working together
Ken Boggs
Description
Collection
Title:
working together
Creator:
Ken Boggs
Date:
3/10/2004
Text:
Well, we've all had time to reflect and absorb the events of last week,and can hopefully speak with more clarity and less emotion about what it means. Thank you to the board members past and present who have shared their thoughts with us. I have also received some lengthy messages from Don Cummings that have gone a long way toward my understanding of the frustration involved in making what were seen as unavoidable decisions. There are still a couple of points to get off my chest and then I will try to maintain a more productive and cooperative frame of mind.
First, I want to make it clear to all BOC practitioners that none of my earlier comments were meant as insults to them. I have had very little first hand experience with BOC practitioners, outside of meeting a few at conventions. I am absolutely certain that there are BOC practitioners who have experience in areas that I am not familiar with who could teach me plenty. In fact, my image of BOC on the whole has been shaped entirely by what ABC has said about them in the past, and what I was told by faculty members in school. I won't elaborate for fear of widening the rift, but the short of it has been that they are not quite on par with ABC. Mr. Cummings made a brief reference suggesting that some of my earlier comments might have frightened some of them away from ABC. I really doubt that the idea of a membership that freely voices their opinions is a frightening idea to any BOC practitioners. Far scarier to them, it seems, is an organization where they have no say.
I truly appreciate Mr. Cummings taking the time to write to me, but since Jason Frisch also received a personal response from a board member, I kind of get the impression that only the squeakiest wheels are getting the attention. I don't mean to belabor a point but I think communication between leadership and the membership is a very central issue here.
Let's look at what happened last week. I'm not sure what the experience of others was, but I got the BOC letter first, on Thursday. I was quite disappointed to hear that the talks broke down ( I do and have felt that unification is essential), but as for BOC's offer, I thought look at that, they're willing to just give away their credential. I made the comment to several people--imagine if it was the other way around--there is no way ABC would just give away our credential matter of pride, etc, etc. And. of course the next day there was ABC's letter with seemingly the same offer. Almost more disturbing was the pointing of fingers, the they lied no they lied it's their fault, etc. and all about details and contradictions that, with all the information that is missing, were things we really didn't need to know anyway.
Imagine what would have happened if BOC had sent their letter and for the moment it stopped there. Does ABC really think that our membership would have instantly flocked to join them? I don't know of a single certified practitioner who would gain from adding another set of initials to their title. What if they would have just hung back, took a deep breath and sent out a simple explanation of what is going on to the whole membership. This is what we plan to do, we know it will be unpopular, we see no other choice, something like that. Why was there the urgency to get this accusing, tit for tat kind of thing to us? It seems to me that this was an opportunity for ABC to truly demonstrate some dignity and control and show why, if there is going to be a single leadership, it should be them. But instead they went along with the blame game and failed to clue us into what was going on until it was done. One of the big issues for BOC is the democratic nature of their board and I imagine the image of our leadership keeping us informed would look pretty appealing to them when we did finally make the membership offer. And I'm sure there would have still been plenty of angry comments, but there is a big difference between heated discussion of an issue and just being PO'ed because you had no say in a decision that is already made.
What's done is done, and we have no choice but to move forward. I honestly hope this ends up bringing us all under one organization. To all the hard working, qualified people who will take up this offer, welcome and I hope there are no resentments. The power of one united membership is beyond debate, but it is just as essential that the leadership be based on communication in BOTH directions. Let's all work together toward that goal.
Ken Boggs LO CO (not loco)
First, I want to make it clear to all BOC practitioners that none of my earlier comments were meant as insults to them. I have had very little first hand experience with BOC practitioners, outside of meeting a few at conventions. I am absolutely certain that there are BOC practitioners who have experience in areas that I am not familiar with who could teach me plenty. In fact, my image of BOC on the whole has been shaped entirely by what ABC has said about them in the past, and what I was told by faculty members in school. I won't elaborate for fear of widening the rift, but the short of it has been that they are not quite on par with ABC. Mr. Cummings made a brief reference suggesting that some of my earlier comments might have frightened some of them away from ABC. I really doubt that the idea of a membership that freely voices their opinions is a frightening idea to any BOC practitioners. Far scarier to them, it seems, is an organization where they have no say.
I truly appreciate Mr. Cummings taking the time to write to me, but since Jason Frisch also received a personal response from a board member, I kind of get the impression that only the squeakiest wheels are getting the attention. I don't mean to belabor a point but I think communication between leadership and the membership is a very central issue here.
Let's look at what happened last week. I'm not sure what the experience of others was, but I got the BOC letter first, on Thursday. I was quite disappointed to hear that the talks broke down ( I do and have felt that unification is essential), but as for BOC's offer, I thought look at that, they're willing to just give away their credential. I made the comment to several people--imagine if it was the other way around--there is no way ABC would just give away our credential matter of pride, etc, etc. And. of course the next day there was ABC's letter with seemingly the same offer. Almost more disturbing was the pointing of fingers, the they lied no they lied it's their fault, etc. and all about details and contradictions that, with all the information that is missing, were things we really didn't need to know anyway.
Imagine what would have happened if BOC had sent their letter and for the moment it stopped there. Does ABC really think that our membership would have instantly flocked to join them? I don't know of a single certified practitioner who would gain from adding another set of initials to their title. What if they would have just hung back, took a deep breath and sent out a simple explanation of what is going on to the whole membership. This is what we plan to do, we know it will be unpopular, we see no other choice, something like that. Why was there the urgency to get this accusing, tit for tat kind of thing to us? It seems to me that this was an opportunity for ABC to truly demonstrate some dignity and control and show why, if there is going to be a single leadership, it should be them. But instead they went along with the blame game and failed to clue us into what was going on until it was done. One of the big issues for BOC is the democratic nature of their board and I imagine the image of our leadership keeping us informed would look pretty appealing to them when we did finally make the membership offer. And I'm sure there would have still been plenty of angry comments, but there is a big difference between heated discussion of an issue and just being PO'ed because you had no say in a decision that is already made.
What's done is done, and we have no choice but to move forward. I honestly hope this ends up bringing us all under one organization. To all the hard working, qualified people who will take up this offer, welcome and I hope there are no resentments. The power of one united membership is beyond debate, but it is just as essential that the leadership be based on communication in BOTH directions. Let's all work together toward that goal.
Ken Boggs LO CO (not loco)
Citation
Ken Boggs, “working together,” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 1, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/222858.
