Are P.E.T.S. Focused On Presidents-Elect? In view of the North American membership decline all North America Rotary institutions and practices should undergo objective analysis, especially the one closest to the clubs – Presidents-Elect Training Seminars (PETS.) Jim Henry

In North America, the now eighteen-year drop in membership, and the over twenty years of organized Presidents-Elect Training Sessions (PETS) is too close of a relationship to be considered a mere coincidence. From this observation, two propositions could be debated: 1. PETS slowed the rate of our membership decline. 2. PETS contributed to our membership decline. To arbitrarily dismiss either proposition would be negligent, but both could be argued for hours without reaching agreement. Sufficient data does not exist to prove either proposition wrong. But there is no question that PETS, particularly Multi-District PETS, could be a vital participant in reversing our membership decline. To be a participant, all PETS program elements must focus on the fundamentals of assisting presidents-elect and their clubs in sustaining and increasing membership. All-Florida and Peach State PETS obtain detailed electronic evaluations the week after PETS, specifically requesting comments and suggestions. In late September, All-Florida PETS sends out a post-PETS survey. Here are the results of one of the many queries on All-Florida’s Post PETS survey: Now that you have several months’ presidential experience, please prioritize the importance of each subject to your club. (Presidents are asked to rate each topic’s priority 1- 5.) Subject Membership Development Club Administration Service Projects The Rotary Foundation Public Information

First Priority to X% of clubs, 2010 50% 28.2% 38.7% 9.9% 10.8%

First Priority to X% of clubs, 2011 52% 32.7% 26.1% 7.9% 7.9%

This data indicates to the All-Florida PETS planners the issues most important to the almost 370 clubs it serves. These clubs represent varying economic, social, and ethnic climates, so this is probably a fair sampling of what all Rotary clubs consider important. Since the only true measure of an effective club is its ability to sustain and increase membership1, shouldn’t all topics be focused on how they help clubs with their main concern – membership development? Let’s examine this from the points of view of two Rotary clubs that represent extremes in Rotary International’s wide spectrum of member clubs. Both are fictitious, but clubs with similar attributes and practices exist: Extreme 1: The Rotary Club of Shark Valley. Shark Valley Rotary club is sixty years old, the only club in this rural community. Membership historically waxes and wanes with the community’s sporadic economy. All club members are leaders of various local businesses and professions. The club screens proposed members and has two on a waiting list because competitive professions are already represented. It furnishes no support to the Rotary 1

http://zone34retentioncentral.blogspot.com/2011/05/only-true-measure-of-effective-club-is.html

Foundation and minimally supports District activities. No one attends any district sponsored seminars. Club resources are concentrated on supporting local projects and programs, including the community library’s cyber café and the Shark Valley Rotary Park. Extreme 2: The Rotary Club of Deep Canyon. Deep Canyon Rotary club is in a large city’s affluent suburb. It has grown from a startup club thirteen years ago to forty-one members. It has a $1,000 new member admission fee whether or not the proposed member is a transferring Rotarian. It encourages members to contribute a minimum of $1,000 per year to the Rotary Foundation and expects members to support the Rotary Deep Canyon Foundation. It frequently partners on matching grants and normally sponsors group study exchange team members. It does not do any hands-on projects, but financially supports other area clubs’ projects. It supports community charities by awarding large grants from the Rotary Deep Canyon Foundation.

Each club is continuing to sustain and attract members. Each is a functioning and effective Rotary club. Each utilizes select attributes necessary to remain effective within their differing social fabrics. If this principle applies to clubs at each extreme, should it not apply to all clubs in between? Critically examine the Effective Clubs graphic (which does not reference Rotary’s purpose – the Object of Rotary.) It pictorially implies that all clubs, to be effective, should standardize practices regardless of their political, social, and economic environments. There’s a close relationship between its illustrated thought process and the thought process of many Rotary educational endeavors. If the Sustain and Increase Membership column is removed, how could clubs build the platforms or perform the remaining illustrated functions? Rotary clubs that do not sustain membership ultimately fail to function. Clubs know that. Presidents-elect know that. District Governors know that. So shouldn’t all Rotary educational endeavors, especially grass-roots PETS, focus on how various attributes could help clubs retain and attract qualified members? PETS, particularly MDPETS, could be instrumental in Reversing our North American Membership Freefall but only if total programming is focused on what is important to the clubs and their PEs. This can only be accomplished by approaching all PETS programming from their points of view. This may require brushing aside egos, evaluating and changing traditional approaches, and making difficult, and possibly unique, decisions. Perhaps each programming element should be put to an acid test by requiring it to respond positively to basic, and perhaps uncomfortable, questions similar to some already asked or suggested by attendees to the All-Florida and Peach State PETS: How does this (topic) help me lead my club in attracting and keeping ‘qualified’ members? What’s Rotary’s purpose? If I want to serve my community, I don’t have to join Rotary. How does this (keynote speaker’s speech) help me lead my club to become stronger and more effective in my community? How do VIP drop-ins (droppings?) and keynote speaker addresses help me lead my club in being more effective at sustaining and growing membership?

Only when approached from a president-elect’s point of view can it be said that P.E.T.S. is focused on Presidents-elect. Jim Henry, PDG D-6960 Rotary Leadership Institute – Sunshine Division Chairman Emeritus Rotarian of the Decade, D-6960 2001-2010 Recipient 2011 R.I. Service above Self Award Regional Rotary International Membership Coordinator, Zone 34, 2008-10 Rotary Coordinator, Zone 34, 2010-11 Posted October, 2011 on http://zone34retentioncentral.blogspot.com/

Rotary clubs do not make communities - Rotary clubs make communities better.