The voting electorate grew from approximately 7,600 in 2015 to 8,000 members this year. But the percentage that voted remained exactly the same, at 16%, despite pleas from some candidates (including myself) to fill in your ballot and post it. If any non voters would like to comment on this – I would love to get their views- and to find out from them what would help them to vote next time.

Support for the current Board is eroding

Last year the incumbent candidate, Christine Craik won the race for National Vice President with 59% of the vote. This year the incumbent, Maria Merle, was defeated in the National Vice President race, gaining only 45% of the vote.

Congratulations To Marie Claire. Her outstanding leadership as well as her skills in policy analysis and policy development will bring a much needed fresh perspective to the Board.

Last year in the race for two Director positions the incumbents gained 62% of the vote. This year in the Director race for 3 positions, the incumbents gained 56.6% of the vote.

Seven candidates contested the race. The first two incumbents won in clear cut fashion, with the third scrambling over the line. (See table below)

Congratulations to the all winners and losers. A contested election is a sign of organisational health.

Voting system changed to favour incumbents and reduce the potential for diversity

Students of AASW politics will know that the in the 2015 elections the voting system was optional preferential. This enabled David Gould to win a Director position on preferences.

This year the Board changed the voting system to first past the post. (Optional preferential is widely considered to be the most democratic system, because it ensures fairness and diversity).  The four independents got 43.4% of the vote. It is very likely that one of the independents could and should have won the third position in a preferential voting system.

It is frankly disgraceful that the Board changed the voting system.

No debate or discussion between candidates- as usual

The election was conducted as usual with no debate or discussion between candidates. Some candidates answered questions in a couple of forums that were seen by a handful of members. Kudos to those all those members who took the time to ask questions of candidates.

Only a few hundred would have looked at the candidate statements on the web.

What were the candidates policies? And why do policies matter?

Boards have two main functions; Firstly making sure that everything that is done on behalf of members is legal, ethical, and efficient, and secondly driving the organisation in the right direction by ensuring that everything that is done helps to achieve the long term mission and vision.

And so a candidates policies ( what they would like the AASW to do) are a critical component of how will achieve its mission.

All candidates devoted considerable space to describing their professional background, qualifications, committees served on, interests and experience. Most outlined the vision they had for the AASW. Words like “strong voice”, active engagement, action on social justice, wholistic, equitable, evidence based, diverse representative, vibrant, responsive, excellence in professional practice, inclusivity, leadership, and collaborative all got a strong workout.

The incumbent Board members also wrote about their track record in increasing the membership, SWOT, building finances, constitutional changes, and strengthening the AASW voice on child protection. Part of their pitch was an appeal to continue the program of “reform” they had begun, but with little or no detail about what further work this might practically entail.

In analyzing the candidate statements, I have tried to infer as fairly as I could the policies of each candidate. To be considered a policy in my mind, the statement had to involve some specific future action, not just a declaration of what the candidate stands for. Below is a list, by candidate, of all the policies I could find.

1.  Investing more in research and working with our academic colleagues to strengthen research expertise in social work
2. Accrediting a larger range of specialist practice and post grad qualifications that support this
3. Drive the strategic development of social policy working with social work experts in key policy areas
4. Further develop innovative approaches for tapping into the expertise of members
5. Further develop the profession’s policy profile

1.  Committed to the campaign for the national registration of social workers
2. Build membership to 15,000
3. Increase range of flexible CPD options for rural and regional members
4. More national symposiums and local branch events
5. Strongly support the new student council
6. Ensure membership fees remain affordable
7. Pursue national registration

1.  The determined pursuit of registration
2. Strong representation for rural social workers

1.  Continue the registration campaign
2. Follow up on the changes required upon the completion of the ASWEAS review

1.  Bed down the strategies we have put in place (did not specify which strategies needed further work)

1.  Pledge to cover the area of front line clinical practice and liaise with members and colleagues about these matters

1. A personal AASW web page for every member who wishes to have one. Facebook/Linkedin type networking features would enable ease of communication between members across the country
2. A national voluntary and comprehensive mentorship program available to all members
3. Sharing power and responsibility with the Branches
4. Build a longer term social justice agenda embedding our core commitments to equality of opportunity and social justice, in collaboration with trade unions, churches and consumer groups
5. The creation of an umbrella group of counseling associations and non-registered professions to strengthen ethical self-regulation
6. Working collaboratively with trade unions that cover our members to advocate for reasonable workloads and adequate supervision
7. Negotiating with employers to enshrine the AASW Code of Ethics as the professional standard for our work
8. Instigate a national summit of all stakeholders in social work education and social work employers to start collaboratively tackling issues of mutual concern
9. Supporting a treaty with our first peoples
10. Join the movement to divest from fossil fuels, and move AASW assets (bank accounts and super funds) into institutions that will invest our money ethically

1.  Advocate for registration of social work
2. Partnerships with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to ensure equitable outcomes for all

1. Continue to grow our organisation
2. Provide support and representation to the diverse practice groups that make up the AASW

 Next year?

Reading this list you might agree with me that policy is not necessarily a gamechanger in AASW elections!

it is worth noting that many candidates pledged their continuing support for the registration campaign. But readers of my blog would know better than most, that our representations to COAG are bound to fail, and it is only a matter of time until this will need to be acknowledged.

I await the day when the Board takes the members into its confidence and explains this.

The unfolding political scene of the next 12 months will be fascinating, both in our broader socio-economic fortunes and in AASW politics.

I will be standing for AASW Vice President in September 2017 and asking for your vote.

The current AASW Board has done much that is praiseworthy, including building financial reserves, developing SWOT, recruiting student members with a low cost introductory fee, promoting contemporary advanced practice via the revamped National Bulletin, as well as strong social justice advocacy particularly around asylum seekers

And yet there is a lot missing, both in how things could and should be done, as well as what needs to be achieved.

Beginning with how, there is no easy way for members who share interests to have an online conversation. Consequently some members have set up closed Facebook groups for this purpose. See for example Australian Social Work Changemakers https://www.facebook.com/groups/1486334714924119/

The AASW should be offering this kind of facility to all members on the AASW website.

Related to this deficit, are the flawed consultative processes within the AASW. Submissions are not routinely published, nor are there online forums where members can critically engage with each other around submissions, be they policy papers or reviews. The recent constitutional and governance changes and the ASWEAS review are cases in point.

Segments of members that are looking for a stronger voice within the AASW (eg, students and private practitioners) are being dealt with in silos; again because there are no forums where the rest of us can engage in the conversation.

The Board changed the voting system for AASW elections last year from first past the post to preferential, and this year promptly changed it back again. The membership was not consulted about either change. Worse –the preferential system is generally acknowledged as being fairer, through honoring diversity and minority opinion.

This is the road to a more disengaged and passive membership.

Turning to the what- a key element of the AASW vision is collaborative relationships with educational institutions, industry, government, client associations and the community.

This is an area of serious concern. We need to see a strong body of ringing endorsements and partnerships around shared concerns with any and all of these groups. So lets get serious. We must:

• Start self-regulating now, with or without government subsidy. Include the counseling associations as well as NASRHP under the self help umbrella,
• Reassess our futile attempts to gain registration through COAG, and be straight with the membership about the chances of ever achieving registration
• target inequality in our social justice campaigns and the toxic effects of unfettered free markets on the poor, via pay day lending and the deregulation of gambling and alcohol sales,
• do our bit for the global environment by making sure that the AASW divests any assets it may have in fossil fuels
• Support a treaty for our first peoples
• Lead a national summit of educators, employers, professional associations and community groups in our sector to develop an integrated vision of how to support and maintain quality social care

And if we want to improve internal membership engagement we should:

• implement a national voluntary and comprehensive mentorship program available to all members. This would give our junior and student members access to the rich knowledge and wisdom of our older members,
• Share power and responsibility with the Branches. This can be done through a funding model that funds programs and areas of responsibility, rather than our outdated capitation model.

There is so much to be done!

The incumbent candidates for the Board are resting on their track records and offering more of the same!

If you agree with my analysis -vote for the independent candidates in this election- including Marie-Claire Cheron Sauer, Jeanne Loraine and Mark Wilder.

Strategic Goal 1 is “to be innovators in knowledge, skills and actions for social workers”.

For this goal, the AASW lists eleven measures on which to judge its performance, three for accreditation reviews, seven for CPD, and one for coaching and mentoring.

The three university accreditation measures are,

1. 100% compliance with annual calendar of university reviews
   My comment- This a core function of the AASW, not an innovation or improvement!
2. Regular participation in forums with our stakeholders
   My comment- This is meaningless without specifics (what forums? What stakeholders?), and in any event a baseline expectation of any sensible organisation.
3. 80% satisfaction of framework with stakeholders including Heads of School, students, field educators, employers.
   My Comment- Well intentioned, but again meaningless without specifics. 80% of whom? About what?

The most important measure, the ASWEAS review is not mentioned. Sadly, the parameters of this review are, in my view, so limited that they nibbles around the edges of current practice, when genuine innovation is needed. If there have been submissions that are paradigm shifting, we may never know, because the AASW is (at this point) not publishing submissions.

The seven CPD strategy measures are,

1. Member consultations conducted by December 2014.
2. Employer consultations by June 2015.
   My comment- I would like to think that both these happened. If anyone can point me to the evidence, I will link to it and acknowledge it here.
3. Policy and initial curriculum developed by December 2014
4. National Office develop content and pilot SWOT program etc
5. Each Branch develop and pilot one CPD activity that contributes .. to SWOT content.
   My comment- The SWOT resources look good. Clearly a lot of work has gone into SWOT. Well done to all those involved. I hope the current survey results are made public so that we can a sense of membership views on how SWOT can be improved.
6. Three social work practice papers per year, which promote contemporary and advanced practice
   My comment- The AASW has done some excellent work in converting the Bulletin into serving this purpose. The issues devoted to Health and Leadership had high quality contributions from experts in the field.
7. One CPD partnership (with other professional organisation, private provider) developed by June 2015
   My comment- Am I the only member that feels uncomfortable about a CPD partnership with a private provider? Is it OK for a private firm to make a profit on our CPD needs when so many of our own members also provide training? Could we do more to build the capacity of our own members in training and marketing?

The one coaching and mentoring strategy is to,

1. Develop a policy paper and a model on coaching and mentoring by March 2015
   My comment- This is a crucial need which is now well overdue! We have a skewed membership of many over fifties and increasingly many students. There is not enough incentive for student members to swallow the massive increase in post graduation fees without a direct supportive link to a mentor/coach. Why is it taking so long?

The lack of progress on mentoring is a major gap. My overall rating on Strategic Goal 1-Six out of ten.

Strategic Goal 2 is “to a strong voice for social justice, relevant and engaged with stakeholders”.

For this goal, the AASW lists fourteen measures on which to judge its performance- four on social policy position papers and media strategy, one on CPD marketing, four on stakeholder engagement, and five on self-regulation.

The four social policy position/media strategy measures are,

1. Three Position papers and twelve Position Statements per year
   My comment- I doubt that anyone would be too concerned about the number of statements. Quality and relevance are the key issues. Our advocacy on refugee policy has been outstanding. And the quality of our other work is consistently good.
   In my view however, we must do more to comment on the rising tide of inequality in Australia. We have a strong grip on the inadequacy of welfare payments but, globalization, privatisation and unfettered free markets have led to an explosion in problem gambling, pay day lending, under employment of the unskilled, as well as rising costs for health and education and transport. The lack of robust response from the Labor party and other progressive organisations on these issues has left fertile ground for the rise of One Nation and other right wing groups.
2. Two press releases per month and two other type of publications
3. At least one publication in media outlet per month
4. At least weekly updates and promotion of AASW in social media
   My comment- The AASW is certainly improving its performance in this regard, but the website paradigm is ‘one to many’ with the exception of SWOT.

The networking in SWOT is limited to a few groups and is centrally controlled. The architecture of the software is more a classroom than a forum. The aims of these networks and number of members is often invisible. The network that interests me (Green Social Work) appears to be inactive. We should have our own internal social media.
I am proposing a Linkedin/Facebook type function for our members to communicate with each other on a ‘many to many’ basis. Logging in to the AASW website would give you immediate access to your own page should you wish to have one, and access to the pages of other members who agree to connect with you.

The one CPD marketing measure is,

1. At least one large employer to promote and purchase a package of SWOT CPD material
   My comment- The AASW sees this as a concrete measure of an improved reputation for high quality CPD. Whilst I have no problem with making a modest profit from our intellectual property, I do not see it as a measure of quality. Our members will be the best judge.

The four measures on stakeholder engagement are as follows,

1. Strategy paper by March 2015
   My comment- I have no idea what this refers to?
2. Conduct a member survey by June 2015
   My comment- I cannot find any reference to this on the website?
3. To ensure representation at all Heads of Schools meetings
   My comment- Seriously? Turning up at a meeting to which we have a standing invitation is not a strategic measure!
4. To develop an active project partnership with the Heads of School group
   My comment- If this happened, I would love to hear what it is.

The five measures on self regulation are,

1. At least 3 employers in any state or territory actively recruit social work with the accredited trade mark
   My comment- This seems to me to show a fundamental misunderstanding of how employers operate in the human services labor market. I would be surprised if this measure is ever achieved. If I am wrong- please let me know and I will post it here.
2. To have 10% of members using the collective trademark by 2014.
   My comment- Given our significant membership in private practice, this exercise in branding may have reached the target. Can anybody confirm?
3. Actively contribute to the development of the National Alliance of Self Regulating Health Professionals (NASRHP) model
   My comment- It is one thing to develop a model, but the implementation of the model seems to be stalled because the Federal Government is not prepared to fund it. As I have repeatedly said we should proceed with this model as soon as possible, funding it from within the participating associations, including the counseling associations.
   The AASW is still pursuing the cause of registration via the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) Health Ministers meeting. As I have discussed at length elsewhere, this is futile. Unfortunately the AASW has committed another $10,000 to the campaign.
4. Complete NZ Mutual Recognition Agreement by July 2014.
   My comment- I am certainly in favour of ease of movement between countries. This recognition is done and dusted, driven by overarching issues in the Australia/NZ relationship.
   It is worth noting that the many holders of 3 year degrees in NZ have caught a lucky break, given the extra requirements that the AASW puts on holders of 3 year degrees from any other country. NZ social work has long recognised both 3 and 4 year degrees, and is now transitioning to exclusively 4 yr degrees.
5. Active mutual recognition negotiations with one other country
   My comment- I have seen nothing about this. Can anyone help? Has the AASW chosen a country (or countries) to talk too? 

Summary for goal 2 on being a strong voice for social justice

Apart from developing and publicizing policy papers, I fail to see what the rest of these measures have to do with being a “strong voice for social justice”.

My overall rating for Strategic Goal 2- Five out of 10.

Strategic Goal 3 is “provide responsible governance and management of the AASW in partnership with Branches and National Committees”.

For this goal, the AASW lists nine measures on which to judge its performance; three for enhancing governance capability, three for having satisfied and engaged staff, and three for engagement between the Board, National Committees and Branches.

The three measures for enhancing governance and management are,

1. Publish reviewed and updated policy and procedures by October 2014
   Comment. I have written extensively on the governance review here on my blog. Sadly many members were not exposed to the full arguments against some of the AASW proposals, and would have been puzzled by the tense environment at the AGM.
   I cannot recall an instance in the past few years where the AASW has published submissions for any review on its website. This is fairly common in other organizations. It stimulates discussion and debate during the review period and it promotes the kind of transparency that the AASW ought to be embracing.
2. All Directors complete governance training within 6 months of election
   This is a baseline expectation of any sensible organisation. Nothing strategic about it.
3. Review the Risk Management Strategy quarterly
   Ditto point 2.

The three staff measures are: completing performance appraisals for all staff, offering professional development opportunities to all staff, and having annual staff surveys and acting on them.

Comment. Frankly these measure are so basic to any organisation, they do not merit the description of “strategic”.

The three measures for engagement between the Board, National Committees and Branches are,

1. Board to meet at least annually with Branch Presidents in conjunction with monthly teleconferences
   It is the content of meetings that may or may not be strategic- not the fact that meetings simply occur.
2. National Office to convene bi- annual meeting with Branch Managers
   Sounds worthy. Nothing strategic about it
3. Active liaison between National Committees and the Board
   I would hope so. (again – a standard expectation)

Summary

Is it just me? I cannot find any reference to National Committees on the website? The AASW used to publish details of National Committee membership, email addresses and terms of reference.
If there is a theme here it is the decline of transparency and accessibility. Each National Committee should have its own blog and publish drafts of policies and submissions for comment.
State and Territory Branches do not have a defined role or unique responsibilities within the AASW. Until this is sorted there won’t be much change.

As a NSW Branch Committee member, I have found the one-size fits all approach imposed by National Office on recruiting a Branch Professional Officer very frustrating. NSW has been without a professional officer for 8 months. Branches need the flexibility to determine needs locally and find local solutions.

My rating on Goal 3 is three out of ten

Strategic Goal 4 is “build a strong sustainable membership and equity base”.

For this goal, the AASW lists three measures on which to judge its performance.

The three measures for building a strong sustainable membership and equity base are,

1. To grow retained earnings by $300k per annum
2. Implement a cash management strategy
   Why can’t this strategy include ensuring we do not invest in funds that support fossil fuels?
3. Grow membership by 10% per annum
   Comment. There is no doubt that the AASW has done well in building savings and growing the membership. The Board should be commended on this.
   

Summary

The question now is- how to invest savings wisely to build for the future of the AASW?

And the related question- how are we to retain and sustain the newer, younger members we have recruited?

Without a mentoring program and an open and accessible way for members to connect with each other, our member renewal rates may falter and our membership numbers plateau.

My rating for Goal 4 is eight out of 10

Overall, this document confuses standard operational issues with strategy.  What strategy there is does not do enough to move us towards closer and more “collaborative relationships with educational institutions, industry, government, client associations and the community”, (a key element of the AASW vision). There are serious gaps related to member engagement, member mentoring, transparency and connecting with our education and industry. Currently the AASW is simply treading water- my global rating- five out of ten.