A Crisis in Leadership in Exercise Physiology
Tommy Boone, PhD, MPH, FASEP, EPC
Professor and Chair
Director, Exercise Physiology Laboratories
Department of Exercise Physiology
The College of St. Scholastica
Duluth, MN 55811 

“We do not accept things as they are, but rather anticipate things as they can be.” – Warren Bennis 

Why are so few exercise physiologists talking about leadership today?  Could it be that so few want to be leaders?  Or, perhaps, exercise physiologists do not have the desire to be effective leaders.  Whatever the reason may be, there is a crisis of leadership in exercise physiology.  Good leaders understand that leadership is more than doing research.  It is about selfless service [1] to exercise physiology.  So in a nutshell, to be an ASEP exercise physiologist is to communicate the ASEP vision [2] of where exercise physiology needs to go: 

1. To be recognized as the leading professional organization of American scholars and practitioners in the study and application of exercise physiology to fitness, health promotion, rehabilitation, and sports training.
2. The Society is dedicated to unifying all exercise physiologists in the United States and worldwide to promote and support the study, practice, teaching, research, and development of the exercise physiology profession.
3. Through proactive and creative leadership, the Society empowers its members to serve the public good by making an academically sound difference in the application of exercise physiology concepts and insights. 

To ensure that the ASEP vision becomes reality, exercise physiologists must continually improve upon their thinking about professionalism and professional development.  Making sound and timely decisions on behalf of all exercise physiologists is imperative.  Thus, a sense of professional responsibility must be learned and developed.  Setting the “example” is not easy, although it is critical to convincing colleagues to join ASEP.  Then, ultimately, by setting high standards of practice, professional values empower exercise physiologists who embrace a shared expectation and self-image.  

The choice is clear:  “Will exercise physiologists become the architect of change within their own profession?  Will they become advocates of their professional organization?  Or, will they continue to allow the hierarchy within sports medicine to influence exercise physiology?  Or, will they accept themselves, acknowledge their problems, and rely on their own intellect and skills?  Will they accept that exercise science is a broken record and that sports medicine has no business acting like an exercise physiology organization?    Exercise physiologists need answers to these questions.  They need to sell the ASEP vision, and they need to declare to others they know where they are going.  Members need the big picture.  They need confidence in leaders, especially in leaders who are committed to the work of the professional organization. 

But, once again, where are the leaders in exercise physiology?  Why aren’t they influenced by the needs for job security, promotion, raises, and approval of their colleagues?  Is it because the gatekeepers are professors [3]?  Is it because they are not working in gyms and rehabilitation programs?  Perhaps, not until the professors take the time to evaluate the non-doctorate jobs will they understand the problems students face at graduation.  This is why leaders are important to any profession.  Conditions that seem of little importance to professors might actually be extremely important to others.  Leaders understand this point.  Among other qualities that help to define leaders, they have empathy for others and, therefore, are poised to develop ways to improve the conditions, which begs the question:  “When was the last time a professor called to ask about job conditions?”  Of course the answer is “never.”  Not in my nearly 40 years of college teaching have I heard of a professor calling recent graduate students to get their reaction to the job and/or if he or she could do anything to make the work conditions better. 

Leaders can help the change process by changing the employees’ attitude towards exercise physiologists.  Change does not have to be a complicated and disruptive process.  It does not have to be feared if there are leaders to help along the way.  The idea that “we are in this together” assumes that there are leaders to help along the way.  It assumes that there are professors and others who are passionate about the ASEP organization and professional development.  It assumes “shared power” for all the obvious reasons.  Exercise physiologists need leaders to help with unlearning the old habits of sports medicine, but where are they?  Do they think the ASEP organization is going to destabilize exercise physiology?  Do they fear their security will be lost?  Do they fear that they will not understand the new exercise physiology?  Do they fear change because it is likely to influence their social networks, self-respect, personal rewards, and career?  Whatever the reason may be, professional development and job enrichment requires change.  It adds depth, control, accountability, and enlargement upon what exercise physiologists do in the public sector. 

This is why exercise physiology needs more leaders.  There must be growth in thinking like a healthcare professional and therefore, in the self-actualization of every exercise physiologist.  Ask yourself this question:  “What is it that exercise physiologists do today that will have profound consequences that will reach far into the 21st century.  It is within this thinking and the struggle that exercise physiologists must enter the uncharted depths of leadership.  No longer is it logical that exercise physiologists fail to set aside adequate time to acknowledging that change begins with leaders themselves.  The reality is this: 

“Leadership begins with thinking and talking about issues and concerns that define the need to act.

Because the network is essentially outside of the meaningful changes that have taken place in exercise physiology since the founding of the ASEP organization, its influence is less engaging than it used to be.  Many non-doctorate exercise physiologists are no longer comfortable with their comments.  There is a recognized problem and place for those who act as though they represent the heart of exercise physiology.  Students understand the problems that associate with would-be leaders.  This is why they trust the ASEP leadership and believe that their work is an authentic effort to commit to a positive development of exercise physiology.  This growing sense of exercise physiologists coming to terms with ASEP is expected.  Others are realizing that it comes from the heart of the ASEP leaders. 

This successful building of the infrastructure of professional development does not mean that the “crisis of leadership” within exercise physiology is no longer a problem.  The crisis is real, and it will be for decades to come.  The responsibility for professionalism and authenticity belongs to every exercise physiologist.  This exactly why this article is important.  Too often we feel good where we are without communicating the impact and challenges of traditional influences and/or thinking.  Such lack of connection with real life events and problems that result from academic institutional failures are commonplace stories among graduates.  John, for example, a recent graduate of a major university with a degree in exercise science, spoke recently of his feelings about the deception and emotional impact of failed leadership at his University.  

When I think about my earliest contacts with faculty members in the Department of Exercise Science, I remember being very excited.  As you might imagine, I was a freshmen on campus.  Everything was new and exciting.  I met with the Chair of the Department first.  Then, I met with an exercise physiologist.  I asked about jobs and salaries.  Everyone I talked to had good things to say about the major.  I was convinced that the degree was as good as majoring in physical therapy or nursing.  It was not until after graduation that I realized I had made a mistake.  Even though I had done an internship, there were no jobs from which I could make enough money to pay my college loans.  My parents were not happy.  I was not happy.  All I could think about was the conversations I had with the Department Chair and faculty.  It never occurred to me that I was given misinformation. 

After speaking with John (and, frankly, countless others like him), I rededicated myself to a deeper reflection and specificity about exercise physiology.  His goals at graduation were never realized.  His parents’ opinion of the University and the exercise physiology faculty is dramatically different from what it was years earlier.  They believe the exercise physiologists failed to pay faithful attention to their son’s questions.  Ironically, the parents are professional counselors.  With good reason, they are not comfortable with the communication between their son and the faculty.  As an exercise physiologist, I agree with the parents.  Had the Chair of the Department of Exercise Science and/or the exercise physiologists communicated an accurate view of the job opportunities with a degree in exercise science, John would not have selected a different major.      

Because John believed he was given the correct information, he did not stop to think about career options until after he graduated.  This is not an uncommon result.  In fact, it is happening all across the United States.  The Chair and faculty have a responsibility to the students.  Both failed John and his parents, which raises ethical concerns.  Regardless of how the reader may feel about this point of view, those who represent the University system are expected to tell the truth.  At no time can their behavior or communication with students be less than ethical.  This view should not come as a surprise to anyone.  Other professionals are held to the same standards.  They, too, understand the need to do the right thing for the right reason.  This is why the Chairperson and the exercise physiologist should have communicated the truth about the exercise science degree.  

There is a growing feeling that the root of professionalism is founded in trustworthiness.  The ability to relate to others with truth and honesty is imperative.  As strange as it might sound, some academics do not get it.  If only the faculty understood the importance of looking beyond their own self-interests, they could help students obtain better careers in health, fitness, rehabilitation, and athletics.  This is not news, but somehow too many academics have forgotten the reason students go to college.  Those who do get it have the foresight to explore academic and career opportunities that leads to progress in exercise physiology (e.g., such as the ASEP organization).  Academics need to get out of the sports medicine foxhole and get out there and support the ASEP leaders.  After all, leadership is what the ASEP leaders and members do together for the collective good of all exercise physiologists [4]. 

Professors should help students understand the key role professional organizations play in transformational change.  They should help students understand that it is okay to challenge the status quo, create new thinking, and challenge the basic assumptions about sports medicine.  They should help students grasp the new career possibilities in the public sector, not the same old, stale, and lifeless jobs in gyms.  But, unfortunately, none of this is the case today.  The failure to declare something better is in itself a statement of the faculty’s lack of understanding that the “old way” of sports medicine is no longer right for exercise physiology.  This stems from the fact that doctorate programs fail to communicate a shared history, steps, and/or understanding of professional development.  Only a few members of the academy are willing to commit to this understanding, which is a problem for two reasons.  First, it suggests a huge lack of awareness that should have been self-evident among college professionals.  Second, it requires a level of thinking that goes beyond the sports medicine way of thinking that, again, should be self-evident among exercise physiologists.  To continue to ignore these points, to disregard the fundamentals of professionalism and fail to appreciate its importance is a crisis in leadership.  

Listen to another graduate’s comments about her exercise science degree:  “Instead of exercise physiologists declaring they will develop a credible academic degree in exercise physiology that is accredited by the professional organization of exercise physiologists, they continue with the exercise science degree.  Instead of having financial value and respect, the degree is meaningless.  Instead of benefiting from 4 years of college, I wasted my time and money.  Someone should be held accountable.”  I agree.  The Chair and the faculty (and the University administrators) should be held accountable.  The lack of leadership is a compelling reason for declaring a crisis.  Those in charge must be able to envision a future with credibility and hope, or otherwise what is the point of the academic degree?  This is why the ASEP leaders know where they are going.  They are defining the future and the changes necessary to realize it:

They see academic degrees in exercise physiology that are accredited by The Center of Exercise Physiology.  The see exercise physiology faculty who are members of the American Society of Exercise Physiologists.  They see credible and financially viable careers in exercise physiology.  They see exercise physiologists as board certified healthcare professionals who are held accountable to a code of ethics and standards of practice.  In addition to existing careers in health, fitness, rehabilitation, and athletics, they see exercise physiologists as owners of healthcare clinics.  They see exercise physiologists engaged in the use of exercise as therapy in the prevention or postponement of mind-body conditions that shorten life or its quality.

It is clear that the founding of the ASEP organization resulted from deeply personal concerns for students and exercise physiology.  This is a large difference between sports medicine and ASEP.  The former was conceived for entirely different reasons.  That is why the ASEP organization and its leaders should be embraced and trusted.  Their willingness to define exercise physiology and to ask other exercise physiologists to get involved in the ASEP organization is a declaration of their commitment.  Naturally, they knew there would be reservations.  And, they knew that there would be mistakes made along the way.  But, clearly, anyone who takes the time to study the challenges of developing a new organization and a new way of thinking about exercise physiology knows that it is not an easy task.  Few leaders will have all the details worked out at the beginning, which is why the following comments by a member of the ASEP Board of Directors are important:

Last week, I spoke to a college class about the American Society of Exercise Physiologists.  The students were respectful of my comments as were the faculty in attendance.  I talked about why it is important to change from exercise science to exercise physiology degree-programs, and that the ASEP leaders were not infallible.  Mistakes do happen, but that the leadership is committed to the professional development of exercise physiologists.  I also talked about values, respect, and trust between students and the faculty.  As change-agents, we have not only learned from others but have a deep passion to ensure the professional success of our students.  I expressed concerns regarding, “Who’s in charge of exercise physiology?” and shared my feelings why exercise physiologists needed commitment from students, teachers, and administrators.

There is a head at the body of exercise physiology, and it is the American Society of Exercise Physiologists.  However, I think a colleague’s comment during a recent phone call makes a lot of sense.  He said, “The simple truth is that the head needs a body that is strong and committed.  Without members, the head is just a symbol.”  His comment rings a note of truth, thus raising the question however hard it is to imagine: “What does it take to succeed in getting a larger body of committed members?”  To put it another way, where are the leaders outside of the ASEP organization on behalf of exercise physiology?  What are they waiting for?  Is it strength to confront the setbacks and challenges?  Is it the lack of passion or hope that they can make a difference?  Yet, regardless of size, age, and position, each person can make a difference.  The path of leadership begins with a vision, then an allegiance to a professional organization, and thus the basics of change begin.    

The crisis can be confronted with self-discovery and time to learn.  No one is in position to dictate how exercise physiologists will succeed.  All anyone can do is to give to others what he or she knows has worked along the way.  Of course encouragement from those who have assumed leadership positions is always helpful, too.  Everyone should know that to change how colleagues think and feel about who they are and what they do requires courage and conviction.  Understanding these basic elements of leadership is important rising to leading others and inspiring trust.  What is true for leaders also is that they must accept that they are leaders, and that they are responsible for creating their own professional existence.  Warren Bennis [5] said it best:

“…we have the means within us to free ourselves from the constraints of the past, which locks us into imposed roles and attitudes.  By examining and understanding the past, we can move into the future unencumbered by it.  We become free to express ourselves, rather than endlessly trying to prove ourselves.”

Just the idea of becoming free to express our desires is a huge mental obstacle for people.  Exercise physiologists are no different when it comes to likelihood of making a mistake.  No one wants to be accused of having made the wrong decision.  As a result, it is always safer to not to do anything or it seems that this is better approach.  Here again, Bennis has a great response to this point.  He says that leaders with whom he talked to “…believe in the necessity of mistakes, they see them as virtually synonymous with growth and progress.”  This means that making mistakes is a normal byproduct of growth.  No one should be compelled not to work on behalf of the ASEP organization out of fear of failure.  If something does not work, then try something else.  Letting the leader inside of you emerge is part of the failure-to-success story that is always new and changing.

Unless exercise physiologists are willing to step up to the plate and take some hits from colleagues and unless they are willing to take risks on behalf of exercise physiology as a healthcare profession, they will not be leaders.  However, this will not stop those who dare to think differently.  And, yet even with their help, the lack of everyone getting involved will prolong meeting new challenges in exercise physiology.  Again, it will not stop change that is relentlessly driven by passion, reason, flexibility, and strategic thinking.  It will not stop the ASEP leaders from pursuing the ASEP vision and market niche.  In other words, the crisis in leadership cannot stop the ASEP leaders from realizing the dream of equality for exercise physiology students and professionals.  They are not controlled by the likelihood of making errors, but instead understand that failure is part of the growth process. 

As Terry Pearce [6] said, leaders “…inspire us with possibility.”  Leaders understand the three stages of truth, as said by the German philospher Schopenhauer:  First, it ridiculed.  Second, it is opposed.  Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.  This thinking applies equally as well to leadership.  First, most people do not think they have it in them to be a leader.  Second, when confronted with the need to create the future, they do not get involved.  Third, the "new reality" is accepted.  Coming to terms with one's passion is an inner experience that starts with an inspiring idea, thoughts, and feelings.  Leadership is therefore all about discovering what matters and the willingness to stand for something.

References

      1.  Clark, D. (1997). Concepts of Leadership. In The Art and Science of Leadership. [Online]. http://www.nwlink.com/~dondark/leader/leadcon.html
2.    American Society of Exercise Physiologists. (2005). The ASEP Vision. [Online]. http://www.asep.org/vision.htm
3.    Boone, T. (2005). An Essay on Professionalism and Exercise Physiology for Students and Teachers.  Professionalization of Exercise Physiologyonline. 8:3:   [Online]. http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/EssayPROFESSIONALISM.html
4.    Brungardt, C.L. (1998). The New Face of Leadership: Implications for Higher Education. [Online]. http://www.nwlink.com/~dondark/leader/lead_edu.html
5.    Bennis, W. (2003). On Becoming a Leader. New York, NY: Basic Books, p. 71.
6.    Pearce, T. (2003). Leading Out Loud: Inspiring Change Through Authentic Communication. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, p. 60.