2. MEMBERSHIP AND FISCAL STATUS
ASA Membership in the 1990s
Overall membership levels were fairly steady around 13,000 members throughout the 1990s. The student membership category was the major growth category throughout the 1990s, although retention rates for students were lower from year-to-year than for the other membership categories. (Retention rates represent the percentage of members from year-to-year who chose to renew membership.) Regular membership declined somewhat, but retention rates remained high (over 80 percent) during this period. Records show that this rate was considered high when benchmarked against other professional associations.
The ASA Executive Office mounted a vigorous campaign to attract new members to the Association, particularly at times when membership levels were low. Outreach efforts focused on members slow to renew, as well as to members of regional and aligned associations such as the American Association of University Professors, and sections of the American Public Health Association. Members who did not renew their membership were targeted in special personalized campaigns using emails, faxes, and phone calls.
Profile of ASA Members and Minority Participation in ASA
Membership in 2001
The Association began to collect demographic data systematically on its membership in the early 1980s (see Chapter 1). With the implementation of NOAH—a dedicated database management and information system—in the early 1990s, ASA’s capacity to report on membership improved significantly, even though non-reporting of certain key information (e.g., race and ethnicity) still presented challenges in related analyses. Reporting up-to-date information on members became even more accessible on an ongoing basis (see following section on Information Technology) after the installation of the Windows based e-NOAH in 2001, but extracting information for research purposes from the NOAH database remained complex and required customized services. Such advances however, made possible generating reports of the membership along various dimensions for administrative and research purposes as required.
A report on ASA membership in 2001 was prepared under the direction of Roberta Spalter-Roth, Director of the Research Program on the Discipline and Profession, and published in Footnotes (January 2002:8–9) and on the ASA homepage. The report indicates that ASA had a total of 12,365 members at the end of the 2001 membership year (see Appendix 12 for membership counts by year). Counts in 2001 were overall lower than the years before or after due to an expected attrition in membership associated with the 2001 dues restructuring and due to the comparatively lower attendance at the Annual Meeting in Anaheim. In 2001, most members (53 percent) were in the regular membership category (i.e., those who have full voting rights), followed by student members (30 percent), associates (11 percent), and emeritus members (6 percent).
Although the demographic data (based on the Membership Application/Renewal forms) must be considered with some caution because many members do not provide information on key characteristics, they do provide some indication of the overall composition of the membership in 2001 (see Appendix 13, Tables 3 and 4). Data on the regular members category only show that men were still the majority (55 percent) of these members. Of regular members who reported race/ethnicity, about 80 percent were non-Hispanic white, 5 percent reported their race/ethnicity as African American, 5 percent as Asian American, 3 percent as Hispanic/Latino, and less than 1 percent as Native American. The average age for all regular members was 51 years, and the modal age was 54. For most regular members 85 percent reported a doctorate, 12 percent a master’s level degree, and only 3 percent a bachelors degree as their highest degree.
Most ASA regular members in 2001 who reported their employment status were employed and employed full-time (82 percent). Of these, 80 percent were employed in institutions of higher education; 14 percent worked in federal, state, or local governments, or not-for-profit organizations; and 3 percent either owned businesses that employed others or were independent consultants.
The overwhelming majority reported an academic or teaching appointment (73 percent), about 13 percent had a research position and about 7 percent had an administrative position. The remaining 7 percent were distributed among postdoctoral fellowships, applied, non-research positions, writing/editorial positions, and other work positions.
These data showed significant differences between men and women in income levels, with men earning more than women at the top income categories. Asian Americans, Hispanic/Latinos and Native Americans also were less likely to be in the top income categories and more likely to be in the bottom category.
Trends for the future demographic distribution of ASA members can be seen in looking at the student member category. Relatively large proportions of student members in 2001 were female (65 percent female, 35 percent male). Also, large proportions of non-whites in the total membership were students, although the large non-response rate on this data element suggests that these data should be viewed with caution.
ASA Membership Trends
Although there have been changes in definitions of membership and income categories over the past quarter century (and also fairly high rates of non-response on key items on each survey), some estimates of trends in membership on key demographic variables are possible. Comparison of breakdowns on gender and race/ethnicity show a significant increase in women members since 1981.
Looking over all categories of membership, women were 33 percent of the members in 1982, 41 percent in 1992, and 52 percent in 2001. Minorities made up less than 10 percent of the membership in 1981, about 15 percent in 1991, and about 20 percent in 2001 (see Appendix 13).
Participation Trends by Women and Minorities, 1982–2002
Following directives of the ASA Council in the early 1980s, the Association also began to collect data on participation of minorities and women in certain areas of its governance (i.e., ASA Council/elected positions, committees, presidential appointments, section councils, journal editorial boards). Appendix 13, Table 5 contains summary data of trends in participation by minorities and women in these areas since 1982. Data for these analyses were compiled from 1982 data presented by Paul Williams in a December 1982 Footnotes article, and from the NOAH database for 1992 and 2002 governance activities (prepared for this report). ASA members who serve on councils, editorial boards, in committees, and task forces generally report their race and ethnicity on their membership forms (non-reporting rates on any relevant data element was seven percent or less).
Overall women and minorities have increased their share of positions in all areas of ASA governance over the past quarter century. Minorities comprised 6 percent of Council in 1982, 25 percent in 1992, and 32 percent in 2002. Similar patterns occurred for minorities with respect to representation on constitutional/elected committees (no representation in 1982, 21 percent in 1992, and 35 percent in 2002); in Council, presidential appointments (20 percent in 1982, 21 percent in 1992, and 31 percent in 2002); on editorial boards (6 percent in 1982, 7 percent in 1992, and 23 percent in 2002); and elected section officers (6 percent in 1982, 13 percent in 1992, and 18 percent in 2002).
The analysis of data at these points in time show that women also have increased their representation in all areas, except on Council in 2002. Women, however, made up more than half of all ASA Councils each year from 1991 to 1999. Women now comprise more than one-half of all elected/constitutional committees, and elected section councils, and nearly half of editorial boards and presidential/Council appointments. The Committee on the Status of Women in Sociology presented detailed findings on these and related issues in its 2004 Final Report to Council (2004 Report of the American Sociological Association’s Committee on the Status of Women in Sociology, Final Report , October 22, 2004:24–27).
Budgets and Finances
Audit reports indicate that ASA was financially solid during the 1990s, generally running budget surpluses each year. Investment portfolios reflected the overall market trends, and showed healthy growth throughout the period, with a slight decline as the markets turned downward in the late 1990s. At year-end 2000, the revenue of the ASA was $5,134,720 and expenditures $4,891,431. Net assets stood at $8,912,764 (2000 Audit in Footnotes , September 2001:16–17).
Investment Portfolio and ASA Reserve Funds
In August 1992, based on a review of the investment strategy over recent years and an examination of a number of investment firms, the Committee on the Executive Office and Budget (EOB) under Secretary Beth Hess decided to change from the Seattle Office of Oppenheimer & Co. to Fiduciary Trust International, Inc. as the manager of ASA accounts. Premised on the value of periodic reexamination of investment management and accordingly based on a resolution of EOB in June 1996, a Subcommittee (consisting of Secretary Teresa Sullivan, Chair, Neil Smelser, David Featherman, and Felice Levine, ex officio) reviewed long-term financial management and investment firms, including Fiduciary International. The EOB Subcommittee scheduled meetings with four firms on December 9, 1996. After the interviews, EOB concluded that Fiduciary Trust International provided a better understanding of how ASA guidelines were being used in handling the ASA portfolio, and that ASA should continue with the current investment firm, but closely monitor the firm’s performance and strategy.
A further review of investment policy, asset allocation strategy, and investment management firms was undertaken by Secretary Florence Bonner, Executive Officer Felice Levine, and Deputy Executive Officer Phoebe Stevenson on behalf of EOB in 1999. One impetus was an interest in determining how best to handle the net revenue from sale of the headquarters building at 1722 N Street. Given the shakier state of the economy and the passage of years since the last review, EOB sought this review, which included an independent assessment of the ASA investment portfolio and investment strategies by Robert W. Everett, an investment advisor and Assistant Professor of Finance at the Johns Hopkins University.
At its July 1999 meeting, EOB considered the performance of Fiduciary International, the investment strategy for each of the ASA funds, and the wisdom of a value versus growth investment strategy—the latter being ASA’s long-term approach. Everett joined the EOB for this discussion.
As set forth in the July 1999 minutes, in January 2000, EOB identified a set of guidelines relating to the Building Fund, decided to continue to purchase only investment grade bonds, clarified policies related to fair labor practices, and specified general parameters for asset allocation. The EOB recognized that the use of a value investment strategy might provide ASA with possible diversification. EOB urged the ASA Secretary and the Executive Officer to interview value managers and potentially solicit proposals that might apply to the Building Fund only. In January 2000, EOB considered value versus growth strategies and proposals for each. EOB concluded that the Building Fund should remain with Fiduciary International and selected an asset allocation that EOB thought would maximize the opportunity for necessary growth in this Fund.
Socially Responsible Investments
An investment policy was defined by Council in 1987 and is monitored by EOB. Two sets of guidelines were articulated at that time (see Chapter 1). During the 1990s several modifications were made to the 1987 policy, such that social responsibility guidelines were further specified as: (1) No funds shall be invested in companies whose economic activity is primarily engaged in defense contracting; and (2) No funds shall be invested in companies with ‘notorious’ anti-labor policies, deficient records on worker health and safety, or firms whose policies have been prejudicial to minorities. The ban on investing in companies directly involved in or doing business in South Africa was lifted in November 1993. Guidelines were also established for allocation, divestiture, and monitoring of ASA’s portfolio.
In December 1997, Council member Joe Feagin raised the issue of proactively pursuing socially responsible investments, but Council members noted that it is easier to craft policies on what not to invest in as opposed to what to invest in. Council also pointed out that ASA would need to decide whether to have categories of industries which to avoid. This issue was raised again in June 1998, but the consensus reached in EOB was that ASA “should not go further down the path to more restrictive (socially responsible) guidelines. Other than the steps already taken (e.g., vote proxies for the companies where ASA owns stock), EOB recommended no further changes in ASA’s investment policy.” (EOB Minutes, June 1998 and January 1999)
Development Campaign
In 1998, when he was President-Elect of the ASA, Alejandro Portes convened a committee to explore the possibilities of a long-range development campaign for the Association. The goal of such an effort as envisioned by Portes was to “put in place a long-term fundraising effort that would enable the Association to undertake important programmatic work on behalf of the discipline. He thought that a fundraising strategy [planned as part of the Centennial commemoration in 2005] to promote and advance ‘Sociology for the New Century’ would be the right legacy to leave for sociology and for ASA.” (Council Minutes, February 2001)
Council supported Portes’ interests in moving in this direction and the initial explorations being pursued. Other issues, in particular the controversy about the ASR editorship (see later discussion in chapter), deferred moving ahead on a campaign in 1999. Though Council took several subsequent actions to activate such a Campaign through 2001 and Executive Officer Levine signaled an interest in working on building such a reservoir of resources to advance the discipline, this activity was not a priority in the way that it was for Portes. Council tabled the idea on August 20, 2002 on the recommendation of EOB due to the weak state of the economy as well as consideration that such a campaign linked “to the centennial might not be the best approach.”
Proceed to next part of this chapter
