This is my last column as president and very soon I will become a clinician, teacher, and scholar again. After a long time in governance, it will be a personal renewal for me to go back to those professional commitments.
Organizations have similar transitions. There are times when politics and governance have to be in the forefront because structural changes are needed. Our efforts to reorganize have put us into one of those periods. But now it is time to move forward because the Association is in deadlock, in danger of splitting, and the future of psychoanalysis is in the balance. As we approach a much-needed decision on the kind of Association we will be and the future of the field we love, there are policy debates, discussions of means and methods, and political disagreements. As important and preoccupying as those debates, discussions, and disagreements may be, it is important to keep them in perspective. No organization exists to conduct internal political debates or to be preoccupied with its own governance. Our responsibilities to psychoanalysis and psychoanalytic values require us to be smart and effective to honor those commitments. When we have been smart, and when we have set the structures in place to be effective, governance will recede into its rightful place in the background.
We need change because the Association has gotten functionally old, set in its ways, burdened by internal tensions, and encumbered by outdated institutions of regulation and governance.
We need change because the Association has gotten functionally old, set in its ways, burdened by internal tensions, and encumbered by outdated institutions of regulation and governance. We have two major internal institutions, a Board on Professional Standards and an Executive Council, both established in the postwar period, representing that era's institute and society divisions, both locked in struggles for years, and both now out of step with the times.
BOPS was an outgrowth of the days when we were the only game in town, when closed networks (reminiscent of Freud's “committee”) were customary, and when the laudable principle of high standards was applied rigidly. Those days have gone. We no longer have a virtual educational monopoly; education is the number one priority of everyone, not just a few; and we need to be flexible and encouraging to potential candidates. While we have an uncompromising dedication to high standards and quality education, we have come to understand that we can support rather than dilute those values by being progressive, flexible, and vitally integrated into the Association. Put simply, we recognize that our institutes are Institutes of the American Psychoanalytic Association.
The Executive Council has approximately 58 councilors, the vast majority of whom represent societies. Although we have long since become an association of members, the Council memorializes another time when we were a federation of societies. Such a federation model made sense when we were smaller and internally preoccupied, with no competition or challenge—scarcely our current circumstances. In the 21st century, we need expanded and enhanced capabilities on our board of directors if we are to thrive and not just survive. To cope effectively with our difficult environment requires a smaller, streamlined board of directors, directly elected by and responsible to you—the membership. The board of directors must have broad perspectives and very much needs minority seats for essential extra-analytic talents in law, finance, public information, fundraising, and lobbying. To put it from a slightly different perspective, we need a board of directors that can raise money as well as oversee its expenditure.
We need to change how we function and to do that we need a comprehensive plan that can be submitted to you. As we consider any plans, there are benchmarks each must meet. I have outlined them in the four points below:
It must be integrated and comprehensive. To be effective, the organization must function as a whole and the proposers of the plan must have thought through all aspects of Association functioning. Piecemeal plans may seem attractive because they feel familiar but they will only give us more of the same.
It must represent our democratic principles, especially one member, one vote. We are a membership organization and a membership corporation, so that as members we are the Association and we are the corporation. There is no reason to have a society, institute, or other intermediary between us and the direct election of our board of directors. We can think for ourselves and cast our own votes.
It must accomplish reorganization through bylaw changes. The members are the only ones with sufficient authority to determine what kind of organization we will be. I believe attempts to change how we function by any other means would violate this most cherished principle. Bylaws must pass with a two-thirds majority of those voting and represent the authority, consent, and consensus of the members.
There must be a system of checks and balances. In some organizations, the board of directors holds all power to change bylaws, choose the officers, and appoint their own successors. We have never, and should never, operate that way. There is a kind of “corporatism”
Jon Meyer, M.D., is president of the American Psychoanalytic Association.
talked about that suggests that the board of directors should “own” us. In my view, we should not be “owned” by anyone.
We have had two strategic initiatives and this is where they come together. Strategic planning has developed our priorities and brought us face to face with long-range planning, tough choices, and the critical need to function better. To be more effective, we need to reorganize, and not just in a token manner. The changes we need have a lot more to do with good organizational functioning than with not-for-profit corporation law.
We have recognized the serious external challenges to the health and well-being of the profession we love and are taking needed steps in response. It has been an honor for me to take some of those steps with you. We have worked hard and well and, while we are not yet there, I believe that together we can renew the Association.