can work together, challenge each other's views, yield or hold with equal grace, and continue after each hard-fought battle to respect each other." Henry Ford (adapted)
Till next month,
Dave Brown AMA President dbrown@dbproducts.com
Transcribed from original scans by AI. Minor OCR errors may remain.
