What makes for a vibrant medical physics professional society?

Received: 4 October 2017 | Revised: 4 October 2017 | Accepted: 5 October 2017 DOI: 10.1002/acm2.12207 EDITORIAL What makes for a vibrant medical physics professional society? This issue’s invited Editorial is provided by Per Halvorsen, Associate the ACMP’s tenure — its open access model challenged the tradi- Editor-in-Chief of the JACMP. It concerns the recent effort to mod- tional approach to medical physics publishing and has contributed to ify the Association’s governance and contains some very perceptive a more diverse perspective on the Journals’ business management analysis that should prove useful if the AAPM decides to revisit this now that the ACMP’s functions have been assumed by the AAPM. issue at some future date — Michael Mills, JACMP EIC Those of us who are AAPM members have just witnessed a robust Diversity of perspective, then, is arguably more important than volunteer experience for Board of Directors positions in a medical debate about the normally dry topic of Association governance. A pro- physics professional society — and I say that as one of the individu- posal for a significant change in the Association’s structure was devel- als holding the distinction of many years of AAPM volunteer experi- oped by leaders of the Association with the help of a paid consulting ence. Another comment in the recent AAPM governance debate firm, and put to the membership for a vote on By-Laws changes was: “Governance needs to systematically and structurally enforce needed to implement the proposed governance change. The discus- the possibility that different points of view can and will be pre- sion leading up to the vote was energetic, with many thoughtful obser- sented.” I agree with this statement. What can be done structurally vations. The proposal failed to gain the support of the necessary to ensure that different points of view are presented? This leads to 2/3rds majority of voting members, despite being the result of a sin- the second crucial ingredient: grass roots engagement. cere effort by a group of dedicated volunteer members. The AAPM’s existing governance structure strongly supports So, what are the key ingredients for a vibrant medical physics grass roots engagement. The Chapter Representatives to the Board professional society? I posit that three ingredients are crucial: diver- of Directors are selected by their local Chapter members — perhaps sity of perspective, grass roots engagement, and fiscal checks and the essence of grass roots engagement. And while the Association balances. has a Nominating Committee which makes a good-faith effort to One of the threads in the AAPM governance debate could be identify strong candidates for leadership positions, it is impossible described as “experience vs. diversity of perspective”. Experience for a small group of individuals to know all the members of the certainly brings value — and in the context of a professional society, Association. The result is that the Nominating Committee, however this is typically measured in terms of volunteer service within the well intentioned (full disclosure: I’m a current member of the Com- organization. A disproportionate focus on volunteer experience as a mittee), is likely to miss many potentially excellent candidates for criterion for Association leadership positions, however, brings an such leadership positions. In this context, I believe it is essential to increased likelihood of entrenched priorities leading to a less flexible preserve the ability for direct nomination by the membership for cer- organization. Without diversity of perspective, the organization risks tain Board positions — which our current governance allows. In the continuing practices even when they do not best serve the organiza- last round of elections, the Nominating Committee’s slate of candi- tion or its members. One of the comments in the AAPM discussion dates for At-Large Board positions consisted entirely of PhD physi- used the phrase “constructive turbulence”, which captures the princi- cists. This was not an intentional bias by the Committee, but we ple quite nicely. For example, the AAPM continued to contract with missed the mark in terms of ensuring a sufficiently diverse slate of AIP Publishing respecting journal and society publications for over 4 candidates. The membership corrected this by nominating several, decades; after opening up for competitive bidding, we now have a equally well qualified, candidates. Our governance structure ensured contract with one of the leaders in scientific publishing with the grass roots engagement, and for that I am grateful. potential of realizing significantly more net revenue flowing to the Finally, fiscal checks and balances. An important principle in this Association. The American College of Medical Physics (ACMP) was regard, as described in another comment in the AAPM governance formed in part due to frustration over entrenched priorities within debate, is that the organization’s budget should be approved by indi- the AAPM and the consequent lack of focus on professional-practice viduals who do not have a direct role in the use of the allocated issues. The ACMP’s formation motivated the AAPM to become more funds. Our current governance structure honors this principle. The engaged in professional-practice issues, leading to a more active and majority of allocated funds are used by the Councils and their many productive Professional Council. This Journal was founded during Committees and Task Groups, and by the AAPM Headquarters ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. © 2017 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine. 4 | wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/jacmp J Appl Clin Med Phys 2017; 18:6: 4–5 | EDITORIAL operation. The representatives of both entities (Council Chairs and Executive Director) are nonvoting members of the Board in the current structure — essentially, advisors who can inform the Board’s deliberations but cannot vote. 5 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I thank Editor-in-Chief Michael Mills and Associate Editor-in-Chief Timothy Solberg for their valuable and perceptive comments. Some have advocated for aligning the AAPM’s governance more closely with the structure of our physician sister societies, such as CONFLICT OF INTEREST the ACR and ASTRO. I believe this is misplaced. We have a strong working relationship with them, as we should, but we are different — we do not have the operating budgets of our physician sister societies. Rather than aspiring to become more similar to such societies, we should embrace what has made our Association strong and nurture the key ingredients for an even more vibrant society: diversity of perspective, grass roots engagement, and fiscal checks and balances. If a new AAPM governance change is proposed in the future, it is my hope that it will be crafted with robust grass roots involvement and structured with these key ingredients firmly in mind. The author declares no conflict of interest. Per Halvorsen Lahey Hospital & Medical Center, Burlington, MA, USA E-mail: [email protected]