Growing Up with APS: The Next Five Years

The start of a new year makes one particularly conscious of the concept of time. So it is probably inevitable that a column written during the period between Hanukkah, Christmas and New Year’s Day would be sprinkled with thoughts of past, present, and future, and of development and change.

Reflecting on the past, present, and future of APS calls up (for me, at least; those familiar with my addiction to metaphor will understand) ontological analogies between organizations and individuals. The first five years of life are characterized by rates of change measured in weeks and months, a sense of awe at the very fact of existence, and a strong focus on the present. Developmental milestones are reached and surpassed in rapid succession, and symbols of growth and change are highly salient. For APS, important developmental markers include the establishment of a Washington office and a highly effective advocacy program, convening of a Summit of psychological science societies that resulted in the successful Human Capital Initiative, and a rate of membership growth that exceeded all expectations and brought us to the 15,000-member threshold in 1993.

From Metaphor to Metamorphosis

But for organizations, as for children, the fifth birthday produces a noticeable change in perspective. From this point on, maturation is measured in years rather than months, it is possible to reflect on the past and to think of planning for the future, and the time comes to address the question: What do we want to be when we grow up?

It was with that perspective that the APS Board of Directors convened for a retreat meeting in December. In contrast to such meetings in the past, relatively little time was spent on issues of survival, and attention turned instead to visions of the future (the “vision thing,” as one of our members dubbed it). Turning to the future meant addressing issues of what it means to “grow up” in both size and complexity, and discussion focused on both of these dimensions of growth.

Size: What Is Big Enough?

Attaining a membership of 15,000 was an initial objective articulated at the founding of APS. Reaching that particular goal prompted serious discussion of what it means for a scientific society to be “big enough.” Is there a limit on the number of members such a society can adequately represent, and should we consider a membership “cap” in the range of 15-16,000? Members of the APS Board did not dismiss such an idea lightly, but ultimately reached a consensus that cutting off membership growth at this point would be equivalent to stunting the growth of an individual at age five, long before full potential had been reached. Instead we took seriously our stated organizational goal of representing all those whose professional career involves substantial contribution to the science of psychology. Defining contributions to include teaching and application as well as basic and applied research, a new target of 25,000 members was agreed to be consistent with our organizational aspirations.

Growth in Functions: Achieving Unity with Diversity

Increasing size also means increasing the scope and functions of organizational activities and responsibilities. Additional membership implies additional services that justify continued investment of dues and organizational loyalty. In this column in the November Observer, Steve Hayes called attention to the critical issues of balancing union and diversity as the scope of APS commitments expands. In its discussion of growth and change, the Board took seriously the suggestion that APS has reached a point where differentiation into suborganizations equivalent to divisions or interest groups would best serve the dual goals of breadth and unification. Ultimately, however, we reaffirmed the long-standing APS aspiration and commitment to the single­assembly model as the best way to achieve the integration of basic and applied psychology and the representation of teaching and research.

While reaffirming the single-assembly model for internal structure, however, the Board also agreed that APS’s mission includes casting a broad net externally to serve and represent the many specialty organizations that already promote research and scholarship within the psychological sciences. For that purpose, we take as our prototype the 1990 and 1991 Behavioral Science Summits that produced the Human Capital Initiative and the successful working groups and subsequent initiatives that have been spawned by that process. Also indicative of efforts in this direction are various contractual arrangements between APS and other independent societies such as the Society for Research in Child Development and, most recently, the Society for Psychophysiological Research. As we grow, we will continue to experiment with new organizational forms that will serve the collective interests of psychology as an evolving scientific discipline and field of application.