The Making of Leaders in Exercise
Physiology
Tommy Boone, PhD, MPH, MA, FASEP,
EPC
Professor and Chair
Department of Exercise Physiology
The College of St. Scholastica
Duluth, MN 55811
In 1995, my wife asked, “Who is in
charge of exercise physiology?” Her question resulted from several
conversations that we had months before. Finally, I had to answer
the question, saying “There are no leaders.” A recent discussion
with several students on “authors of exercise physiology texts” produced
the notion that they are leaders in exercise physiology. But increasingly,
after further analysis the students agreed that events and circumstances,
which were important distracted from bringing exercise physiology forward
as a profession. I think the students are right.
Exercise physiologists are excellent
at doing research. They appear to know relatively little about the
importance of professionalism, a code of ethics, or why certification must
be linked to accreditation. The simple truth is that the academic
exercise physiologists did an excellent job at getting other researchers
to recognize their expertise in applying physiology to sports and rehabilitation
from heart disease. We need researchers just like medicine, nursing,
physical therapy, and others. The success or failure of evolving
professions rests on the perceived quality of the scientific papers.
We need leaders, too.
It is hard to imagine exercise physiology
without leaders. It is especially troubling to all of us who have
been part of academic exercise physiology for decades, but that is exactly
what we have failed to do. Our strength as researchers is not balanced
with our failure to foresee the need for leadership. Research therefore
has prevailed for nearly 50 years. It has been our guiding light.
It has defined us, and it is our bankruptcy if we do not get a handle on
the importance of academic leadership. Research per se is not a bedrock
of principles of honesty and fair play. Research does not define
ethics or ethical thinking. Also, few exercise physiologists seem
to understand or even care about the troubling decades of fiscal improprieties
in the name of sports supplement research.
We see exercise physiologists writing
and talking about the assumed benefits of specific sports or dietary supplements
and/or drugs, and we often hold them in high esteem. But, what do
we do about the right and wrong of such activity. What can we do
about changing the emphasis on ergogenic aids and exercise physiology as
a sports driven discipline vs. exercise physiology as a healthcare profession,
caught up as we are in the context of our own research and need to be seen
as experts? Perhaps part of the change process begins with taking
the first step of studying what is professionalism and what are the professional
developments important to our students? Exercise physiologists must
immerse themselves in the study of ethical thinking. They can no
longer be considered innocent just because they have a huge interest in
research (i.e., research for research sake is not enough). Shrinking
from the responsibility of the global issues and problems that stem from
supplement and/or drug usage is no excuse either or the way in exercise
physiologists has dealt with career opportunities for undergraduates.
The increased emphasis on sport supplement
research is at an insane level of comprehensive. If the research
shows that a particular supplement does not increase athletic performance,
the researchers use hedge words to get around the statistical conclusions
[1]. If the research is done well and the conclusions match the statistical
results favoring a supplement, who is asking the question: “Is it ethical
to promote the supplement to give an unfair advantage to the athletes?”
Furthermore, there is the impression, given the role of athletics in society
and the value placed on winning, that sports nutrition (an important part
of the exercise physiology body of knowledge) is driving exercise physiology
in a highly focused and questionable direction. In other words,
despite the profound impact exercise physiology research has had on lifestyle
risk factors, health and wellness, and rehabilitation, research about athletics
(i.e., jumping higher, running faster, and getting stronger) underscores
what is believed to be important in the field.
This unsettling evidence that exercise
physiology is just about athletics is alarming. It may have been
true decades ago. It is no longer true today. Exercise physiology
is a healthcare profession. Athletics is part of its overall appeal.
The founding of ASEP in 1997 is largely responsible for the ending of what
amounted to as an “athletic-research” monopoly. Yet, until real leadership
steps up to the plate, the impact of exercise physiology expanding and
continuing its growth as a healthcare profession will be slow. This
distinction strikes at the heart of the problem non-doctorate exercise
physiologists have faced for years. Lost in the mistakes of years
ago, force to work alongside less prepared employees and, basically, forgotten
after leaving college, they nonetheless struggle to work in the field while
suffering from the consequences of failed or no leadership.
We talk about other professions having
their own professional organizations. We understand the importance
of accreditation and consequences of not being credible. Unable to
find professional and credible independence, graduates leave the field
to become nurses, physician-assistants, or physical therapists. Exercise
physiology lost its healthcare edge because it lost its way. We forgot
what we were studying, the implications of the content, and how important
everything is to declaring a freedom of practice. Students were often
not interested in talking about healthcare or new ideas about practicing
exercise physiology. In facts, many students have said that they
are interested in athletics and sports training. Undoubtedly, this
is part of the reason for the development of organizations that deal primarily
with strength and conditioning as well as recipes and slogans that declare
a sports commitment versus healthcare.
The concept of “the public good”
in terms of healthcare is hardly a special interest among many students.
Exercise physiology has devolved into a sports training mentality.
There is certainly a lot less challenge in finding one’s way within the
opportunities of sports and supplement companies that are more than willing
to provide a few bucks for research and subsequent advertisements.
Increasingly, those who look to exercise physiology from a healthcare perspective
(e.g., Multidisciplinary Exercise Physiology Healthcare Clinic) are beginning
to learn that many different professions look to benefit from the belt-tightening
to better America’s healthcare. Certain professions will not want
to step back or allow new professions to become part of the future of healthcare.
These professions are likely to consider outsiders like exercise physiology
a threat to their practice and common vision. This is a shared problem
because exercise physiologists are left without the leadership to guide
them. And without leadership there is usually great difficulty in
achieving goals and objectives. The selling of exercise itself is
not hard to do. Getting people up and exercising is hard. Exercise
physiologists need a vision that extends their research to benefit society.
Having captured a niche research section of physiology and related disciplines,
exercise physiologists have failed to unlock the professional inroads into
healthcare. That is exactly what is driving much of the success of
other healthcare professions. With that mind-set, everything else
becomes secondary whereas our addiction is sports.
It is time for exercise physiologists
to square off with their past thinking and look at the boundless opportunities
in healthcare. Ironically, our best and brightest seem to have understood
this from the beginning. They have little tolerance for academic
programs that fail to live up their professional expectations. Organizations,
too, should serve its members, and professionals should never give their
allegiance to organizations that do not. This is where leaders are
born. They have a vision. They understand the importance of
a guiding vision, such as the ASEP vision [2]. Leaders know that
nothing is easy. After the first step toward change, that is, to
decide to be something other than what has been true for decades due to
lack of leadership, it is necessary secondly to stay the course.
The 21st century exercise physiology
needs leadership with a passion for healthcare issues and concerns along
with new ways of accessing career opportunities. Students need hope
and a sense of direction from their professors. Academic exercise
physiologists should be among the students’ first contact with leaders
from within the field. The academic setting should be defined by
integrity and a commitment to the students. Professors should be
responsible to their students’ education and professional development.
Leaders should tell the truth about the “what is exercise physiology” and
“who is an exercise physiologist”. They should no longer leave students
to their own to figure out how to make it. Instead, they should help
to change conditions within academic departments so that the students’
reality of the job market is truthfully understood. It is a matter
of trust, which is important to professionalism.
I read several months ago, “Leaders
invent themselves” [3]. I agree completely. I’m reminded of
the eight ASEP state association presidents [4]. All but one has
a master’s degree, yet under the circumstances, each has the character
and vision to invent themselves along with the transformation of exercise
physiology in their state. Being a president of a state association
is not easy, especially when doctorate prepared exercise physiologists
fail to extend their help. It is clear to me that these eight presidents
are leaders in exercise physiology. To my knowledge, none of them
took a leadership course. None of them viewed themselves as a leader.
In fact, it probably came as a big surprise to each of them that they stepped
up to the plate of responsibility. I argue that is what they did
and, in so doing, they became leaders in exercise physiology. Their
work and leadership will help to build exercise physiology in their state
and throughout the United States. We need more men and women with
unshakeable convictions, with sincerity, and who have the backbone to forge
ahead regardless of the challenges, obstacles, or comments.
I cannot stress enough the importance
of getting involved with the professional development of exercise physiology.
The time has come that we become intensively and deeply active as exercise
physiologists. If it requires breaking out from yesterday’s thinking,
then we must do it. It is not a matter of waiting for someone to
pat you on the back and then, “it is your turn”. Taking charge, expressing
yourself, and teaching yourself are important steps to overcoming denial
and obstacles. So, why not reflect on where you are and, then, where
you want to be. Learning to be fearless requires a new, internalized
understanding of what you need to do. It is self-directed learning
that results from unlearning the conformist way of thinking. Too
many of us never outwardly manifest the desire to overcome the influence
of circumstances. However, it is never too late to nurture change
and to be free to learn and to shape the future of exercise physiology.
Nurturing change to realize a vision
is what leaders do. They think about what must change, what is possible
and then they go about doing what is necessary to get where they want to
go. It is what the presidents of the ASEP state associations understood.
By taking on the challenge and responsibility of founding a state association,
they have chosen to shape their destiny. This is instructive because,
in effect, it is a step in the right direction for all of us. Instead
of saying there is nothing we can do about the conditions we face, their
efforts have reduced ambiguity, fear, and confusion and have brought respect
to the overall ASEP initiatives. This kind of thinking is special.
It is as important as any research publication by the academic exercise
physiologists. It is also exciting since new ideas amount to a type
of out of the box thinking that leads to multiple scenarios that allow
for a kind of magical engagement with possibilities.
Regardless of the adversity and mistakes
that associate with problem solving and trying out new ideas, leaders learn
by leading. This is intuitively correct just as swimmers learn by
swimming. It is a matter of trying everything and doing everything
and never giving up. Leaders become part of the adventure and, wherever
possible, they share the shameless enthusiasm that drives them. Roger
Gould may have said it best: “Once you have a vision that you’ve
tested over and over again, you’ve got the tiger by the tail. You
almost can’t stop leading, because that would mean being unfaithful to
your vision of reality” [3, p. 130]. This is the first responsibility
of leading and helping others. Remember what Roger Gould said the
next time you are thinking about exercise physiology. Leaders follow
their inner voice even when everybody is saying something different.
References
1. Boone, T. (2003). The Nutritional
Needs of Athletes. Professionalization of Exercise Physiologyonline. Vol
6, No. 9. [Online]. http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/NutritionalNeedsOfAthletes.html
2. American Society of Exercise
Physiologists. (2004). ASEP Vision. [Online]. http://www.asep.org/vision.htm
3. Bennis, W. (2003). On Becoming
a Leader. New York, NY: Basic Books, p. 33.
4. American Society of Exercise
Physiologists. (2004). ASEP State Associations. [Online]. http://www.asep.org/StateAssociations.html
