Are Rotary's District and Club Leaders Serving Sentences?

Rotary's administrative districts and member clubs often have difficulty getting people to serve as leaders.  One reason why is happening right now!  Many existing leaders, sounding like inmate's approaching the end of their prison sentence, say "Only four-and-a-half more months!"  What non-verbal perception does this simple phrase deliver?

     Personally, I welcomed the opportunity to serve as club president and District 6960 as Assistant Governor and Governor (2003-04).  These were wonderful opportunities to experience the joy of building friendships and developing spheres of influence while honing leadership and communication skills that were put to good use in my professional engineering practice.  (This is merely practicing the first Object of Rotary.)  Through these friendships, and using Rotary International attributes, we were able to establish the continuing district-wide Dictionary Project; the now multi-state and international Rotary Leadership Institute Sunshine Division; and an International water project where all District 6960 clubs participated in establishing fifty-four water systems in Africa.

     Long-time Rotarians are keenly aware that, in the last twenty years, Rotary International and its member clubs have placed heavy emphasis, even priority, on its attributes and the noun 'service'.  The overlooked fundamental was that the quality and quantity of the 'service' produced depends on the quality and quantity of acquaintances developed.  I am now in the eighth decade of life, but if given the opportunity to develop new acquaintances as an opportunity for service, I would. 

Rotary leaders, what perceptions are your verbal and non-verbal actions projecting: that your position is a desirable experience to be valued, or a sentence to be served?

Is the Office of District Governor in Danger of becoming more Symbolic than Functional?

     RI now employs Regional Membership and TRF Officers and has Rotarian Zone Coordinators with three-year terms.  Districts are encouraged to have District Trainers, Membership, TRF, and Public Information chairs, all serving multiple year terms.  Many districts sponsor Rotary Leadership Institutes.  Considering these developments and present day technology, what is the purpose of having district governors?  Is it possible that the position is becoming more symbolic than functional, and why do some districts have difficulty recruiting - yes, recruiting - applicants for the position?

  Perhaps the administrative position of district governor could use an overhaul.  Consider that a Rotarian, usually a past assistant governor, is interested and chats with district leaders about the position. Often leaders tell the Rotarian that they would be a wonderful governor.  They download, or are given, a copy of Leading Your District: Governor, an initially intimidating 166 page document.  Upon a brief scan, most Rotarians would realize that it is a prescriptive planning and training manual and do further research, usually referring to the Manual of Procedure.  It mentions Rotary's Code of Policies, in which they download and read Article 19.020 Governor's Specific Duties and Responsibilities.  The article's second of eight (8) paragraphs says, quote "Governors will adhere to the provisions of the RI Constitution and Bylaws."  They proceed to RI's Constitution and By-laws to learn what they will adhere to.  The Constitution's Article 3 spells out RI's three purposes, the first of which is, quote, "(a) to support the clubs and districts of RI in their pursuit of programs and activities that promote the Object of Rotary."  That's an idealistic, somewhat exciting vision that opens their mind a bit more.

   Then they go to the By-Law's Article 15.090 Duties of a Governor, to which they will adhere.  After surfing the opening paragraph, they proceed through fourteen (14) scriptures of which any one of the first three, all related to developing membership, could distort visions of being an effective governor because, even as assistant governors, they frequently had not been involved in more than one of the prescribed activities.  Serious doubts about being an effective governor set in, and they cast aside such thoughts. 

   Leaders panic and go into recruiting mode. They promise to help while selling the candidates on the positive social and travel benefits and continually stress that those prescribed duties to which they will adhere to are merely guidelines.  Then the closer - success is in the eyes of the beholder - not the district, not RI.  One or more recruits apply; one is selected and proceeds to follow the examples set by previous governors, all of whom, of course, had successful years (even though membership continued its decline.)  This cycle continues until the position loses functionality and becomes a time and resource consuming symbol.

    The position of District Governor is a time-honored tradition in need of re-examination.  If Rotary were being created today, would it even have district governors?  What would be their purposes?  Their objectives?  Their term of office?  Their incentive to serve?  What would be the most effective way for RI to educate and support them?  And the closing RI self-examination - how will RI measure its own effectiveness at supporting the clubs and districts in their pursuit of programs and activities that promote the Object of Rotary?

WITHOUT CONTINUITY IN LEADERSHIP, ROTARY'S GOALS CAN RUN AMOK!

Goals focus attention and deliver results, which is exactly why nobody likes to talk about goals that run amok!  But they do, more often that we realize!  Rotary International (RI) leaders, because of Rotary's leadership cycles, frequently set well-meaning time-sensitive performance goals.  Unfortunately, such goals can have long-term damaging effects, but few Rotary leaders care to discuss potential future effects because their thoughts are now, what they consider 'my time'.

     For example, let's return to Rotary year 2001-02.  RI's growth had stagnated for several years and declined in several major market areas.  RI leaders approved a well-meaning performance goal to increase membership 10% by a deadline nine months into the year, which allowed the RI President to present awards to his team 'during their time' at the annual International Convention.  RI assumed that a large percentage of the recruits would remain in clubs, therefore returning RI to a steady state of growth.  This was a logical assumption, and the goal delivered the expected short-term result.  Because of its success, ensuing Rotary leaders continued setting short-term, performance recruiting goals, sometimes focusing on specific generations and genders, yet RI membership continued to stagnate. The 2001-02 initiative did not deliver the long-term result it desired.  Instead, it delivered the perception that RI and its member clubs were desperate for members and would induct anyone that had a heartbeat and could afford six months dues.  One club, at the last meeting before the nine-month deadline, hurriedly inducted several recruits so it could receive an award.  The club president (my time) got the award, but not one recruit ever attended another meeting, leaving them and existing Rotarians with lasting, negative perceptions.

     In 2011-12, RI directors wisely approved a complex learning goal to achieve an 80% average retention rate over a three-year period.  The initial shock was that Rotary leaders had to learn the importance of continuity in leadership and messaging, minimizing traditional 'my time' thought processes.  Rotary and staff leaders had to learn the significance of retention rates.  Staff had to learn and develop algorithms to convert data into easy-to-compare, understand, and communicate metrics.  Coordinators, district leaders, and clubs had to learn the deliverables necessary to retain members for three or more years.  Probably because of this complexity, the 80% three-year goal was a well-kept secret until 2014 when RIPE Ravi encouraged clubs to improve their annual retention rate by one percentage point, reinforced by RIPE Germ eliminating the use of nine-month 'my time' deadlines.  But even focusing primarily on retention goals can deliver devastating long-term results.  Without continually developing new acquaintances (recognize the wording?) Rotary could literally die off.

Setting appropriate goals should be considered a cooperative undertaking by past, present, and future leaders.  Analyses of past goals, including those that had run amok, and the short- and long-term affects they had on the Object of Rotary should be carefully weighed.  Goals should also recognize that RI was organized and districts were created to charter and strengthen clubs.  Every club's purpose is to attract and retain members.  Both are necessary to continually advance the Object of Rotary.  This is why the only easy-to-understand and communicate metric that is fair to all concerned and reflects Rotary's long-term viability and effectiveness is an R_etentionG_rowth Index.

Why Did Rotarians Undertake the Initiative to Eradicate Polio?

In 1982-83, Rotarians in Mabalacat, Pampanga, Philippines thought they could make life safer for themselves, their families and their province if they ridded Mabalacat of polio. Networking with other local organizations, they did. Their story spread throughout the Rotary network, and Rotarians, thinking they could do the same thing in their social fabrics, did.  Today the world is a safer place because endemic polio has almost been eliminated, the result of Rotarians advancing the Object of Rotary.  

Throughout the world Rotarians continually make the world a better place - one community at the time - simple because they think they can.