Re: US POLITICS - National office split
Description
Collection
Title:
Re: US POLITICS - National office split
Date:
10/19/1999
Text:
I like you Joe, do not normally respond to posts on this listserv. Too busy
most of the time I guess. I wanted to echo what Joe just offered. I am not
sure where Tom Lunsford got his info, but I would say from my perspective that
it is incorrect. The three ED's have no more ego than most practitioners I
know, ie. they are confident and competent. The impending dismantling of the
National Office was leadership driven, voted on unanimously by all boards. The
ED's and their staff will now facilitate the directives given to them by their
various boards. A practitioner/leader/friend once said that all things must
evolve, that evolution is more often the case rather than revolution. Such is
the case with the sister organizations and the National Office. The NO concept
was an excellent one at its inception and during the early 1990's. By the later
90's it kept growing in staff and costs until it reached the point of no longer
being a cost-effective or efficient mechanism of facilitating the sister
organizations in their mission and business activities. ABC, the Academy, AOPA,
NCOPE all continue to evolve and will now do so without a National Office
concept. But all organizations are in strong positions, are working and
communicating well together, and have strong and well directed staff. My hat
goes off to all three ED's (four if one includes NCOPE) who went above and
beyond through the insecurities of the consolidation effort and who now can run
their own organizations more independently, with their boards and without the
bearuacracy that the National Office had become.
most of the time I guess. I wanted to echo what Joe just offered. I am not
sure where Tom Lunsford got his info, but I would say from my perspective that
it is incorrect. The three ED's have no more ego than most practitioners I
know, ie. they are confident and competent. The impending dismantling of the
National Office was leadership driven, voted on unanimously by all boards. The
ED's and their staff will now facilitate the directives given to them by their
various boards. A practitioner/leader/friend once said that all things must
evolve, that evolution is more often the case rather than revolution. Such is
the case with the sister organizations and the National Office. The NO concept
was an excellent one at its inception and during the early 1990's. By the later
90's it kept growing in staff and costs until it reached the point of no longer
being a cost-effective or efficient mechanism of facilitating the sister
organizations in their mission and business activities. ABC, the Academy, AOPA,
NCOPE all continue to evolve and will now do so without a National Office
concept. But all organizations are in strong positions, are working and
communicating well together, and have strong and well directed staff. My hat
goes off to all three ED's (four if one includes NCOPE) who went above and
beyond through the insecurities of the consolidation effort and who now can run
their own organizations more independently, with their boards and without the
bearuacracy that the National Office had become.
Citation
“Re: US POLITICS - National office split,” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 6, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/213066.
