National Collegiate Athletic Association
NCAA News Archive - 2007
« back to 2007 | Back to NCAA News Archive Index
The membership within the membership
Affiliated organizations often play significant role in developing NCAA policy
Affiliated organizations often play significant role in developing NCAA policy
|
By Gary T. Brown
The NCAA News
The NCAA News
Why do colleges and universities join the National Collegiate Athletic Association? Because they care about intercollegiate athletics as an integral part of higher education and they benefit from the programming and status that membership in an association affords. In short, the NCAA is the most powerful and influential association in college sports because of its membership’s collective voice.
Given that, why would an athletics director, a football coach, a commissioner, an athletic trainer, a senior woman administrator, a faculty athletics representative or a basketball coach want to join an affiliated association when they already are members of the successful parent group?
The answer is the same. The “power of the association” trumps the power of the individual. Kay Hawes, who works for a company that manages associations, said, “As with the rest of society, people involved with intercollegiate athletics join associations to provide a collective voice and advocate for their interests, to discuss common problems and solutions, and to pursue professional development and advancement in their field.”
According to the American Society of Association Executives, there are 86,054 trade and professional associations in the United States, along with more than a million different philanthropic and charitable associations. They include everything from grain-elevator operators and gun enthusiasts to printers and pediatricians.
The NCAA has about 70 affiliated members that also run the function gamut, from umpires to registrars, from business officers to athletic trainers, from faculty to football coaches, from synchronized swimmers to twirlers. What makes associations in intercollegiate athletics unique, however, is that they generally are pursuing an agenda with the NCAA, not with a government. For example, while the American Medical Association is lobbying the federal government to further its agenda, which represents the interests of its members, the Women’s Basketball Coaches Association is lobbying the NCAA to advance its agenda on behalf of its constituents.
And those NCAA affiliated members have indeed influenced legislation and policy over time. Both the men’s and women’s basketball coaches associations successfully steered legislative packages through the governance structure two years ago that strengthened coach-athlete interaction and acclimated athletes into the educational system earlier. Faculty groups became major players in a presidential task force report last year that stressed greater integration of athletics into the campus. The National Athletic Trainers’ Association initiated and coordinated a 2005 task force on head-down contact and spearing that led to an NCAA rule modification in football, a 2006 task force to address cardiac arrest emergency response in collegiate student-athletes and a 2007 task force addressing student-athletes with sickle-cell trait.
And that doesn’t even include administrative groups such as the National Association of Collegiate Directors of Athletics, the National Association of Collegiate Women Athletic Administrators and the Collegiate Commissioners Association, whose members regularly influence NCAA policy.
“Affiliated organizations and other closely related groups bring a different perspective to any discussion,” said current Faculty Athletics Representatives Association President Dennis Leighton, the FAR at the University of New England. “FARA provides the academic perspective, for example, while another group brings the business perspective and another the marketing perspective. When any governing body makes a decision, members collectively want it to be an informed decision. The way to do that is to seek input from several different perspectives. That’s the value affiliated organizations bring to the table.”
Affiliating for a reason
Hawes, a certified association executive with Sports Association Management, Inc., in Kansas City, Missouri, said the NCAA’s affiliated members choose to affiliate not only because of the benefits a collective voice provides, but because it’s in their best interests. She said in fact that as the NCAA’s business becomes more complex, affiliation is almost essential.
The NCAA legislative process became tougher to follow in 1997 when the Association federated its governance structure. The legislative cycle has different stages in Division I than in Divisions II and III, which means affiliated groups have to monitor legislative developments closely, particularly Association-wide proposals. And because of the increased reliance upon conference representation in Division I, affiliated groups are smart to be involved with multiple conferences early on in the legislative cycle rather than wait for the Management Council vote, since most conferences have decided on proposals by the time the Council meets.
The NCAA, particularly under President Myles Brand’s watch, has sought more collaboration with affiliated groups. Brand facilitated outreach to the basketball associations and has relied heavily on faculty groups for counsel as well. He has targeted athletics directors for input, too. The Division 1A Athletics Directors’ Association in fact has been an important player recently in providing athletics compensation data that help inform decision-making regarding fiscal responsibility. Dutch Baughman, the executive director of that group, said affiliated members bring value to the parent association by providing knowledge from the trenches about how the NCAA operates.
“That’s not only important to the NCAA, but consistent with the role and mission of an affiliate organization,” Baughman said. “I could see where affiliates might think they need to be strong players themselves, but personal interests and agendas can interfere. By finding ways to encourage and support our members to involve themselves with NCAA matters, we find opportunities for ourselves.”
Those opportunities, Baughman said, help advance specific constituents’ interests without meddling with another affiliated group’s territory.
Professional development
“As we work with commissioners of I-A conferences, or with NCAA staff, we understand that we represent Division I-A athletics directors and that we have a role to play with presidents, FARs, deans and student-athletes on every campus,” he said. “We’re not trying to take anyone’s turf, but trying to be responsible for that we know our obligations to be.”
What would the NCAA miss without affiliated organizations? A lot of core programming, for one thing. Many of the NCAA’s best-known and most successful professional-development initiatives are outgrowths from brainstorming sessions within affiliated groups.
Jennifer Alley, executive director of NACWAA, said her organization’s HERS program for athletics administrators wouldn’t have evolved without a discussion with leaders in the HERS program for women in academia who want to advance their careers to become university vice presidents or presidents.
“The leadership of NACWAA sat down with the leadership of HERS and asked how we could modify the program to make it happen for women in intercollegiate athletics administration,” Alley said.
In turn, the idea for leadership institutes for minority females and the women’s coaching academies, which became NCAA programming realities several years ago, emanated from a NACWAA/HERS program discussion.
“That’s how a lot of these programs develop,” Alley said. “When you get people with a passion together, they have an opportunity to share ideas, and a dream or an idea evolves from there into these phenomenal programs. The affiliates allow members to come together to form great ideas, which become great partnerships, which lead to great programs.”
Without affiliated groups, the NCAA also would miss the diversity of perspective. FARA President Leighton said the NCAA would still have individual ADs, coaches and FARs on its myriad committees, but that the representation wouldn’t be as valuable. “The strength of an affiliated group is the networking and sharing of information,” he said. “So when FARA members, for example, become NCAA committee members, they are more likely to represent all FARs rather than just themselves or their own conference.”
Leighton said that in turn adds to a balanced discussion and a better collective decision on whatever legislation or policy matter the NCAA is considering.
“The FAR responsibilities are academic integrity, athletics oversight and student-athlete well-being,” he said. “Our job is to maintain credibility. We’re always reminding people of that. It isn’t to say that other people aren’t thinking about academic integrity and enhancing the student-athlete experience, but hopefully we add to a balanced discussion.”
Given that, why would an athletics director, a football coach, a commissioner, an athletic trainer, a senior woman administrator, a faculty athletics representative or a basketball coach want to join an affiliated association when they already are members of the successful parent group?
The answer is the same. The “power of the association” trumps the power of the individual. Kay Hawes, who works for a company that manages associations, said, “As with the rest of society, people involved with intercollegiate athletics join associations to provide a collective voice and advocate for their interests, to discuss common problems and solutions, and to pursue professional development and advancement in their field.”
According to the American Society of Association Executives, there are 86,054 trade and professional associations in the United States, along with more than a million different philanthropic and charitable associations. They include everything from grain-elevator operators and gun enthusiasts to printers and pediatricians.
The NCAA has about 70 affiliated members that also run the function gamut, from umpires to registrars, from business officers to athletic trainers, from faculty to football coaches, from synchronized swimmers to twirlers. What makes associations in intercollegiate athletics unique, however, is that they generally are pursuing an agenda with the NCAA, not with a government. For example, while the American Medical Association is lobbying the federal government to further its agenda, which represents the interests of its members, the Women’s Basketball Coaches Association is lobbying the NCAA to advance its agenda on behalf of its constituents.
And those NCAA affiliated members have indeed influenced legislation and policy over time. Both the men’s and women’s basketball coaches associations successfully steered legislative packages through the governance structure two years ago that strengthened coach-athlete interaction and acclimated athletes into the educational system earlier. Faculty groups became major players in a presidential task force report last year that stressed greater integration of athletics into the campus. The National Athletic Trainers’ Association initiated and coordinated a 2005 task force on head-down contact and spearing that led to an NCAA rule modification in football, a 2006 task force to address cardiac arrest emergency response in collegiate student-athletes and a 2007 task force addressing student-athletes with sickle-cell trait.
And that doesn’t even include administrative groups such as the National Association of Collegiate Directors of Athletics, the National Association of Collegiate Women Athletic Administrators and the Collegiate Commissioners Association, whose members regularly influence NCAA policy.
“Affiliated organizations and other closely related groups bring a different perspective to any discussion,” said current Faculty Athletics Representatives Association President Dennis Leighton, the FAR at the University of New England. “FARA provides the academic perspective, for example, while another group brings the business perspective and another the marketing perspective. When any governing body makes a decision, members collectively want it to be an informed decision. The way to do that is to seek input from several different perspectives. That’s the value affiliated organizations bring to the table.”
Affiliating for a reason
Hawes, a certified association executive with Sports Association Management, Inc., in Kansas City, Missouri, said the NCAA’s affiliated members choose to affiliate not only because of the benefits a collective voice provides, but because it’s in their best interests. She said in fact that as the NCAA’s business becomes more complex, affiliation is almost essential.
The NCAA legislative process became tougher to follow in 1997 when the Association federated its governance structure. The legislative cycle has different stages in Division I than in Divisions II and III, which means affiliated groups have to monitor legislative developments closely, particularly Association-wide proposals. And because of the increased reliance upon conference representation in Division I, affiliated groups are smart to be involved with multiple conferences early on in the legislative cycle rather than wait for the Management Council vote, since most conferences have decided on proposals by the time the Council meets.
The NCAA, particularly under President Myles Brand’s watch, has sought more collaboration with affiliated groups. Brand facilitated outreach to the basketball associations and has relied heavily on faculty groups for counsel as well. He has targeted athletics directors for input, too. The Division 1A Athletics Directors’ Association in fact has been an important player recently in providing athletics compensation data that help inform decision-making regarding fiscal responsibility. Dutch Baughman, the executive director of that group, said affiliated members bring value to the parent association by providing knowledge from the trenches about how the NCAA operates.
“That’s not only important to the NCAA, but consistent with the role and mission of an affiliate organization,” Baughman said. “I could see where affiliates might think they need to be strong players themselves, but personal interests and agendas can interfere. By finding ways to encourage and support our members to involve themselves with NCAA matters, we find opportunities for ourselves.”
Those opportunities, Baughman said, help advance specific constituents’ interests without meddling with another affiliated group’s territory.
Professional development
“As we work with commissioners of I-A conferences, or with NCAA staff, we understand that we represent Division I-A athletics directors and that we have a role to play with presidents, FARs, deans and student-athletes on every campus,” he said. “We’re not trying to take anyone’s turf, but trying to be responsible for that we know our obligations to be.”
What would the NCAA miss without affiliated organizations? A lot of core programming, for one thing. Many of the NCAA’s best-known and most successful professional-development initiatives are outgrowths from brainstorming sessions within affiliated groups.
Jennifer Alley, executive director of NACWAA, said her organization’s HERS program for athletics administrators wouldn’t have evolved without a discussion with leaders in the HERS program for women in academia who want to advance their careers to become university vice presidents or presidents.
“The leadership of NACWAA sat down with the leadership of HERS and asked how we could modify the program to make it happen for women in intercollegiate athletics administration,” Alley said.
In turn, the idea for leadership institutes for minority females and the women’s coaching academies, which became NCAA programming realities several years ago, emanated from a NACWAA/HERS program discussion.
“That’s how a lot of these programs develop,” Alley said. “When you get people with a passion together, they have an opportunity to share ideas, and a dream or an idea evolves from there into these phenomenal programs. The affiliates allow members to come together to form great ideas, which become great partnerships, which lead to great programs.”
Without affiliated groups, the NCAA also would miss the diversity of perspective. FARA President Leighton said the NCAA would still have individual ADs, coaches and FARs on its myriad committees, but that the representation wouldn’t be as valuable. “The strength of an affiliated group is the networking and sharing of information,” he said. “So when FARA members, for example, become NCAA committee members, they are more likely to represent all FARs rather than just themselves or their own conference.”
Leighton said that in turn adds to a balanced discussion and a better collective decision on whatever legislation or policy matter the NCAA is considering.
“The FAR responsibilities are academic integrity, athletics oversight and student-athlete well-being,” he said. “Our job is to maintain credibility. We’re always reminding people of that. It isn’t to say that other people aren’t thinking about academic integrity and enhancing the student-athlete experience, but hopefully we add to a balanced discussion.”
© 2010 The National Collegiate Athletic Association
Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy