DO WE REALLY HAVE THE CORRECT NUMBER OF DIRECTORS?

Print this Article | Send to Colleague

Of all the challenges that we face as a trade association, I can think of none more important and vital to our sustainability and growth as an industry than our membership. The membership numbers have plummeted over the last few years and aside from companies that have gone out of business, the number one reason for this is that people don't see the value in what we do. While our remaining members continue to stay active and donate their valuable time and resources, it has created overcrowding in our Districts.

Why is this important?

A significant threat emerging within our Districts is that they can't cover their expenses based on the amount of revenue they bring in each year. Even the most active and successful Districts rely more and more on fundraising campaigns just to stay afloat. Worse yet, there are current talks of at least two other Districts that are considering shutting down due to poor attendance and hemorrhaging costs. As we all know, the most substantial expenses are related to travel surrounding the Board of Directors meetings. What ends up happening is that the Districts decide how many of their eligible Directors they will send and most often it's not a full representation because the costs are too high. As a result, fewer committees are attended, fewer people are in the know and poor reporting gets back the Districts.

Bringing value back to the Districts

One possible solution for this is reducing the number of Directors per District. This will accomplish two things. 1) Bring value back to the position of District officer that includes pride, a purpose of service and responsibility. 2) We save the Districts money. If the current number of members per District is maintained, we still have the same revenue to work with but fewer expenses.

Furthermore, it is the responsibility of each and every one of us to promote the welfare of the industry and to recruit and mentor new members. One of the best ways to do this is to get people engaged at the District level and start them on a path of involvement. Officer positions should be carefully voted on and a candidate selected who is willing to travel to Board of Director meetings, participate in Committee meetings, represent the District that elected him/her and give comprehensive reports upon his/her return. These people are the future leaders of our association and this job should be taken seriously. In my opinion, all too often we make haphazard decisions to send more people simply because there are vacancies to fill.

NPMA by comparison

Look at NPMA for example. They have more than 6,000 members and the makeup of their Board of Directors is: a six-member Executive Committee, 10 At-large Directors, five Regional Directors, two Associate Directors, one Past President Representative and one Supplier Representative. There are numerous moving parts in an organization that large but it runs like a well-oiled machine, and the work done by NPMA committees is particularly impressive. Granted there is a lot of engagement and support from staff positions, but this is a calculated move that PCOC's Executive Committee has endeavored to mirror. Starting this year, there are now official liaisons assigned to each standing committee to help facilitate, support and guide them towards success.

A healthy alternative

Currently our Bylaws support a ratio of one Director for every 10 members with a maximum of 10 Directors per District. As of Sept. 11, 2011 we had a total of 775 Regular and Supplemental members with a grand total of 87 Directors. What's more, this number historically increases by December as more membership renewals come in. One option would be to adopt a 1-2-3 scale for elections whereby a District with one to 10 members would be allotted one Director, 11-30 members would be allotted two Directors and 31 and up would be allotted three Directors. Given our current membership totals, this system would bring the number of Directors down to 50. This would give us a tremendous opportunity to streamline many of our inefficiencies and bring value back to the districts and the people who belong to them.

Careful consideration should be given to each person who serves on a standing committee. Selection should be made based a member's interests and strengths. Perhaps creating a new position of Associate Director is appropriate. This position could be designated for participation on standing committees only. This is also a great opportunity for development and transition into a Director or Committee Chair position.

These are just a few ideas that may help create strength and foster growth in our association. Wouldn't you agree?

Pest Control Operators of California
www.pcoc.org

The Voice of PCOC digital magazine