Unit Dues Project Team Report to K

1
(No Transcript)
2
Unit Dues Project TeamReport to KC Board of
DirectorsOctober 11, 2005
3
Unit Dues Project Team - Members

• Team Sponsor Richard T. Jacobsen
• Team Advisors Wade Troxell, Burt Dicht

4
Summary

• It is recommended that
• KC implement a new program, to provide
  merit-based funding for all units of ASME.
• Funding / financial support to be awarded to
  Units that are providing programs, activities,
  and other initiatives in support of their
  members.
• These financial awards are to be based on Unit
  performance criteria to be established.
• Funds required for this new program are to be
  obtained from current dues.
• Separate Unit Dues not be adopted for ASME.

5
Unit Dues Project Team Team Charge

• Review the current policies, constitution and
  by-laws of ASME that define the current dues
  process and identify what would be required to
  change it.
• Determine the distribution and use of current
  Society dues as a point of departure.
• Investigate current practices of other
  Professional Societies with respect to dues for
  specific functions within the society, and
  develop a recommendation for the ASME Knowlege
  and Community Sector Board of Directors with
  respect to implementation of such a practice.

6
Unit Dues Project Team Team Charge

• If additional dues (either voluntary or
  mandatory) are recommended for Section or
  Division (or other) activities, the committee
  should provide
• a general plan for collecting the dues,
• recommend the appropriate amount of additional
  dues,
• and explain the consequences of
  payment/non-payment of such dues.(What do you get
  if you pay the added dues, and what don't you get
  if you don't pay them?)

7
Financial support for Units is needed

• It is imperative that a source of funds be made
  available / provided to units of ASME, especially
  those that are high performing.
• Units with substantial programs and activities
  provide added value to members, resulting in
  membership retention and a willingness by members
  to pay dues.

8
Options considered by the team

• Dozens of options were considered and discussed
  by the team. These options and multiple
  variations may be categorized as follows
• Option 1 Institute Optional Unit Dues
• Option 2 Institute Mandatory Unit Dues
• Option 3 Member-directed use of dues to support
  Units
• Option 4 Provide funds from dues for an
  objective, merit-based Unit funding program.

9
Findings

• Benchmarking sample 9 of 15 other Technical
  and/or Professional Societies do have some form
  of optional local Section or Technical
  Division dues
• All 15 have means of providing financial support
  for Units.

10
Findings

• Surveys by team members of Section and District
  Leadership find little to no support for local
  Unit Dues options
• We did find a need for KC BoD to improve
  communications between ASME leadership and local
  ASME Unit leadership
• Misunderstanding, miscommunications, rumors,
  distrust, and hostility are present

11
Findings

• Option 4 is strongly preferred by team members
  and by local Unit leadership contacted by the
  team.
• Option 1 mixed results some weak support for
  this option, combined with some strong feelings
  against this option.
• Today, Section and Division membership are
  included with payment of Dues
• Implementation of local Unit Dues would erode the
  real and perceived benefits of ASME membership

12
Option 4 New merit-based Unit funding program

• This is the option recommended for implementation
  by the Unit Dues Project Team
• Implement a new program to provide funds from
  dues for an objective, merit-based Unit funding
  program (for Sections, Technical Divisions, and
  Affinity Communities).
• Units would be provided funds based on programs
  and activities conducted by the Unit, as
  suggested by Michael Molnar.

CMA Section Appropriations Improvement Task
Force, 17 June 2003
13
Backup Slides
14
Backup Slides
15
Proposed Process

• Link Appropriation to a Performance Measure
• We already track many performance metrics on the
  unit reports
• The team agreed the single most important
  performance metric is the general (section)
  meeting
• Other things important, but the local member is
  principally served by actual activities held
• KISS principle is important to follow...

CMA Section Appropriations Improvement Task
Force, 17 June 2003
16
Definitions on Activity Level Metric, and
proposed funding for Sections

• LEVEL INACTIVE
• Defined by General meetings not held/reported
• Irrespective of whether other activities (e.g.
  planning meetings) were held or the annual report
  was filed
• Proposed Section Funding Formula
• NO appropriation.
• Inactive and special situation units can petition
  the appropriate KC VP for revitalizing
  resources.
• Rationale
• No service to our members does not merit funding.
  Separate revitalization/special situation cases
  from the funding policy, as these are unique
  cases and the responsibility of the KC BoD

17
Activity Metric (contd)

• LEVEL ACTIVE
• Defined by At least TWO general meetings were
  held, with at least one event meeting the
  definition of a technical meeting (ref ML-15)
• number to be selected by KC BoD indicating the
  minimal level expected of a funded Section
• Technical content quoted as the top member need
  in customer surveys, so must deliver at least one
  local event (technical dinner meeting, seminar,
  symposia, PD course)
• Other meetings would include events such as a
  plant tour, an awards banquet, a social event
  (ref ML-15 meeting types)
• Proposed Section Funding Formula
• At this minimal level, the section receives HALF
  of the allotment they receive today.
• Rationale Support the section, but encourage
  greater performance

18
Activity Metric (contd)

• LEVEL EXCELLENT
• Defined by Four or more general meetings were
  held, with at least two of the events meeting the
  classification of a technical meeting, and at
  least one of the events meeting the
  classification of an outreach meeting.
• Qualifying outreach events include a Professional
  Development course, co-sponsorship with a
  technical division or group on a symposia, or
  co-sponsorship with a student section on a
  significant event.
• Proposed Section Funding Formula
• The section receives the FULL allotment they
  receive today.
• Rationale Supports section operations delivering
  real value to our members, funding directed to
  those units performing well giving us a true
  performance based allocation.

19
Unit Dues Project Team Community of Practice

• lthttp//cop.asme.org/COP/ASMEDUESPROJECTTEAMgt

20
Team member input / feedback

• Many members, including those that serve as local
  Section officers, are very surprised to learn how
  little of their current dues are returned to
  local Sections as supporting funds.
• For many members, local Sections / Technical
  Divisions and the ASME Magazine are the face of
  ASME.  Cutting support for these activities could
  ultimately result in increased loss of
  membership.

21
Team member input / feedback

• The local Sections and Technical Divisions are
  the support structure of the organization.  If
  you lose the roots, eventually the whole plant
  dies.
• It is disappointing to many members that the
  sections now only get 3 to 4 of the 121 annual
  dues payment.
• The sections have lost the help of the Regional
  Offices.
• The sections are struggling with fewer volunteers
  to keep the sections going.

22
Team member input / feedback

• The sections need more money / resources than
  ever.
• The technical divisions are in the same boat.
• Many regional and national level volunteers have
  lost committee assignments and travel funding.
• My proposal is more money for the units - more
  unit support is needed now at this critical time.

23
Option 1 Instituting optional ASME Unit Dues

• Unit dues are being billed optionally by some
  other technical and professional societies,
  including 9 of 15 reviewed by this team.
• ASME could do the same thing. This option may or
  may not require a constitutional amendment and
  does require revisions to the ASME By-Laws and
  Policies.

24
Option 1 Instituting optional ASME Unit Dues
(continued)

• How it might work
• Request, say, 10 per year Section dues. If
  paid, the member is a Section member. If not
  paid, the member is not a Section member.
• Request, say, 10 per year Technical Division
  dues. If paid, the member is a Division
  member. If not paid, the member is not a
  Division member.
• Members should be allowed to join as many
  Sections and Divisions and other units of ASME as
  they wish, for an annual unit dues of 10 per
  unit.

25
Option 1 Instituting optional ASME Unit Dues
(continued)

• Units of ASME would be challenged to provide
  programs and activities so that members would
  want to pay the optional local unit dues.
• Units of ASME would own the funds.
• Other possibilities
• Units set their own dues amount
• Units send their own dues statements and collect
  their own Unit dues

26
Option 2 Instituting mandatory ASME Unit Dues

• 1. Increase annual dues by 10 for all corporate
  members (not students)
• 2. Put the dues increase to a membership vote.
  Make it clear for the vote that this 10 will
  always go to the units - no handling fee.
• 3. ASME would guarantee 100 of the 10 dues
  increase would always go to your local Section or
  one designated Technical Institute, Division or
  Chapter (as designated by the corporate member on
  their dues paperwork).
• Put this change into ASME's Bylaws or
  Constitution.

27
Option 2 Instituting mandatory ASME Unit Dues

• 4. Low performing units would continue to get the
  standard annual allotment per member.
• 5. Medium to high performing units would vie for
  the remaining funds as managed by the KC.
• 6. All monies (10 per corporate member - this is
  approximately 1,000,000) would be distributed to
  the units by September 30th of each year.

28
Option 3 Member-Directed use of Dues to Support
ASME Units

• Members would be provided the ability to direct
  that 10 of their annual dues be provided to the
  Technical Division, Section, or other unit of
  ASME of their choice.
• This would be a dues check off similar to
  marking an IRS Form 1040, indicating whether you
  wanted 3 of your tax money to go into a
  Presidential Election fund.

29
(No Transcript)
30
(No Transcript)