Not my job.

No mountain seems too high, when you don’t care about climbing it.

I want to talk about our biggest impediment to membership growth, and it’s not one of the usual suspects. It’s not our ageing membership base or our gender imbalance. It’s not the cost of membership. It’s not the demands on one’s personal time or the intrusion into one’s personal life. It’s not about venues, food or traditions and rituals. And whilst there are still far too many people who don’t know what we do or what we stand for, it’s not our public image either.

Our biggest impediment to membership growth comes down to one word… APATHY.

The image above was a finalist in a quirky online competition – the “not my job” awards. Clearly the line marker decided it wasn’t his job to get out and move the log, and just swerved around it. It has been my experience in Rotary, that for the majority of members, membership is “not their job”. They just swerve around it!

Rotarians are busy people. Some are passionate about fundraising, some are passionate about polio eradication, some are passionate about youth programs. Some are busy being club treasurer or secretary. We are all passionate about something, and many of us wear a number of hats and take on multiple roles within the organisation, but make no mistake: membership is everyone’s job.

I have often been asked to help clubs with recruitment initiatives or give a presentation on what clubs need to do to attract more members, and one of the first points I always make at such presentations is that it’s everyone’s job, and if everyone isn’t prepared to work on it, no matter how good the idea, you’re unlikely to get the most out of your efforts. Your whole club needs to be on the same page with this, and they need to want it bad enough.

In most clubs, this is how it works. There will be one member who has been given the role of membership chair (whether they wanted it or not), and additionally there might be one or two other enthusiastic recruiters at best. Then there’s the rest of the members, who are quite relieved that membership is not their responsibility, many of whom will not lift a finger to help promote the club, and as our statistics clearly reveal, will NEVER ask someone to join. I remember a few years ago handing out new promotional fliers for my own club to every member, and asked them all to keep five copies in their glove box, brief case or hand bag, in case the opportunity presented itself to pass on some information about our club. I wouldn’t have thought this an unreasonable request, but about six months later I asked who needed more fliers (assuming at least some had been handed out) and they all looked at me as if I had two heads. Many couldn’t even remember getting them in the first place.

I strongly believe that if EVERY Rotarian was truly COMMITTED to improving our membership outcomes, we would be able to easily overcome those aforementioned usual suspects, and we would turn around our fortunes.

I don’t think I have ever heard an incoming president or district governor’s speech which doesn’t mention membership. “This will be the year”, blah, blah, blah. But before long, apathy and the “not my job” mindset prevails, and other than printing a few fliers and arranging a guest speaker in Membership month to talk about membership, not much else will happen in club land. I’m almost totally booked out for August in my own district already.

To be fair, some clubs have worked hard and had encouraging membership outcomes over the last year, and they are to be congratulated on their efforts, but across District 9520 we are down 38 on opening numbers, and this is an annual trend which shows no sign of abatement.

So what leads to apathy? I suspect the answer is comfort. After a while, many of us become accustomed to the way it’s always been done and change becomes a dirty word. We have “done our bit” and it’s the routine of a weekly meal with our friends that keeps us in Rotary. I’ve even seen instances of Rotarians actively sabotaging recruitment initiatives to protect the status quo. These are people who depend on their club remaining small, so they can preserve their position of influence within it. Somewhere in the process, “self” managed to slip above “service”.

Given that around 50% of us are retired, we have lost a great deal of our capacity to network and source new members through our business contacts, but we can still approach people in our lawn bowls clubs, golf clubs, churches and family networks. And even if members feel they don’t know a lot of people to ask, they can still help the club by handing out fliers at the local shopping centre, spreading the message via social media, wearing Rotary T-Shirts at events and putting Rotary bumper stickers on their car. There are ways to get everyone in your club involved.

So here’s the question I will leave you with, and the question you can ask of each and EVERY member. What will YOU do to help grow our membership?

I was wrong...

There you go. I said it. But you’ll have to read down a lot further before I reveal what I was wrong about. (By the way, I've been wrong about a lot of things, and no doubt will have ample opportunity to be wrong again, but most of these instances will have nothing to do with this blog).

I want to first tell you about three remarkable Rotarians, all of whom have had a considerable influence not just on my personal Rotary journey, but over Rotary leaders globally as they've walked the world stage. I have the highest level of respect for these three men, and am very fortunate to have met them all personally. (No - Dr. Phil is not one of them!)

Bill Boyd was the RI President in 2006/07, the same year I was club president at the Rotary Club of Edwardstown, and during that year I was naturally keen to find out more about him, and hung on his every word. I read all of his contributions to RDU during that year, and have since followed his commentary with interest on other Rotary matters including The Rotary Foundation and membership. There was one particular quote from Bill which I found extremely helpful during my year of presidency, a quote about how our most common response to requests for help would be “No”, and how important it was to think carefully before saying “Yes”.

Stuart Heal was an RI Director from 2010-2012, and in my humble opinion has done more to promote change, and keep the conversation going about change, than any other Rotarian. I've been lucky enough to be in the room on a number of occasions where he has delivered outstanding speeches on the issues facing our organisation and the direction ahead. His frankness and pragmatism have been like a breath of fresh air. There’s a difference between a Rotarian who is uncomfortable with the status quo, and a high ranking Rotarian who is prepared to put his neck on the line and stand in front of large crowds of Rotarians and talk about it. I was once one of those Rotarians who was reticent to publicly share my views, but once I heard similar concerns expressed by a (then) RI Director, I felt it gave me license to have a crack too. And I haven’t stopped since.

Michael McQueen is a social researcher, best-selling author and is National President of Professional Speakers Australia. And he’s a Rotarian too. He has spoken at the International Assembly before District Governors Elect, numerous Rotary conferences, and produced a DVD set on “Engaging the Next Generation of Rotarians”. I have the DVDs and two of his books. He is a leading authority on Generation Y, and his presentations on where Rotary is headed and the opportunities before us are nothing short of extraordinary. I had the pleasure of spending 3 hours with Michael in a car recently, as I was asked to chauffeur him to a recent district conference. Now that is a conversation I will never forget.

So other than being internationally renowned and respected commentators on Rotary, what do they all have in common? Well, in the last two months I have been in the room where they were each key note speakers (at three separate Rotary events), and (amongst other things) they have all said pretty much the exact same thing about modernising Rotary and attracting a new generation of Rotarians. I will paraphrase, “Forget trying to change old clubs, start new clubs.”

I remember at a Rotary membership seminar back in about 2008, a conversation at morning tea with some of my fellow immediate past presidents. They were keen to start a new Rotary club in the area of our clubs with a specific focus on young members. My reaction was that surely we can all work to bring about change in our own Rotary clubs, to make them more attractive to a younger audience, and I denounced the idea. It probably took me about six months to realise I was wrong. At the time my club was going through a phase of removing Rotary rituals from meetings, and I was confident it would lead to a more attractive environment for younger members, but the stampede never came. For at least half of my 18 plus years in Rotary, I've been the youngest member of my club by a fair margin. We have from time to time recruited younger members, but invariably they don’t seem to fully engage, and eventually leave.

I'm not suggesting that it’s impossible for someone under 30 to fit in with a group predominantly in their 60s and 70s, but it’s not easy. The bigger problem I suspect is that the lifestyle and demands on today’s average 30 year old are completely incompatible with the culture and expectations of many of our Rotary clubs.

I have spoken at length recently about my concerns that Rotary is too meeting-centric and needs to focus more on service. We now have an opportunity as a result of recent Council on Legislation changes to completely shake things up, and offer a new style of Rotary club that will better complement the millennial lifestyle.

But often this comment is just flicked around as if to suggest that starting a new Rotary club is easy peasy. I can tell you from personal experience, it is not. I have now been working on chartering the Rotary Club of Seaford for well over 12 months, and it is a constant challenge. The requirement for a minimum of 20 members to charter is a real sticking point, and one of the challenges is keeping the list of interested parties engaged and enthusiastic whilst the search for new members continues.

But here’s what keeps me going. It’s that light at the end of the tunnel. I've often suggested, and even blogged, that district leadership is akin to leading horses to water that aren't always thirsty. But there have already been so many rewards from this project, and the prospect of a new, modern and flexible club which shatters the traditional Rotary club mould is indeed alluring. And when these three luminaries have all suggested it's the way forward, I know I'm on the right track. New Rotary clubs are not always going to fill geographic voids. Sometimes diversity voids are worth addressing too.

Dead Horses by the Waterhole

Can district leaders effect change in Rotary?

At the time of writing this blog, our district governors elect were attending the International Assembly in San Diego, USA, in preparation for their approaching year at the helm. This event was once a closed shop, but thanks to the internet, anyone interested can follow the speeches and even download transcripts within minutes of the presenters walking off stage. For those prepared to look, there are some truly extraordinary online resources available to help clubs with membership initiatives.

One such presentation was by Australia’s own Michael McQueen, a presenter and author who I remain unambiguously impressed with (view the presentation here). His extraordinary insights into our organisation’s battle with relevance should be required viewing for all Rotarians. In his address he quoted Paul Harris who once said “If Rotary hopes to advance its aims, it must be evolutionary always, and at times revolutionary”, and followed up by asking “As those of you who are at the helm of this organisation, will you be the evolutionary and even the revolutionary leaders that your clubs and your districts are crying out for? I sincerely hope you will, because make no mistake - the future of Rotary will depend on it.” He delivered essentially the same presentation last year to our current district governors, who he also asked to be evolutionary and revolutionary leaders.

So this all has me wondering for how long we’ve been asking and how long have we been dependent upon our district governors and other district leaders to be agents of change, because our founder’s hopes for “at all times evolutionary” have clearly not been met, and as for “at times revolutionary”… Tell him he’s dreamin’.

To be fair, I’ve seen some good examples of positive change at district administration level in my own and other districts. Credit where it’s due, the changes in training methodology, content and delivery have bordered on revolutionary in my own district. But real, meaningful and consistent change at club level (the type required to turn around our membership fortunes) has been very rare.

District governors no doubt want desperately to leave their districts in a better place than where they found it, but their success in that mission relies heavily on the drive, energy and leadership of a band of club presidents, who in turn are reliant on rank-and-file Rotarians in club land.

One of the great ironies in questioning the seemingly catatonic pace of change in our organisation is that many regular Rotarians feel that Rotary leadership at district and higher levels is deliberately retarding change. It is my experience however, having served in senior district roles for the last seven years, that the complete opposite is true. I have found overwhelmingly that district leaders are very keen for clubs to innovate and show initiative, and will even turn a blind eye toward clubs that dare fiddle with our precious Rotary rules. The messages filtering down from the highest levels of the organisation tacitly back up that stance. It is in fact conservative elements within clubs that are holding back innovation and flexibility (and ultimately growth), not district or Evanston.

It took me a while to realise it, but leadership positions at district level are predominantly about leading horses to water. I have personally delivered a number of presentations to presidents elect at PETS, and am always encouraged by the will in the room to effect change in their respective clubs. I’ve even been known to egg them on, but invariably this enthusiasm gets beaten down by the week-to-week demands of driving the presidency bus, and even the most modest of planned changes rarely get implemented. So if presidents find it hard to effect change at club level, where in theory, most members are rowing in a similar direction, how likely is it that district governors will be successful in effecting change across a district of autonomous clubs?

If I was asked what my key objectives were as District Membership chair, they would obviously be to see more members recruited and retained. That’s a no brainer. But I can’t personally recruit and retain members for every club, so my strategy has been to provide club leaders with the resources they need to make their clubs attractive and promote their work. These are made available in a number of ways: membership seminars, blogs, Facebook, training, PETS, websites, club visits and even tailored plans for clubs – for those interested, anyway.

We are lucky to live in an age where the sharing of ideas across the world has never been easier, and for many years I have been collecting good membership initiatives from all over the Rotary world together with ideas from corporations and organisations outside of Rotary. I feel confident that our district membership committee can deliver genuine assistance to clubs in need, and has the resources to help clubs work their way through any membership challenge, but Rotarians in club land have to ask for help, and be prepared to act on proven advice. Meaningful change WILL produce meaningful results, but discussing change will achieve nothing.

So back to the original question - Can District leaders effect change in Rotary? Only if horses are prepared to drink once led to the water. Regretfully, too many horses die of thirst with hooves still wet from the waterhole.

Taboo Topics in Rotary

"You can’t talk about Religion or Politics in Rotary"

I’ve heard that comment bandied about the place, and it’s had me scratching my head. Just to set the record book straight, there is no such rule. We do have rules about adopting political positions, with good reason. Our ability to be first responders with international aid such as Shelterbox depends on us remaining a non-political and secular organisation. But some members have a knack of conflating the two issues of “taking a political position” and “discussing politics”.

I have embedded below (unedited) the extract on politics from our Manual of Procedure. The extract clearly points out what we mustn’t do, but it also points out what we must do. 

Politics
RI and its member clubs refrain from issuing partisan political statements. Rotarians are prohibited from adopting statements with a view to exerting any pressure on governments or political authorities. However, it is the duty of Rotarians
1) In their clubs, to keep under review political developments in their own communities and throughout the world insofar as they affect service to their vocations and communities as well as the pursuit of the Rotary objective of world understanding and peace. They are expected to seek reliable information through balanced programs and discussions so that members can reach their own conclusions after a fair, collective examination of the issues.
2) Outside their clubs, to be active as individuals in as many legally constituted groups and organizations as possible to promote, not only in words but through exemplary dedication, awareness of the dignity of all people and the respect of the consequent human rights of the individual. (89-134, RCP2.100.)

That’s right, far from prohibiting discussion, our Manual of Procedure asks us to discuss these topics!

So, where did we ever get this idea that discussions on politics and religion were taboo in Rotary? This is a societal convention, not a Rotary convention. Obviously these are hot button topics where people hold deeply seated views and open discussion can cause conflict. So it’s easier to stifle debate. But aren't we above that in Rotary? If one’s beliefs cannot withstand the scrutiny of others, are they really worth holding?

The secret of course, is respect. Surely intelligent community citizens can hold conflicting views and still respect each other. Diversity has always been a cornerstone of Rotary membership. There’s a reason a club’s membership base cannot be all butchers. We need the bakers and the candle stick makers as well. We depend on cultural diversity, as we depend on diversity in age and gender amongst our ranks. We cannot demand diversity in our membership and expect conformity amongst our views.

If Rotary is to grow its capacity as an agent for effective change, peace and conflict resolution and the lifting of the standard of life for the world’s disadvantaged, it surely relies on a membership base that is prepared to discuss the tough issues.

The next generation of Rotarians are more likely to wear their political views on their sleeves, and if we are to engage them in our membership, we had better be prepared to include these “taboo” topics in our conversation. We can’t use catchphrases like “Join the Conversation” with our fingers crossed behind our backs hoping that the conversation is not awkward.

Sadly, it is also becoming increasingly difficult to have mature conversations about religion, but it needn't be. Respect is again the key. I was recently at a Rotary Christmas dinner where a totally appropriate and respectful Christian Christmas message was delivered. But the speaker herself (a Salvation Army envoy) indicated that she was wary of raising religion in Rotary. I didn't have a problem with it, and I'm an atheist, so I would hope no-one else would be uncomfortable.

It’s time to embrace our differences, stop worrying about stepping on egg shells and get on with the job of making the world a better place. There will always be differences of opinion in Rotary – in fact there must be. Last year my own club lost a Rotary legend, Keith Walter, a member of 45+ years. He was someone who I had an enormous level of respect for, but he was often outspoken at meetings if he felt we weren't doing the right thing. Over the years, we had a number of disagreements, particularly with regard to change in the organisation. But I can distinctly remember after every meeting where differing views were expressed, Keith would come up to me (or the member in question), shake me by the hand and say, “Well done, that was a good conversation.” And we would continue on our way as good friends. Respectful dialogue - now that’s what Rotary is all about!

How Flexible is Your Club?

In my last blog I suggested Rotary needed to focus more on service, and less on meetings. It’s amazing how many times a conversation leads me to start blogging again, and I feel compelled to produce a sequel to that last blog.

In the process of trying to create a new Rotary club in Seaford, I have put a lot of effort into seeking out a team of community minded individuals to form its initial membership base. I have just had a conversation with a wonderful young woman who has an amazing drive and dedication to work with her local community and help to make it a better place, and she can clearly see that Rotary provides a method by which she can achieve her goals. In my eyes, she will make a fabulous Rotarian. She has already attended a few of our casual meetings, and is committed to remaining involved. She has even identified other potential members for us. But she has just advised me that she is really struggling to make meetings on the day and time we are currently holding them.

To a traditional Rotary club, that would probably mean the end of any chance of recruiting her as a member. Fortunately for me, I'm not trying to build a traditional Rotary club. The club I want to build will not rely on meeting at the same time, on the same day, in the same place every week. In fact the way we meet will probably not look anything like a traditional Rotary meeting.

In my capacity as District 9520 Membership Chair, I have been asked on a number of occasions what my thoughts are on clubs meeting fortnightly, rather than weekly. I happen to know that there are clubs already working this way, and it has saved them from annihilation. In a perfect world, the ideal situation is for every club to be active and healthy and meeting weekly, but we don’t live in a perfect world, and that’s why Rotary is here. Whilst the Standard Rotary Club Constitution DOES demand weekly meetings, it also allows for (via the Club Bylaws) meetings on varying days and times, and at different venues. I commented on this in my last blog so I won’t go over the same ground again, but my basic premise is that if your club is holding a BBQ at Bunnings on the weekend, call it a meeting.

Rotary appears half pregnant on this and other similar meeting and attendance issues. Commencing in 2007, RI introduced a number of pilot schemes where 200 “lucky” clubs worldwide (out of a total of 35,000) were chosen to trial more flexible meeting and membership initiatives. I wish I had a buck for every seminar I've attended, speech I've heard, article I've read where Rotarians have been told their clubs need to be more flexible, but by the way, we mustn't break the rules. I've also been lucky enough to see the reports on the outcomes of these trials, and every one of them resulted in considerable membership growth (including a higher representation of female members and members under the age of 50) over and above that of the global norm. The results were in. Flexibility resulted in positive membership outcomes. One might have thought the RI board, having seen these positive results would be chaffing at the bit to allow more flexibility across the board. Not if it has to get past our Council on Legislation!

So that brings me back to the issue I have with the lady who would make a great Rotarian, but struggles to make regular meetings on week nights. The main reason I wanted to write this blog, is that I happen to know there are THOUSANDS of great people out there in exactly the same boat. People who would make fabulous members of YOUR Rotary club, but simply cannot make regular meetings. Maybe I can’t tell you what YOU should do, and how YOUR club should act, but I can tell you what I'm going to do, because when you’re starting a new club, you don’t have to be constrained by the way an existing club has always done things.

Along with my colleagues at the Provisional Rotary Club of Seaford, I am personally going to do everything I can to keep this lady informed, involved and welcome. We will be holding occasional meetings on weekends, because we don’t have to hold all of our meetings on a week night in the same venue. We will hold social events, service projects and fundraising initiatives, all of which we will classify as meetings, and she will receive a personal invitation to each one. In other words, we will value what she can give, when she can give it and vary our meetings to suit the increasingly busy and complex lives of the members of our community. And if the Council on Legislation hasn't been able to catch up in 20 years’ time, I won’t be losing any sleep over it.  

Maybe your club can try a little flexibility too.

Less Meetings, More Doing.

A party without cake is just a meeting. 

There was a time when we all thought that the Earth was the centre of the universe, and that everything orbited around it. Galileo got into an awful amount of trouble for daring to suggest that the Earth in fact orbited around the sun. He was even forced to recant his theory, and spent much of his life under house arrest.

In our enlightened times we now know better, but in the sixteenth century one could understand that geocentric view. In a similar way, we seem to have meetings at the centre of our Rotary universe, and everything seems to revolve around them. Rotary is a service organisation, yet despite the rhetoric, we do not demand service of our members, we demand that they attend meetings. If they can’t attend our meetings, we expect them to attend another club's meeting. As a last resort, if they cannot find a meeting to attend, we’re prepared to let it fly if they can actually do some service, and we call that a makeup. Am I alone in thinking that in our Rotary universe we have our priorities a little out of whack? Fortunately, our attendance rules have become somewhat relaxed in recent years, as we have come to the realization that turning up every week can be challenging. But the meeting is still very much at the centre of our Rotary universe.

In the same way that we now clearly understand that our planets orbit the sun, is it time that we shift our priorities in the Rotary universe? I would like to think that the Rotary universe of the future will have service at its centre, around which everything else revolves. I wonder if Rotarians in 20 or 30 years’ time will look back on the Rotary of today, and realise our meeting centric model had outlived its time.

In his two part DVD presentation, "Attracting the Next Generation of Rotarians", Michael McQueen suggested, "There were very few of you who were staring at a blank wall, with a whole lot of spare time thinking 'I wish I could go somewhere where they fined me if I was late, and we sang a song at the beginning, and we ate some food that wasn't awesome. I wish we could find a place like that.' You joined Rotary because there was some sort of outcome, some purpose that you were passionate about and you realised Rotary was a way of getting there. A way of producing that outcome."

A recent survey of young professional non-Rotarians conducted by RI found that Rotary has an image problem, and it’s hurting our ability to attract the next generation of Rotarians. Younger professionals were not interested in traditional ways of organizing as a group. They were turned off by weekly meetings, plated meals, and ceremonial songs. They are time poor, so the time they give must be effective. It's worth bearing in mind too that the largest cost of being a Rotarian lies with paying for a weekly meal (plus raffle, plus sergeant etc), and this is most certainly affecting our capacity to recruit and retain.

But so much of our identity lies with our meetings. If we can only manage to somehow put less reliance on meetings, and more emphasis on the work we do, we can perhaps begin to challenge some of those perceptions.

For some reason as recruiters, we tend to get particularly excited if we finally get a prospect to attend a meeting. We feel that we've got to first base, because they've now seen our club at its very best. If you asked 100 Rotarians about their best experience in Rotary, not many would suggest something that happened at a meeting. Admittedly, I have attended some awesome meetings, but I've also attended some duds. First impressions are everything, and if we really want our prospective members to see Rotary at its best, they need to see us out and about in the community doing our work and get involved in service. If we continue to push our meetings as the epitome of Rotary, we're in strife.

But I hear you asking, "What about that requirement of RI that we meet weekly?" Yep, I can't argue with that, but no-one said we have to meet weekly in the same hotel, at the same time, on the same day, for a "meeting". Maybe it's time to consider a new model. Sure, we might like to occasionally have a formal meeting over an enjoyable meal with a quality speaker, but we can also use our projects and fundraising initiatives as "meetings". We can meet casually over a coffee in a cafe, or over pizza delivered to a member's home. The sausage sizzle at Bunnings can in fact take the place of a meeting, so can that tree planting project. Clubs don't have to meet in person either. E-clubs meet using online video conferencing tools such as Skype™ or Gotomeeting™. Maybe RI leadership could meet online more frequently and save us rank-and-file Rotarians the cost of their international airfares!

As a long time member of a traditional Rotary club, I feel that face-to-face contact is a very important part of my Rotary experience. But I'm also a district leader whose commitments mean regularly missing out on my own club's meetings, and I have to admit that I miss catching up with my fellow members if I don't see them in a while. There are however other ways to achieve that contact than over a rump steak with chips and gravy on a Tuesday night. Tomorrow's Rotary needs to accommodate ways for people to meet that aren't meetings.

Taking the Class out of our Classification System

Rotary International President K.R. Ravindran’s speech to District Governors Elect at the International Assembly in San Diego earlier this year included the following quote:

“I believe that we have to find a way to bring back the fundamentals that built our organization: the emphasis on high ethical standards in all aspects of our lives, and the classification system that encourages a diversity of expertise in each club.”

I have always believed the intent of our classification system was to ensure diversity within our ranks. So I'm not about to question the intent of our classification system, but I am about to question the way it is often interpreted and applied when recruiting members into our clubs, some of which hold up our classification system as some sort of benchmark, and even a barrier to entry.

The average millennial (born between 1977 and 1997, now aged between 18 & 38) is expected to have 15 – 20 jobs over their working life. Can you comprehend how absurd our classification system

must appear to our next generation of Rotarians?

I want to introduce a term that I will be using in recruitment conversations this year, and that term is “Vocational Diversity”. The way I see it, our classification system seems to identify a horizontal plane of professions into which Rotary wants us pigeon-holed. Picture if you will, a line of professions: Doctor, Architect, Teacher, Retailer, Public Servant, Accountant, Police Officer. It’s true that many of us do already fit into one of these or similar professional groups, or what Rotary calls “classifications”. 

But now I want you to think of a vertical line, which better describes the stage you are at in your career, than the career itself. That line may include student, apprentice, employee, supervisor, manager, CEO, self-employed and retiree. It might even include “stay-at-home parent”. We also have representatives of all of these groups within our ranks, but the Rotary classification system struggles to cope with this method of identification, which is why I think “Vocational Diversity” is a more contemporary concept. I see the classification system solely as one of horizontal diversity, but if we want to grow into a truly diverse organisation, I feel we need to be far more accommodating of diversity on that vertical plane as well.

I recently conducted a club membership survey across the district, and included a question on the employment status of members. The result is the pie chart pictured. One of the myths we happily peddle is that Rotary is an organisation of CEOs and powerful business people. The statistics would suggest in fact that we are an organisation of retirees, although it’s reasonable to assume that some of those retirees were once from big business.

Retirees are an extremely valuable group within our organisation. They have more spare time to contribute and the life experience to act as mentors to our younger members, but they often lack the current business and professional networks to further our recruitment efforts. Executives, CEOs and managers of big business seem to lack that available time to contribute to Rotary. Perhaps the best lesson to learn from this is that rather than targeting specific groups such as executives and “big business”, we would be better off targeting the sort of people that will make the best Rotarians, i.e. recruit on personality type and motivation, rather than employment status.

I would like to leave you with a quote from another organisation that we Rotarians could learn from: “We define our leaders by the way we think, not by our title.”