PEPonline
Professionalization
of Exercise Physiologyonline

An international electronic
journal for exercise physiologists
ISSN 1099-5862
Vol 3 No 9 September 2000


 
Understanding the Sense of Purpose
Tommy Boone, PhD, MPH, FASEP
Professor and Chair
Director, Exercise Physiology Laboratories
College of St. Scholastica
Duluth, MN

“There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to condut or more uncertain in its success than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things.”  --  Machiavelli, 1592


AT FIRST GLANCE, nobody likes change.  It goes against the survival instinct of an organization and, yet change is necessary for growth and prosperity.  Any organization that isn’t willing to risk change and to confront challenges is likely to surrender to less than their best performance (1).  The degree to which we understand change helps us understand the Will Rogers’ quote “Even if you’re on the right track you’ll get run over if you just sit there.”  The key is not just doing something right but doing the right thing.  Those that fail to do the right thing do not have a compelling vision for their future.  Without a vision, it is next to impossible to know why an organization exists. 

What is ASEP’s fix on its direction and, thus its framework for making decisions?  In short, where is ASEP heading?  The answers to these questions is in the ASEP Vision.  It tells us where we are headed, why we make decisions as we do, and what to expect to find when we get there.  In other words, a vision is so important that it must never been ignored or forgotten.  It is the driving force of the organization.  It is why the leaders are committed to turning ideas into action.   It is why our sights are set on accomplishing the ASEP Goals and Objectives

What about the Exercise Physiologist Certified (EPC) exam?  We feel that it contributes to the Vision.  It is a reasonable expectation with a target time frame.  It has purpose, specificity, and a history of events leading up to the “first-ever” national certification of an exercise physiologist.  What about the accreditation of exercise physiology academic programs at the college and university level?  This, too, is an action committed to by the Board of Directors.  The Board knew who could get it done and when it would be completed.  That person is Dr. Dale Wagner of Vanguard University in California.  The development of the ASEP Accreditation Manual is not a knee-jerk reaction to the gross inconsistencies in our academic programs.  Rather, it is the key factor in understanding the primary reason for ASEP’s existence and the strategy necessary for professionalism.

The Great Silence

In today’s academic settings, it is almost unheard of where an academic program is not accredited.  Yet, for decades, there hasn’t been an effort to organized exercise physiology.   As a result, there is little consistency across programs (either by name or curriculum), and no evaluation of the appropriateness of such programs.  Without the commonly recognized credentials of certification (and not just any certification), licensure, and accreditation, the idea of continuing unchanged says little for the academic exercise physiologists. The great silence of the academic community is a problem.  Think about it.  ASEP is working to fix past failures, and one of the more disheartening aspects of doing so is the lack of support from the academic community.  The strategy for doing business faster than usual was always to have the academic community understand the reasons for change.  The message at the beginning was that exercise physiologists have missed the opportunity to professionalize the field.  The silence needs to be broken on behalf of all exercise physiologists.  Otherwise, the price of failure is reciprocal – when we stop creating change, we stop growing. 

This would be a good time for academic exercise physiologists to risk their position on behalf of the profession.  To turn the profession around, we have to begin and allow for a lot of time to realize the turn.  The size and complexity of the idea are particularly challenging, but not impossible.  The impossible has already been done – ASEP!   Its leadership and members are working hard to teach and to set an example.  It isn’t easy, however.  Finding help who is willing to invest time in realizing the new exercise physiology structure has not been easy. Thomas Carlyle said, “We must get rid of fear; we cannot act until then.”  Even in today’s age of enlightenment, no one is totally free of fear.  The fear of not belonging or belonging to the wrong group, associating with the wrong people, failure to say the right thing, and not looking like a group player are fears all of us understand.   After all, this is the reason some organizations refuse to cooperate with others.   Out of fear, just one or two key people in high positions can keep organizations apart and from helping each other.  It isn’t right yet it happens all the time.  The quality of the communications between organizational leaders depends heavily on the examples set by those in charge.  It is either deenergizing and demoralizing or energizing and empowering. 

A Shared Vision

The message here is that as long as academic exercise physiologists are making it, no one really looks at the the inherent problems.  At the same time, though, necessity for change is driving them to recreate themselves with a new label.  This will very likely require the cooperation of ASEP members and, after all, ASEP is for all exercise physiologists.  This is a critical issue about the organization.   The point is this: even though non-exercise physiologists can join ASEP, the differences between them and ASEP exercise physiologists exist with voting rights.  The reason is simple.  People, whether in an organization or not, compete against each other.  The lack of agreement between exercise physiology members and non-exercise physiology members, should it ever exists, will not dictate the ASEP initiatives.  This is essential in mainstreaming the exercise physiology agenda.  An initiative that will, in fact, take some time to correct. 

Herein lies one of the key issues in managing change: the need for stability and a setting in which members can acquire the credentials they need for job satisfaction.  The common theme is that credentials are important to the increased assurance of better jobs and better pay.  Credentialing is not defined by a single approach to one item of interest.  It involves a shift in thinking from just certification to licensure and accreditation.  It is, for instance, a shared vision with the potential to influence behavior and to overcome resistance.  A vision nonetheless that requires a certain amount of politicking and, therefore, not surprisingly, it is necessary to reach out to all exercise physiologists. 

In time, most exercise physiologists will recognize the power that comes with the right credentials, the ability to control the profession through its Code of Ethics, and the higher level of competence and commitment to the profession.  Hence, what is being suggested is that change isn’t a bad thing especially when there is a certain feeling of powerlessness without the doctorate.  If change is done correctly, those who view themselves without power will benefit.  This includes many of the individuals who have graduated with a degree in exercise physiology with a tuition loan of $60,000 to land a part-time cardiopulmonary rehabilitation job under the direction of a physical therapist or a nurse.

The challenge for each of us is to share in the ASEP Vision by supporting the organization and its right to self-manage the profession.  The barriers between related organizations need to come down.  Likewise, the differences in attitude and thinking among exercise physiologists, however welcomed and important forces for change, need a common ground of agreement from which the average exercise physiologist can be helped in doing his/her work.  The drawbacks to not working with each are obvious: the most significant being, a less than respected group of professionals.  No one desires the latter so all of us will need to embrace the new model for change and over time work out the logistics of participative management of the exercise physiology profession. 

Managing Credibility from Within

For those unwilling to change, we will miss you.  We will miss your technical help and support, your leadership skills and knowledge, and your ability to communicate with others and to facilitate committee work and/or organizational functions.  Again, we will miss you.  We will, however, move on and manage exercise physiology from within the ASEP organization.  The trick for the unwilling is to figure out the reasons for change, and accept the value of change for everyone.  Let us all have the courage to sit down and talk objectively and passionately about the broadest possible definition of exercise physiology and its Scope of Practice in the public sector.  In so doing, let us keep in mind the concept of balance between research and professionalism.  Let us not loose sight of either while trying to bridge the two with honest communication, and let us learn how to lead with integrity and respect for all exercise physiologists.

The basic point is: Important work-related changes shaping the nature of what non-PhD exercise physiologists do in the public sector demand that we become more sophisticated with respect to issues of credibility.  With that increased sophistication, we can help our graduates be more competitive.  We can even make the profession of exercise physiology more exciting and personally satisfying for all exercise physiologists.  It is also my impression that it is naïve to assume that any generic organization, however good at what it does, can completely reorient an emerging profession like exercise physiology.  This is especially the case with the development of undergraduate accreditation and new ways of thinking about the field. 

It is almost impossible to overstate the significance of what accreditation will bring to the field.  The changes that are expected to take place will require more exercise physiologists to allocate more time to finding intelligent ways to adapt to the academic changes.  Managing the academic diversity in an effective and responsible way requires, first, leadership and then, second, the ability to manage the implementation steps of accreditation in as responsible way as possible.  But, given the truism that “knowledge is power” and yet information alone is not always enough (2), the key ingredient for those aspiring to professionalism is perseverance.  John P. Kotter presented early in his book, Power and Influence, the following statement that is a good example that knowledge alone is not enough.

“Beyond the yellow brick road of naivete and the muggers lane of cynicism, there is a narrow path, poorly lit, hard to find, and even harder to stay on once found.  People who have the skills and the perseverance to take that path serve us in countless ways.  We need more of these people.  Many more.”
There is no doubt that the challenge for many of us is to learn how to persevere.  This kind of thinking is absolutely essential in all aspects of the professionalization.  Essential, especially because of the present organizational structure and delivery system (or the lack of it).  The lack of accreditation and academic sophistication to keep pace with other professions must change, and change it will with the ASEP restructuring of exercise physiology. 

Summary

The power of a singular voice for exercise physiology can not be overlooked any longer.  For some time, exercise physiology has needed a professional organization that is held accountable for translating to the others its vision and purpose for its existence.  ASEP is designed to share professional authority by means of sharing organizational governance.  The professional organization should be the source of exercise physiology practice, whether academic, clinical, and/or in the business realm.  Shared governance allows for increased control over the profession, with increased opportunity for personal and professional achievement and economic security. 



References

1. Thompson, L. (1994). Mastering the Challenges of Change. New York, NY: AMACOM. 
2. Kotter, J. P. (1985). Power and Influence. New York, NY: The Free Press. 


Copyright ©1997-2000 American Society of Exercise Physiologists. All Rights Reserved.

ASEP Table of Contents

Questions/comments