Leading Change
in Exercise Physiology
Tommy Boone, PhD,
MPH, FASEP, EPC
Professor and Chair
Department of Exercise Physiolgoy
College of St. Scholastica
Duluth, MN 55811
THE MOST DIFFICULT emotion
of many associated with ASEP is the nature of understanding change.
The vast number of issues that must be address is rather complex.
It can take a person’s breath away, given the daring theme of leading change
while anticipating and dealing with the emotional reactions that come from
those who want to keep exercise physiology as it has been for decades.
Members of ASEP have a lot
to be excited about. They have created a powerful infrastructure
on the Internet. ASEP is an organization to be contented with.
Aside from its impressive web site and the first-ever electronic journals
of exercise physiology, it is the first professional organization established
on behalf the emerging profession of exercise physiology. Members
are marching to their own beat while capturing the hearts of those who
live the complexity and myriad of names and conditions that have distracted
them from making the best of their dreams.
The lack of a discernible
beginning hits the hardest when young professionals who realize that the
public sector has a limited idea of exercise physiology. It is also unsettling
to college students who find that the public sector isn’t willing to pay
them what they feel they are worth. Hence, it is unfortunate that 50 years
ago exercise physiologists did not foresee the seeds of the academic chaos
that would come from the lack of professional planning. And, perhaps,
part of the reason they didn’t see the big picture was because they were
physical educators. The professors were not exercise physiologists,
as we think of the emerging profession today. They were interested
in acquiring a better understanding of the physiology of sports and the
value of exercise in developing a better lifestyle free from disease.
Frankly, they had no idea of the potential for exercise physiologists as
equal partners with physical educators and/or other professionals.
After all, they were professional physical educators first, which is still
the case for many exercise physiologists today. They still don’t
see exercise physiology as an emerging profession with its own scientific
body of knowledge and rights associated with a profession. Maybe,
the physical educator turned exercise physiologist isn’t the best professional
to lead from within the inattentive crowd of diverse college educators,
each a social and political equal, and every last one bent on demonstrating
their academic area of study is equally important if not more important.
My experience is that faculty
members have always resisted efforts to bring about change, even when it
is in their own best interest. It can’t be commanded because it simply
increases the resistance to change. Manipulation isn’t good as it
leads to all sorts of problems. In the end, change is a function
of leaders with a vision to transcend “what is” to “what can be”.
If the effort survives, their vision becomes the vision of the members
because it encompasses their needs and aspirations. ASEP is built
on a vision that its members will embrace it.
It is ironic that many of
the exercise physiologists who disagree with the existence of ASEP are
likely to be among the most vocal just a few decades ago in rejecting the
physical education tradition for the right to teach exercise physiology.
Indeed, the current need to treat people with respect and therefore the
need to act might not be that different. It isn’t a question of imposing
one’s will on others, it is about consulting with them and acknowledging
their wants and needs. It is about treating all exercise physiologists
with respect, even those who believe that ASEP is the way of the future.
In reviewing the recently
updated ASEP Directory of Membership, it is both inspiring and troubling.
The inspiration comes from the fact that ASEP is 300+ strong after three
years in existence. The membership is split down the middle with
150 PhDs and 150 members as students and/or bachelor or master prepared.
The diverse membership suggests that significant steps have been taken
in overcoming resistance to change. Increasingly, the members are
taking over and are leading the transformation. And, of course they
understand it is inevitable that they will encounter those who disagree
with the existence of ASEP. This doesn’t mean that they will stop
or give up in bringing about constructive change. From their perspective,
the question is: “When will the die-hards stop ignoring the warning
signs and move to accept the ASEP thinking as the next logical change in
the transformation of exercise physiology from an occupation to a profession?”
It is always interesting
and predictable, although a distraction for sure, that anytime something
new is proposed, the integrity of those responsible is questioned.
It is therefore all too human to resist change by looking for imperfections
in the leaders. This is a troubling observation, but those who are
inspired with hope press on. They refuse to crack or quit when publicly
rejected, even by would-be friends. The change that is necessary
to realize the ASEP ideas, principles, and visions is already reality because
its leadership and its members have never lost sight of what is morally
right. James O’Toole said, “This is where moral courage comes in.
We all know what is right. But it is the leaders among us who behave
in the right way no matter what others might say.”
ASEP leaders and members
encourage all exercise physiologists to believe that it is possible to
create a new profession; one composed of exercise physiologists.
ASEP is the beginning of the emerging profession. It is founded on
keeping its finger on the pulse of all exercise physiologists, particularly
their passion for professionalism and their right to a profession versus
an occupation. The members understand that the ASEP organization
is about ideas and hope for a better future with better jobs with respect
for what they do. Organizations without ideas and hope are about
power, and the empowerment of its leaders.
Members of a dozen ASEP committees
have demonstrated a commitment to the moral principle of respect for others.
They have kept faith with their purpose, that is, to believe in and act
on behalf of all ASEP members. Everyone ought to know that the singular
purpose of the organization is to help each exercise physiologist reach
his/her own highest potential. It is about sharing leadership, respecting
different opinions, and building cohesion within the emerging profession.
In short, it is about enabling exercise physiologists to define their reality
by knowing what they want and why they want it.
We can’t let other exercise
physiologists who don’t understand what we want define what we are.
ASEP exercise physiologists have their own “vision statement” and a “set
of goals and objectives” that are considered fundamental to defining their
leadership in healthcare community and related public sector jobs.
They also have the right to their own professional organization, and the
right to be treated with dignity and respect. All of this, especially
the final point, is important and needs reinforcement. Everyone has
the right and the duty to participant in leading change in his or her profession.
They also have the right to understand the source of resistance to change
among both leaders and followers of competing organizations.
Let’s be clear about this:
Although there is resistance to ASEP’s existence, it doesn’t make the status
quo right and yet the burden of proof is always with those who wish to
alter course. The latter point is critical to organizational success,
and is a challenge since change requires a huge degree of dedication.
However, perhaps even harder than dedicating one’s time and effort is the
fact that the members of the status quo must admit everyone has the basic
right to his or her views about most subjects. Hence, is it possible
that members of the new exercise physiology are right? Do they have
the right to dare to challenge the prevailing conventions? Perhaps
it isn’t enough to be right.
Being right is important,
but it may not be enough! ASEP is founded on right thinking, but
it is not enough if exercise physiologists don’t realize that the timing
is right. Now is the time to speak of our success and to share our
organizational culture with other exercise physiologists and other professionals.
Now is the time to share our dreams and to help others overcome their natural
resistance to change. Everyone needs to understand that resistance
is just resistance. It doesn’t mean that progress isn’t being made.
Members of ASEP have taken the time to listen to exercise physiologists
who work outside of the academic setting. They have respect for what
they do, and have developed a national certification to give them credibility.
So why is there obvious resistance
to change from exercise physiologists within sports medicine to exercise
physiology of an exercise physiology organization? The answer is complicated
but, in short, it is a simple function of not looking close enough at what
exercise physiology has become. There are too many shared assumptions
under the traditional view that have a lot of inertia. The assumptions
are reinforced with groupthink. Too few academic exercise physiologists
are willing to risk their tenure and promotion on a new organization, and
so it comes down to self-preservation. Others simply believe that what
they have is right and no one has the right to mess with it. Many
of these individuals have worked extremely hard on behalf of their organization
and they don’t want anyone to disturb it.
Point in fact, though, they
also have a lot of their ego and the definition of themselves tied up in
the organization. So, to admit that the organization isn’t right
for exercise physiologists means admitting in some way they may have been
wrong in their previous thinking. Understandably, the traditional
view and the work of exercise physiologists on its behalf have merit and
should be respected. Accordingly, however, we must remember that
what ASEP members are doing has merit and deserves respect as well.
Therefore, however dumbfounded non-ASEP members may think of the organization,
its leaders, and its members, they shouldn’t dismiss the right of individuals
to oppose what they no longer accept as the best path to developing professionalism
or their right to have faith in new ideas and values even should others
disagree strongly.
The facts are obvious:
Leading change requires imagination and hard work. It also requires
an understanding that the feelings of those who resist change will be tight
and, at times, improper and also wrong. They are likely to make unfavorable
comments about individuals and their personalities rather than ideologies.
In time, as is the case with most things, differences will be worked out.
Meantime, on behalf of those who don’t agree with the position of ASEP,
they should acknowledge the right of all exercise physiologists to try
and maintain the continuity of their organization consistent with their
beliefs. We all know that we have friends on both sides of the question
to change or to resist change. For certain, no one in ASEP is interested
in imposing his or her will on the members of other organizations.
No one is telling anyone that he or she must change or what to think and
do. The roots of ASEP are founded solely in the individual’s right
to argue his or her case before others.
So, in summary, the biggest
challenge before ASEP members in leading change in exercise physiology
is doing it without imposing their will on others. This doesn’t mean
that the members can’t be passionate about their beliefs. Passion
is important but so is compassion. Everyone has to act and decide
how to lead change, and everyone should recognize that there will be conflict
and tension until a balance is reached between the members of the different
organizations. Keeping these thoughts in mind, our work within ASEP
should be based on responsible thinking that is tolerant of the rights
of others. In the end, the pieces will come together. Something
meaningful will have happened, and we will be proud for staying the course.
References
1. O’Toole, JO (1995). Leading
change: overcoming the ideology of comfort and the tyranny of custom. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Copyright
©1997-2000 American Society of Exercise Physiologists. All Rights
Reserved.
ASEP
Table of Contents
Questions/comments
