| Final Thoughts on the APS Conference | | Date Created: Oct 04, 2004, 11:11 AM |
|
(If you've come here from my InPsych article, you'll need to know that the blog entries here are written in blog-style, reverse chronological order: the most recent entries are higher in the blog, so you need to scroll down to get the early entries. Also, I have embedded links in my entries which were mainly typed during the sessions I attended. Later, I was able to go back and locate pertinent entries to link to.
Now sometimes the link takes you to source material, other times it might reveal a wicked sense of humour. If you liked Alice in Wonderland as a child, then it might be like falling down the rabbit burrow and who knows where you will end up. Enjoy the ride!)
Back in Melbourne and catching up with the backlog, gives me a chance to think about the APS conference in Sydney.
I hadn't attended a conference in a number of years, so it feels like I attended almost with fresh eyes.
Overall, the conference continued the growing program of professionalism the APS brings to many things it does. The Society now has a conference organising staff to take administrative load off the conference program committee and this has both positives and negatives.
Firstly, skilled administrators are terrific at relieving the burden for others to get on with choosing symposia, and orchestrating social events.
Having been involved in the Silver Jubilee conference in Melbourne years ago, I got to see first hand the amount of effort that goes into a national conference, especially in a professional society that may well have doubled in size since that time.
From what I could see, the conference administration ran very well, there were no major technical glitches, and there was a general sense of "smoothness" about this conference. No doubt holding it at the Darling Harbour Convention Centre helped.
There is a downside, which is inevitable in a growing society. And that is that when we all "mucked in" there was a great sense of camoraderie amongst the conference committee members, learning as we went along but using long memories of previous conferences to guide us, but without getting in the way of innovation either.
We held special symposia which crossed the boundary between professions, such as a special Aviation Psychology Day. We organised our own media interviews, which continued our relationship with journalists long after the conference was over, having invited them to attend and meet authors face to face in a special media room.
We had enormous fun organising social events of which there were many during the week, including a Ball featuring a very infamous Campbell McComas impersonation.
Somehow all that feels lost, but I wonder whether a group of members could now pull off such an enormous conference with the professionalism APS members now expect. Mind you, my best guess is the Melbourne conference had the same number attending as the Sydney conference, and at a third the registration fee!
So congratulations to the organising team - let's hope Melbourne in 2005 is something really special.
As to the papers, naturally I attended whatever papers I could looking at technology and psychology, and was not disappointed in the main. Jeff Richards is doing a great job at Monash training young psychologists in innovative uses of technology to treat clinical disorders, and next year in Melbourne expects to hold a full-day symposium. I asked him to keep me updated on this as I'd like to present.
Speaking of presentations, I was generally disappointed with the presentation skills I saw in the symposia I attended. Powerpoint slideshows were ubiquitous, and rarely used well. Either too much information was presented on slides, or the slide information "competed" with what was being said.
I don't think I saw one clever integration of slide and speech, although Paul Martin's keynote came close with his occasional use of large images and to-the-point notes.
Clearly, there is a skill-set lacking here for lecturers and presenters which only reinforces what I have written in my next InPsych article on Powerpoint sucking big-time! Actually, not the application itself so much, but how people use it.
When I discussed this with others, all seemed to be in Powerpoint meltdown mode and eager to see what I had to write in InPsych.
Socially, this was a great conference. I didn't attend the Friday dinner due to other commitments, and kept my dining out to a small circle of friends and new aquaintances, and this was very enjoyable.
Election-wise, the new Board of Directors is essentially the old Board of Directors, with two incumbents holding their positions. Amanda Gordon's election to President means her Communications Directorship falls vacant, to be filled via a by-election, or more likely by appointment.
There are several likely candidates in the wings, but it would be inappropriate just yet to suggest who these might be. (Update - 7/10: Bob Montgomery, who stood for President, has been appointed to this important Director's role).
The AGM on Saturday looked like it was going to be a fiery one, with a number of people holding numerous proxies preparing to vote on many motions. But it turned out to be a fizzer, despite efforts from Victoria and NSW with respect to the Governance motions which related to a Board restructuring. The current structure has been in place for some 10 years, much of it due to the work of people like Frank Naylor, John Collins et. al.
But after 10 years and enormous change in the APS especially due to numbers, a review of its structure and functioning is appropriate. The questions are ones of how and who.
While NSW and Victorian reps. gave a spirited and lengthy offering during the AGM, the motion was eventually put after former president Barry Fallon called a point of order, and the Governance motion was carried. Issues regarding the APS and Government initiatives, which I already blogged, were also discussed at come length. For Victorians, motions to construct two new State Branches were approved: for Ballarat, and Mornington Peninsula. I heard no opposing views put to this, so it will be interesting to see how Victorian Branch and State Executive adapts to this.
A motion allowing the development of an Islam interest group was also passed, meaning the Society now has interest groups that cover two of the three major monotheistic religions, as well as Buddhism and Transpersonal Psychology.
The results of the election suggest that underneath it all, the APS remains a conservative organisation for which change does not come easily. Having been involved in a number of state and national initiatives over many years, attitude shifting is not easy, nor is innovation a part of the APS corporate DNA.
Perhaps it's because the Society represents such diversity of opinion, often at quite opposite ends of the spectrum, that it's not easy to find the consensus needed to make big leaps. From my observations, reinforced at the Conference, there is a huge "drag" factor that continually holds the Society "in check", and even small advances are hard to come by.
After all, this is not a private organisation which relies heavily on a visionary CEO to help it out innovate its competition. It's no General Electric, where a Jack Welch walks in and says, "let me do it my way or not at all!"
It's a hydra, hoping to reflect the many differing views of its constituents. What I've learnt is that sometimes the Society needs several tries to get things done right, and innovative ideas must be wrapped in a conservative cloak which allows for something just a little faster than glacier-like speeds of advancement.
Advances such as the Better Health outcomes don't please everyone, either on philosophical, moral, scientific, or selfish grounds, despite the hard work of the Society's staff.
There was some talk of inviting Management Consultants to review some of the Governance issues the Society is confronting. I am in favour of that being done well, and broadly, to get value for money. It will be one heck of a task, and expensive at that to get good quality reporting - and free of Directors expectations. It needs to be honest and forthright, not toadying and sucking up to the Board. (How's that for new-age management-speak?) It's certainly ironic that one of the APS's most conspicuous and innovative units is the Organisational College.
There was also talk of a continuing involvement of communications consultants to help the society with its media relations. This is about the third time I have heard this occurring, and seems more re-inventing the wheel. Hopefully, the present group are sharpshooters, but I wonder if the APS Board has the wherewithal to know if they are getting value for money? Certainly, Amanda has a lot of media experience, but this is a little different.
Margaret Lord finally becoming a Fellow of the Society reminded me of the efforts she and I went to many years ago to have the Society appoint a paid lobbyist especially to help fight the Medicare battle, which never occurred. An opportunity lost in hindsight, or money saved? Perhaps simply not the right timing in an era where independent and non-academic/non-government practice issues were a mere blip on the APS community relations radar.
And one final thought: I don't recall during at the AGM where any speaker acknowledged the volunteer work being done at unit, branch or state level by honorary office bearers. Maybe I was out of the auditorium at the time, so I may have missed it.
(Update - 7/10: Lyn Littlefield at the Victorian AGM reminded me that she gave significant time to thanking the honorary office bearers during her presentation. I sent her an emailed mea culpa, and new President Amanda Gordon reinforced the message today. I must have been a tired sensitive soul last Saturday. However I still think the idea below has merit.)
I think the Executive Officer could, like the President, hold her or his own event during the conference, inviting all those who have been active in the Society, whether on the groups mentioned above, or Advisory groups, to gather in one spot for drinks and finger food, and an opportunity to mingle and network.
So until I think of other things to write, perhaps after the Victorian Branch AGM on Wednesday (October 6), I will move back to blogging more technology-oriented articles.
(Update - 7/10): The Victorian AGM was held last night, and outgoing Chair Jeff Wilkinson received many thanks from the assembled committee. He can take a well-earned rest and we'll see how Helen Lindner bring a different style to leading of the Branch.
I made some stern remarks about how the Branch Committee needs to have all of its constituents working as a team and not divisively which reduces its vitality and strength. We'll see if my words were misplaced or not at the next meeting.)
Hope you enjoyed this rather personal view - that's what blogging is all about. |
|
|
|
