|
|
Editor-in-Chief
Tommy Boone, PhD, MPH, MA, FASEP, EPC
|
|
|
Strategic Management and Decision Making in the American
Society of Exercise Physiologists
Tommy Boone
Member, ASEP Board of Directors
Chair, Board of Accreditation
American Society of Exercise Physiologists
“In exercise physiology,
there is no historic precedent for planning. The academic exercise
physiologist lives in an environment that doesn’t require strategic planning.
In short, their work is centered on publishing another research paper.
The idea of thinking about what they do, what they teach, and the significance
of exercise physiology as a healthcare profession in the public sector is
not part of their everyday job.” -- William T. Boone, Jr.
The
Beginning Point
During most of the last half of the 20th century, exercise physiologists
were part of the larger sports medicine movement in the United States [1].
They were in many respects the precedent setting researchers in applied physiology.
Human performance became popular, especially the study of training programs.
Athletes learned that they could jump higher and run faster with the help
of exercise physiologists [2,3]. It all made sense, especially the
immediate return on the academic investment. Everyone was happy.
The physical educators turned researchers were surprised by the scientific
community’s acceptance of their work.
Leaders in the field, not fully aware of their influence,
continued to build sports medicine with a variety of certifications [4].
Graduate students from universities across the country were told that they
had to attend sports medicine meetings if they wanted to be exercise professionals.
The idea was both new and partly right. As it turned out, doing research
benefited the academics more than the students. Moreover, attending
meetings, even the big ones, seldom helped to ensure that students got jobs
in the public sector. It is all too unfortunate and sad. The
sharing that took place among the students and academic colleagues failed
to translate into new job opportunities and public recognition. In
other words, the leaders appear to have failed in managing the field of exercise
physiology.
Is there any reason to embrace failure? No, the answer
is obvious. Also, there is no reason (except in storytelling) to give
attention to those who do not understand the ASEP perspective [5]. Here
again, acknowledging the past is done only to give credibility to changes
made by the ASEP leadership. While it may have been possible to partner
in an interactive fashion, it appears the course for ASEP members is the
dynamic acknowledgment of their own right to unlock themselves from the past
[6]. The argument is not hard to understand, and the power is in ignoring
what offends the members. In fact, aside from the usual mistakes of
others to fail in understanding the ASEP vision, there really is little reason
to show that their attitudes have any impact on ASEP whatsoever.
Initiation of Strategic Change
Planning is primary to all other professional activities. If plans
are not written down, they will not be implemented. In short, to repeat,
during the early years of what is now exercise physiology, there were no
plans beyond presenting research about athletics. Later, cardiac rehabilitation
research became important [7]. But, it was beyond the sports medicine
realm of thinking and, therefore, it required the founding of a new organization.
Planning is an important professional function. Without it, there is
the risk of poor decision making, bad strategies, and overall failure to
prioritize professional behaviors and thinking.
As a result, everything fell apart. Meaning simply
this: In the early 1990s, after nearly 40+ years of decision-making by sports
medicine, a significant number of exercise physiologists replaced the earlier
thinking with something new. It was their attempt to break from the
historical perspective. In other words, it was their choice between
two alternatives (i.e., sports medicine or exercise physiology). It
never was (not even from the beginning) a choice between who is right or
who is wrong. Rather, as Peter F. Drucker states in The Effective
Executive book [8], it was the decision that resulted from "...the clash
and conflict of divergent opinions and out of the serious consideration of
competing alternatives."
To change the direction of exercise physiology was (and
still is) the purpose of the founding of the American Society of Exercise
Physiologists. Call the leaders what you will; for certain they
have been called many things. But, of course, among those who understand
the challenges that associate with change, it is par for the course.
Those who do not get it have the biggest problem with something new.
Those who do get it, but still refuse to accept it, often gather to argue
about the useless work of the “takeover sharks”. That’s right.
Failure to manage change brings out all kinds of behaviors. Some good.
Some not so good. The issue is one of management. As H. Fayol
put it, “To manage is to forecast and plan, to organize, to command, to coordinate,
and to control.” This is exactly what the ASEP leadership is doing.
Unfortunately, the ASEP leadership (certainly not the members)
is viewed not as "coordinating and controlling" (which is the essence of
"to manage"), but as having broken off from the historical sports medicine
perspective. They asked themselves, “Why are we still attached to an
organization that is not our professional organization, and why is it that
we do not have our own professional organization?” One of the first
to come to this conclusion was Dr. Robert Robergs of the University of New
Mexico. His article, ACSM and Exercise
Physiology: Past, Present, and Future, published in the first issue
of the Professionalization of Exercise Physiology-online journal [9]
helped clarify the concerns exercise physiologists face outside of the traditional
perspective. Finally, the hearts and minds of a few exercise physiologists
have come together to create a new future. No longer impressed by what
has been their leadership, they now look to a new future in healthcare.
They understand that sports medicine per se cannot (and should not)
make decisions about exercise physiology as a healthcare profession.
Members constitute organizations, but members of a generic organization are
independent of its mission. Why? Because exercise physiologists,
in this case, are professionals who practice exercise physiology (not sports
medicine)!
Therefore, regarding the question, “What went wrong?”
It should be obvious to anyone who has taken a minute to think about it.
Other successful healthcare professionals know exactly what went wrong.
They understand what they had to do to be successful. The problem is
that the sports medicine game is stacked to benefit primarily the doctorate
prepared exercise physiologist. Anyone else, even with an excellent
academic preparation at the master’s level is given the title, exercise specialist
or something similar (health and fitness instructor). That was (and
still is) the thinking among many college professors and other exercise physiologists
who work in the clinical and corporate settings. They see themselves
as the leaders in healthcare, but sports medicine is less about healthcare
and more about athletics. ASEP is more about exercise physiology and less
about sports medicine, which reminds me of something I wrote in the October
1997 issue of the ASEPNewsletter [10].
"Where does the power
come from? Why is an idea so enabling, catching, and moving?
The answer is rather simple, but in itself powerful. It is the hope
of something better and different. Something that an idea or a vision
creates. Hope and faith are powerful motivators in creating change and
providing for opportunities. With hope, there is always a chance of
making progress. The power is in the belief that change will come with
the idea. As a result, people are energized and compelled to commit
voluntarily to achieving success."
It all
depends on us! We are becoming a profession of exercise physiologists.
The power to change is within us. All we have to do is do it day
by day. Remember the old Latin proverb: "Believe that you have,
and you have it." The ASEP leadership is making things happen, and
they have forgotten about the fear of failure. They understand visionary
thinking [11] and, yes, they understand the beginning of exercise physiology
as a profession versus a discipline [12]. And, they understand the
importance of a "title" [13].
What is now clear is that the old establishment is not
going to turn its head from yesterday’s thinking, and so "If you continue
to think the way you have always thought you will continue to get what you
always got. Is it enough?" Many exercise physiologists do not
think so and, therefore, have joined the ASEP organization to help with the
change process. They understand exactly what is meant in the following
statement by George Land and Beth Jarman: “Neither position nor power…will
protect us from the inadequacies of our traditional ways of solving problems
that deal with change or the false assumptions that undergird those methods.”
Strategic Questions
Exercise physiologists must be willing to ask three questions: First,
is sports medicine exercise physiology? If the answer is “no” – then,
second, where will exercise physiology as a healthcare
profession be in three years, ten years, or twenty years? Are the answers
acceptable? If the answer to the last question is “no” – then, third,
why would exercise physiologists continue to do their work under the sports
medicine umbrella of authority? If they continue, what are the risks
involved to the undergraduate students? Are the risks acceptable?
Who wins? Certainly, it is obvious that exercise physiologists cannot win
under the influence of sports medicine. Exercise physiology, like sports
medicine, draws from a variety of academic disciplines. The difference
is that exercise physiology has its own scientific body of knowledge from
which it has power over and authority of with regards to fitness, health
and wellness, rehabilitation, and athletic performance.
In 1997, exercise physiologists agreed that the sports
medicine influence was not just too broad an umbrella organization but unfortunate
in its continuation. Students at the undergraduate level, in particular,
have not once been in the big picture of exercise physiology. A little
scanning of the department names and academic degrees will verify this point
all too quickly [14-15]. While it probably resulted from a default
way of thinking solely about doctorate and master programs of study, it nonetheless
created a serious void in the students’ education. The impact is obvious,
since there is actually little viable market opportunity on a similar playing
field as physical therapy and nursing students. This is why the rules
of organizational thinking had to change. From no strategic planning
to now our ability to foresee the future of career opportunities aligned
with the ASEP vision, students can anticipate and plan for a good job in
the public sector [16-17].
This is the most obvious reason for the existence of ASEP,
and its leadership has worked hard to ensure that steps have been taken to
help all students who have the desire to help others. No longer held
captive by lack of policies and ability to change, the ASEP leadership has
developed a strong professional infrastructure to support the emerging profession
of exercise physiology as a primary healthcare profession [18]. Now,
exercise physiology is not just about research, however important, or just
about athletics, however important, or even cardiac rehabilitation.
Now, exercise physiology is about total healthcare of an individual, a community,
and a nation at risk. ASEP has therefore helped to distinguish the
“applied” and the “integrated” characteristics of exercise physiology.
Emphasis is on strategic decisions about health, fitness, rehabilitation,
and athletics; either singly or collectively, or in a combination thereof,
the accredited exercise physiologist is educated to focus on analyzing the
problems and issues that face the public. This is a new way of thinking
about exercise physiology and what exercise physiologists do in the public
sector [19].
The ASEP Strategic Decision
Because professionalism has been tremendously important to other healthcare
professions, the ASEP strategic decision from the beginning was to incorporate
professional development into every aspect of the organization. Similar
decisions have been made by the leaders of organizations that have already
defined their niche in healthcare [20] and, hence it is 100% not just appropriate
or correct but necessary to ensure career opportunities in the turbulent
healthcare industry. Obviously, the only group that is threatened by
the new strategic decisions of the ASEP leadership is the group that disagrees.
Far-from-secure in their own future, economically speaking, they seek to keep
membership from dropping, certifications from becoming meaningless, actions
from having credibility and, typically, from loosing face with colleagues.
Far from being unified, exercise physiologists now have
the professional opportunity to come together as one [21]. They can,
assuming they rise to the occasion, face up to their problems, gain control,
re-fuel themselves, and become not just productive but serious contenders
in the healthcare field of work. Once again, the key thinking here
is, “assuming they understand the opportunity before them, they will not
only survive but grow and manage their work alongside other healthcare professionals.
The resulting benefit to the students, in particular, is next to unbelievable.
There will be increased opportunity to pull together the content from different
courses to understand the integrative dimensions of individuals, their challenges
everyday at work, at home, and within the social context as well, and to
help define health and fitness as an integral part of the advanced technology
of today.
This evolution in thinking is in line with the years of
work that has gone into academic accreditation [22]. Deans, chairs,
and other administrators understand all too well the importance of academic
credibility. This is where ASEP has made a significant mark in just
a few years, having accredited academic programs that, with important changes,
will define the further development of exercise physiology. This concern
with accountability has led leaders in the ASEP organization to replace old,
generic certification thinking with new, accreditation thinking. ASEP
is the professional accrediting organization for exercise physiology in the
United States [23]. In fact, in light of what the ASEP organization
has accomplished (i.e., in particular, professional accountability and the
management of change), it is simply hard to believe. Maybe all exercise
physiologists should give a hand of thanks to the ASEP leadership!
Coming Together as Professionals
From the beginning, had there been a “plan of action” – meaning, had there
been a strategic plan on behalf of all exercise physiologists, the ASEP organization
would now be half a century old. This is a surprising thought and,
yet it echoes the exact problem that has put exercise physiologists in the
situation that they are in today. Frankly, it doesn’t have to exist
or even continue, but until exercise physiologists come together to share
their concerns, to embrace each other so that they may grow collectively,
personally and professionally, the lack of interdependent will slow their
progress. This is an important point because the formulation of new
career opportunities and new ways to think about exercise physiology is based
on the current emphasis to get out from under the institutional and/or hierarchy
of yesterday’s thinking [24]. Executives know this point all too well
and, thus they hire change agents among others to help build new organizational
ways to think, new strategies for operating at a higher level of performance,
and new steps to cope with critical issues and choices.
Is it easy? Even with the research knowledge from
decades of strategic change in business, it is never easy. Assessing
ideas, changing states of mind, and building bridges between yesterday and
today are difficult challenges for any organization. Why would a colleague
not expect moments of disagreement, misplaced words and/or emotions, or the
inability to handle properly external and internal forces? “Get real”
seems to be the only logical response to such a situation. And, of
course, even the phrase triggers a sense of failure in fine-tuning the effort
to explain change. New ideas and quick changes are always hard
to accept even when they are the most logical treatment [25]. Why?
As stated earlier, it is a matter of self-esteem. No person really
wants to accept that he/she has been walking in the wrong direction for months,
years, or decades. It is embarrassing, and it demonstrates a certain
weakness in our leadership skills.
The threat of change is real [26]. Actual change
is even more real since it says something about marching in the wrong direction
and, therefore, looking foolish. People at all levels understand what
went wrong when the leaders failed to lead. Either they did not have
a vision or the right vision. It appears also that they did not have
either achievable objectives or a strategy to implement their best ethical
thinking, or the right chain of command to set policy guidelines.
“A vision is truly
shared when you and I have a similar picture and are committed to one another
having it….” – Peter M. Senge
Vision
Experts in the field of organizational development understand that the right
vision is above all else extremely important to organizational success.
For this reason, there are books upon books written about visions.
Most authorities in leadership positions have come to appreciate the power
in a vision, especially when it comes from the heart. Visions from
within are passionate statements of effort and belief. They are convincingly
the discovery to new reflections, values, and behaviors; each requiring the
willingness to take risk to create a new exercise physiology.
The ASEP vision is clear and to the point [27]. It
is obviously challenging, and its 100% about excellence in exercise physiology.
Members of ASEP know precisely the intent of the leadership. The purpose
or reason for the existence of the “society of exercise physiologists” is
directly a function of its members knowing what they want. This point
ought to be obvious to everyone. The reality is that it is seldom truly
appreciated. Evidence shows that many members fail to read the vision
or to even understand that it actually is suppose to serve as a guide to
their thinking and interaction with industry, colleagues, and others who
have an interest in the field. They will learn, however. Fulfilling
the vision is the mission of the organization. Nothing should stand
in its way or be confused with the purpose of the organization. When
this point is clearly understood, then the direction of the leadership is
consistent with what the membership can and cannot do.
“The ASEP vision becomes
real when all ASEP exercise physiologists choose to live the ASEP philosophy.
The vision has a life only when the members commit to it and, therefore, take
responsibility for creating exercise physiology as a healthcare professional.”
– William T. Boone, Jr.
The ASEP
vision limits the activities of the members (by setting their direction with
specificity) and, therefore, the organization itself. It sets the organization
apart from other organizations that might identify with it. In other
words, the ASEP vision is the unifying theme that brings the members together
to achieve the purpose of the organization.
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.
In other words,
to be recognized as the leading professional organization of exercise physiologists
is to engage in a crusade for all exercise physiologists through the ASEP
organization. The market niche that becomes associated with the ASEP
vision is a direct link to the members’ attention to “what is” exercise physiology
in the marketplace. Thus, by stressing uniqueness of the organization
and by standing the test of time as a member, the old ideas about exercise
physiology disappear for new career opportunities.
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.
The ASEP vision
is a beacon for each member to place trust in the ASEP leadership.
By coming together, members increase their collective power and thus shared
commitment to prepare for the future (as a healthcare 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.
The vision is clear
that exercise physiology is a healthcare profession. Its members are
entrepreneurial and high-spirited in their application of an academically
sound curriculum to teach self-reliance and purposeful self-care to serve
the public good.
According
to Tom Peters, living the vision means, “…wallowing in the ideas and then,
as they become increasingly clear, living them.” In this sense, the
ASEP leadership is living the vision. In their hearts and minds, they
understand the ASEP vision. They represent the intensity that the vision
brings out of others. And, so as it is with all visions, the very purpose
of the ASEP vision is to provide the foundation upon which the organization
commits to the agreed upon objectives.
Objectives
The ASEP objectives [28] represent the best thinking of the ASEP leadership
[29]. The objectives represent what the leaders expect to accomplish
by a specific date. Organizational leaders understand the importance
of what they wish to do, especially when it changes the direction of the
field through new thinking. They also understand that the organization’s
vision cannot be achieved in a timely fashion if the objectives are not quantified.
This is why the leadership has dropped the “wish to accomplish” (the goals)
to “what they expect to accomplish” (objectives) in a timely fashion.
It the clear from the 2003 Board of Directors meeting that the intention
is to become the professional organization of exercise physiologists by 2020.
To provide a powerful,
unified forum and opportunity for exercise physiologists to present and discuss
current research in exercise physiology.
To promote and encourage
the exchange of ideas and information regarding all phases of exercise physiology.
To promote the advancement
of teaching and research in exercise physiology within the academic environment.
To encourage and implement
undergraduate and graduate education programs to meet the diverse interests
and career opportunities in exercise physiology, regardless of age, gender,
race or disability.
To promote the growth
and application of the highest quality research and professional application
of exercise physiology in health promotion, disease prevention, rehabilitation,
and sport fitness and training.
To promote the development
and exchange of scientific information between ASEP and other professional
organizations with an interest in exercise physiology.
To set the agenda,
determine the direction, and make the decisions about the future of the exercise
physiology profession.
To be a dynamic and
action-oriented clearinghouse for questions regarding the exercise physiology
profession.
To increase visibility
and enhance the image of the exercise physiology profession.
To represent exercise
physiologists whose professional work is mainly clinical, and to help ensure
that federal agencies and legislators understand their work and needs of
the clinical professional.
To participate in
the development and implementation of public policies and procedures concerned
with exercise physiology.
To make a commitment
to quality and integrity in exercise physiology through adherence to the
ASEP Code of Ethics.
To facilitate and
promote positive public policy and professional, ethical behavior by providing
ongoing peer review and quality assurance programs via the accreditation
of the exercise physiology (science) academic programs.
To expand federal
and private funding of exercise physiology research and training.
Strategies
ASEP is following essentially one “explicit” strategy, that is, to do what
it takes to develop exercise physiology as a healthcare profession.
It is not a comprehensive master plan by any means, but it does come from
the heart and it will achieve the organization’s vision and objectives.
For example, to achieve the ASEP objectives, the members of the Board of
Accreditation, the Board of Certification, and the Board of Licensure [30]
have developed impressive documents and guidelines to increase accountability
and credibility. Each set of documents has specified, written deadlines
for meeting the expectations of the Boards, including the Board of Directors.
In fact, each time another candidate sits for the “Exercise Physiologist
Certified” (EPC) exam and passes it, the organization’s professional efforts
grow and gain respect. This is also true with the accreditation of
undergraduate exercise science programs that are being upgraded to exercise
physiology programs of study.
“Management…is making
a plan of action to provide for the foreseeable future.”
-- H. Fayol
Equally
important and consistent with the ASEP initiative is that the leadership
has been as open as possible with the development of the organization.
There is hardly anything about it that is complicated. The standards
are simply signs of maturity and expectations beyond the sports medicine
view of clinical exercise physiology. The accreditation and certification
procedures are to some extent flexible, but balanced with resources that
are available under the circumstances. But, there is no doubt about
it, there has always been a plan of action with unity, continuity, and precision.
It has been thus, from the beginning, both a labor of love and an unfolding
of what to do, how to do it, and who to do it with [31]. Very little
has been left to chance in determining the course of action to take in empowering
the students of exercise physiology.
Policies
Decision-making within the ASEP organization is a function of “getting the
job done”. There are agreed upon guidelines for each of the four major
Boards. But, with any new, creative work even policies must be subject
to attempting to increase the number of accredited programs in exercise physiology,
it is imperative that the Board of Accreditation has the power to set policies
of always evaluating the guidelines on the basis of potential candidates
for accreditation. Similarly, the certification policies are viewed
as both an ASEP strategy and a clear guidance to increase the number of candidates
to sit for the exam. These policies or steps, in addition to periodic
evaluation of different guidelines, also include advertising and promotional
programs to increase interest in the ASEP initiatives, especially the accreditation,
certification, and licensure.
Board of Directors
The Board of Directors (32) shall consist of between 3 to 10 (12 with President
and Vice-President) persons that govern the society. These members can be:
(1) founding members, (2) members of the executive committee, and (3) other
outstanding professionals. As stipulated by Article IX of the "Articles
of Incorporation of the American Society of Exercise Physiologists", the
members consist of no fewer than three or more than 10 members:
Tommy Boone, PhD, MPH, FASEP, EPC (founding member)
Robert Robergs, PhD, FASEP, EPC (founding member)
LaGary Carter, DA, FASEP, EPC
Richard Kreider, PhD, FASEP, EPC
Tim Ziegenfuss, PhD, FASEP, EPC
Lee Brown, EdD, FASEP, EPC
Steve Jungbauer, MA, MBA, FASEP, EPC (President, 2003-2004)
Don Diboll, PhD, EPC
Paula Papanek, PhD
Joe Weir, PhD, FASEP, EPC
Mike Greewood, PhD
Darryn Willoughby, PhD, FASEP, EPC (Vice-President, 2003-2004)
After
one year of office, the Board of Directors can vote on the removal from or
addition to the Board. Voting members of the Board can be elected into office
and have voting rights. Other individuals can be elected to the Board of
Directors without voting privileges. The Board decides, on the basis of a
two-thirds majority, on the admission of further members to the Board.
The Board of Directors governs the Society by:
(1) developing the
objectives of the Society,
(2) selecting a President to implement the goals and objectives of the Society,
and
(3) ensuring that the objectives are carried out.
From 1997
to 2003, the Board of Directors selected the President of the Society based
on the needs of the Society and the suitability of a presidential candidate
to fulfill those needs. Beginning in 2004 with the 6th National Meeting in
Indianapolis, IN the ASEP members will select the President (33). The
duration of the term in office for the President is one year. However, the
Board may select a president to complete one or more additional terms in
office. Members of the Board are not passive figureheads. They are
responsible for the continued growth of the organization, responding to the
stockholder (members) interests when considering activities that may impact
career opportunities, professional status, and financial factors in the public
sector. As a result, ASEP members should know the names of the Board
members, what they contribute to the organization. Board members are
accountable to the members for actions (or lack of) regarding their personal
and professional work in overseeing the management steps to realize the organization’s
vision, objectives, and policies.
The President of ASEP is Chairman of the Board. The
President, as the CEO of the organization, is always looking for ways to
share the ASEP vision with members and those outside of the organization.
There is always the responsibility to help others to see ASEP not as it presently
is, but what it will become when professionals work together to accomplish
a share vision. Hence, it is the President’s responsibility to concentrate
on strategy, planning, external relations as well as keeping the Board members
informed. Also, it is the CEOs job to make sure that the Board and
its committees perform their functions as stated in the ASEP Professional
Responsibilities Guidelines [34]. The work of the committees is the
vehicle to change. CEOs understand this point and, therefore, are willing
to help to ensure standards and attainable goals through the ASEP committees.
In short, the strategic planning process led by the President must be viewed
not just within a one-year context but also over a long period of time.
It takes organizations at least 20 years to mature with significant inroads
into the changing attitudes and standards.
Professional Ethics
Since there is always the tendency of either Board members or others with
a certain position of influence to take advantage of and exploit the very
colleagues that support them, every professional organization must have a
Code of Ethics. Several related articles have been published in the
Professionalization of Exercise Physiology-online journal.
The articles address not only the questionable practices by exercise physiologists
and others, but also the purpose of a professional code of ethics:
Members
need to believe that the organizational management is serious about ethical
issues, and especially when communicating the code in its standards of professional
practice. Not thinking about ethical issues is not the right course
of action for a professional organization. And, leaving the development
of ethical behavior to someone else does not work either. In other
words, it is the Board’s responsibility to support the beliefs about how
exercise physiologists should act in a professional organization. The
common sense “right thing to do” ought to be the professional standard when
dealing with uncertainty.
“A rich arsenal of
untapped power exists in each of us.” -- Joe D. Batten and Leonard
C. Hudson
The significance
of the professional code is that both students and professionals in the study
and application of exercise physiology to health, fitness, exercise, preventive
and rehabilitative services can turn to it for guidance in professional conduct.
Adherence to the professional code
of conduct is expected, and is based on the belief that exercise physiologists
are self-regulated, critical thinkers who are accountable and responsible
for their high quality competence in the practice and the delivery of exercise
physiology concepts, ideas, and services.
1. Exercise physiologists
should accurately communicate and provide health and fitness, educational,
preventive, rehabilitative, and/or research services equitably to all individuals
regardless of social or economic status, age, gender, race, ethnicity, national
origin, religion, disability, diverse values, attitudes, or opinions.
2. Exercise physiologists should be responsible and accountable for individual
non-medical judgments and decisions about health and fitness, preventive,
rehabilitative, educational, and/or research services.
3. Exercise physiologists should maintain high quality professional competence
through continued study of the latest laboratory techniques and research
in preventive and rehabilitative services.
4. Exercise physiologists are expected to conduct health and fitness, preventive,
rehabilitative, educational, research, and other scholarly activities in
accordance with recognized legal, scientific, ethical, and professional standards.
5. Exercise physiologists should respect and protect the privacy, rights,
and dignity of all individuals by not disclosing health and fitness, rehabilitative,
and/or research information unless required by law or when confidentiality
jeopardizes the health and safety of others.
6. Exercise physiologists are expected to call attention to unprofessional
health and fitness, preventive, rehabilitative, educational, and/or research
services that result from incompetent, unethical, or illegal professional
behavior.
7. Exercise physiologists should contribute to the ongoing development and
integrity of the profession by being responsive to, mutually supportive,
and accurately communicating academic and other qualifications to colleagues
and associates in the health and fitness, preventive, rehabilitative, educational
and/or research services and programs.
8. Exercise physiologists should participate in the profession's efforts
to establish high quality services by avoiding conflicts of interest and
endorsement of products in the health and fitness, preventive, and/or rehabilitative
services and programs.
9. Exercise physiologists should participate in and encourage critical discourse
to reflect the collective knowledge and practice within the exercise physiology
profession to protect the public from misinformation, incompetence, and unethical
acts.
10. Exercise physiologists should provide health and fitness, preventive,
rehabilitative, and/or educational interventions grounded in a theoretical
framework supported by research that enables a healthy lifestyle through
choice.
Strategic
Planning
There are dozens of reasons to make plans, whether it is for a vacation,
a class lecture, a meeting, a presentation, or the development of a professional
organization. Planning allows the participants to sense something important
about what they are doing. It leads to success in using resources to
achieve organizational objectives. Planning is a way to cope with what
has transpired and what is necessary in the form of change. To plan,
therefore, is to save time in laying a series of actions to be successful.
It is both intellectual and hands-on. That is, there is an obvious
physical dimension to planning. And, yet it is without question logical
and reflective. All of these factors are key to understanding to the
assessment of the exercise physiologists’ strengths and weaknesses, thus
leading to specific objectives and operational outcomes.
Strategic planning requires risk taking, carrying out decisions
and, most importantly, getting rid of outdated ideas and protocols.
When used correctly, it sets the stage for accountability and credibility.
It allows for improvement in how professionals think about strategic issues,
financial plans, and commitment to ideas. In short, it provides the
opportunity to think openly and clearly about a sense of direction within
the organization. Much of the open and directed thinking is by members
of committees. The members’ synergy is critical to empowering the group
and producing the desired outcomes. It should be no secret to the committee
members that the structure of the committees is dramatically important to
the ASEP vision. Collectively, their role is to continue the development
of what has never before existed.
The de-structuring of the old and restructuring of the
new driven by the passion of the ASEP leadership may seem, at first glance,
negative. In reality, they are not a disorderly bunch, just individuals
who are perplexed over their future determined by non-exercise physiologists.
Instead, what they want and what strategic planning allows for, control over
their destiny. They want to be defined by their creativity and their
ability to respond to and partner with the public. It is nothing more
than a completely different and new view of exercise physiology, planned
by exercise physiologists for the development of the emerging profession
of exercise physiologists. This is the distinction between the old
and new thinking and the obvious underlying assumptions that make up the
reality that will move exercise physiologists to unify. This fundamental
shift in thinking is imperative for organizational change and growth.
“We create ourselves
by our curiosity, interest, and ability to make interdependent connections.”
-- George Land and Beth Jarman
References
(1) Buskirk, E.R. & Tipton, C.M. (1997). Exercise Physiology. In
The History of Exercise and Sport Science. Edited by John D. Massengale and
Richard A. Swanson. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, pp. 367-428.
(2). Astrand, P.O. & Rodahl, K. (1970). Textbook of Work Physiology.
New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Company.
(3) MacDougall, J.D., Wenger, H.A. & Green, H.J. (Editors, 1991). Physiological
Testing of the High-Performance Athlete. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
(4) Powers, S.K. & Howley, E.T. (2001). Exercise Physiology: Theory and
Application to Fitness and Performance. New York, NY: McGraw Hill, p. 11.
(5) Boone, T. (1998). Perspectives on Change. Professionalization of Exercise
Physiology-online. Vol 1 No 1 [Online]. http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/pro2.htm
(6) Boone, T. (1998). Exercise Physiology: New Professional Challenges. Professionalization
of Exercise Physiology-online. Vol 1 No 3 [Online]. http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/pro10.htm
(7) Wenger, N.K. & Hellerstein, H.K. (1978). Rehabilitation of the Coronary
Patient. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
(8) Drucker, P.F. (1967). The Effective Executive. New York, NY: Harper &
Row, Publishers, p. 143.
(9) Robergs, R.A. (1998). ACSM and Exercise Physiology: Past, Present, and
Future. Professionalization of Exercise Physiology-online. Vol 1 No 1 [Online].
http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/jan11.htm
(10) Boone, T. (1997). The Power of Change. ASEPNewsletter.
Vol 1 No 2 [Online]. http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/fldr/links1.htm
(11) Boone, T. (1998). Visionary Thinking. ASEPNewsletter.
Vol 2 No 5 [Online]. http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/fldr/links9.htm
(12) Boone, T. (1998). Exercise Physiology Professionalism: Myth or Reality.
ASEPNewsletter. Vol 1 No 11 [Online].
http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/pro.htm
(13). Boone, T. (1998). What's In a Title? ASEPNewsletter.
Vol 2 No 9 [Online]. http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/links12a.html
(14) Rademacher, E. & Pittsley, J. (2001). Analysis and Comparison
of Colleges and Universities with Degree Titles of Exercise Physiology or
Related Titles. Professionalization of Exercise Physiology-online.
Vol 4 No 12 [Online]. http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/MinimalStandards.html
(15) Boone, T. (2000). Undergraduate Programs In Exercise Science / Exercise
Physiology: Issues and Concerns. Professionalization of Exercise Physiology-online.
Vol 3 No 11 [Online]. C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\UndergraduateProgramsExerciseScience.doc
(16) Boone, T. (2001). What is Our Business? Professionalization of Exercise
Physiology-online. Vol 4 No 2 [Online]. http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/WhatIsOurBusiness.html
(17) Boone, T. (2003). The Entrepreneurship of Exercise Physiology. Professionalization
of Exercise Physiology-online. Vol 6 No 3 [Online]. http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/EntrepreneurshipOfExercisePhysiology.html
(18)Boone, T. (2003). The Making of American Exercise Physiology. Professionalization
of Exercise Physiology-online. Vol 6 No 1 [Online]. http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/AmericanExercisePhysiology.html
(19) Boone, T. (2003). The COURAGE to QUESTION What is Exercise Physiology
in the 21st Century. Professionalization of Exercise Physiology-online. Vol
6 No 1 [Online]. http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/COURAGEtoQUESTION.html
(20) Boone, T. (2002). The Years to Come: Niche or be Niched. Professionalization
of Exercise Physiology-online. Vol 5 No 10 [Online]. http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/TheYearsToCome.html
(21) Boone, T. (2003). The ASEP Organization is a Paradigm Shift. Professionalization
of Exercise Physiology-online. Vol 6 No 2 [Online]. http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/TheASEPparadigmShift.html
(22) Boone, T. (2001). Accreditation is Necessary for Accountability. Professionalization
of Exercise Physiology-online. Vol 4 No 6 [Online]. http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/AccreditationEQUALSaccountability.html
(23) American Society of Exercise Physiologists. (2003). Guidelines for the
Accreditation of Undergraduate Programs in Exercise Physiology. [Online].
http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/accredit.htm
(24) Boone, T. (2000). The Passionate Pursuit of Professionalism: A Critical
Analysis. Professionalization of Exercise Physiology-online. Vol 3 No 10
[Online]. http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/Passionate.html
(25) Boone, T. (2002). Exercise Physiology of the Future: Thinking Out of
the Box. Professionalization of Exercise Physiology-online. Vol 5 No
11 [Online]. http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/ThinkingOutsideTheBoxExercisePhysiology.html
(26) Boone, T. (2003). Overcoming Institutional Inertia with Leadership.
Professionalization of Exercise Physiology-online. Vol 6 No 2 [Online].
http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/OvercomingInstitutionalInertiaWithLeadership.html
(27) American Society of Exercise Physiologists. (2003). Vision. [Online].
http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/vision.htm
(28) American Society of Exercise Physiologists. (2003). Objectives. [Online].
http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/goals.htm
(29) Boone, T. (2003). Leaving the Old Reality Requires New Thinking. Professionalization
of Exercise Physiology-online. Vol 6 No 4 [Online]. http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/LeavingTHEoldREALITY.html
(30) American Society of Exercise Physiologists. (2003). The Center of Exercise
Physiology - online. http://www.exercisephysiologists.com/
(31) Boone, T. (2000). Passion: The Inner Drive. Professionalization of Exercise
Physiology-online. Vol 3 No 2 [Online]. http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/feb1.html
(32) American Society of Exercise Physiologists. (2003). Charter: Board of
Directors. [Online]. http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/execbod.htm
(33) Kreider, R. (2003). ASEP President’s Update. ASEPNewsletter.
Vol 7 No 4. [Online]. http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/ASEPNewsletterApril2003.html#ASEP
President’s
(34) American Society of Exercise Physiologists. (2003). Organizational Structure
and RESPONSIBILITIES. [Online]. http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/OrganizationalStructureRESPONSIBILITIES.html
|
|
