As reported previously in the Newsletter, the Board on Professional Standards passed a motion at the Fall, 1984 meeting requesting that the Chairman, Homer Curtis, appoint an ad hoc committee to study the processes by which the chairs and members of the standing committees of the Board were selected in the past and to ascertain whether there are recognizable patterns in the geographic distribution and durations of these appointments.
The basis for the motion was a perception among some that there was imbalance and inequity in the distribution of appointments, with some institutes relatively less well represented than others. Particular concern was expressed about the distribution of committee chairmanships, as many think that the chairmen of standing Board committees have special authority and influence within the Association.
The Ad Hoc Committee on Appointments to Board Committees, chaired by John MacLeod, interviewed or corresponded with all Board Chairmen who served during the period 1974-1985 regarding the factors they considered in making appointments to standing committees.
They all stressed experience, background, and competence as the most important factors. Assessments were made by personal contact with people around the country who knew potential appointees from names provided by institutes, members of the Association, Fellows of the Board, and individuals who had requested membership on committees.
Geographic distribution was considered, but given less priority. Board chairmen usually came from the existing committee membership and usually served six years.
The MacLeod committee compiled and tabulated the actual distributions with the aid of the Central Office; complete listings of numbers of committee members and committee chairmen from each institute are attached to the report. The period 1974-1985 is covered for both groups as well as 1964-1973 for committee chairmen.
While there was some imbalance, the committee found a relative evening out of the distribution of committee memberships over the past five years. From 1974-1985 there were 233 committee assignments. The top six institutes were Chicago, New York, San Francisco, Baltimore-DC, Institute of the Philadelphia Assn., and NYU, with ninety total appointments — an average of fifteen per institute.
The bottom six were UNC-Duke, Cincinnati, St. Louis, San Diego, Southern California, and Topeka with twenty-seven appointments—an average of less than five per institute.
With twenty-six institutes, even distribution would average nine per institute. However, smaller and relatively newer institutes are more heavily represented in institutes with a smaller number of committee assignments, so the imbalance is probably not great.
The examination of Board committee chairmen, however, revealed an uneven distribution. Five institutes have a preponderance of chairmen during the period 1974-1985. If the Chairman of the BOPS is added, the preponderance is even greater. If the period 1964-1985 is examined, the imbalance is greater still.
Five of our twenty-six institutes dominated—Denver, Institute of the Philadelphia Assn., New York, NYU, and San Francisco. Fifteen of twenty-one chairmen (71%) were from these institutes during 1974-1985. If the Chairman of the BOPS is included, twenty of twenty-six chairmen (77%) were from these institutes. All Chairmen of the Board itself from 1973 to 1987 are from this group.
If the period 1964-1985 is studied twenty-five of thirty chairmen (83%) are from this group of five institutes. There are fourteen institutes, including several large institutes, that have had no chairmen of standing Board committees since 1964.
The complete report is available from the Central Office. The Board voted to discharge the committee, and also to require the Central Office to update this data every year for distribution, so that the membership may see whether this pattern continues.