In 2008 both organizations were going through strategic planning and both came to common and shared goals for increasing services to members, to have more international presence and to increase the diversity of their membership. Early in 2009 the two organization presidents had a conversation about how the two groups might work together to achieve these strategic goals. A working group was set up that met throughout 2009 to study this topic and they eventually developed the recommendation that a merger of the two organizations be considered. It was felt that a merged organization would have a stronger international presence, greater membership diversity and be able to provide a greater depth of services.
What are some of the specific things that a merged organization will do for the membership?
Where we saw the real value in an organization that combined the strengths of the ALA and SBS was in an ability to draw on an expanded combined network of experts and that together we could develop a much wider variety of services to offer our members. We also saw that this would give us an opportunity to reach out internationally and to establish programs, either meetings, symposia, or virtual courses or other educational forums that would be inclusive of diversity that exists across the globe.
A merger also provides our vendor community, which are a strong member component of organizations, a means for more efficient marketing investment and the benefits of a stronger reach of the organization globally.
So both the technology user and technology provider members will benefit.
What will happen to the current ALA and SBS organizations? Will they disappear?
That’s a key question. As the two organizations have discussed and explored this merger over the past 12 months, both agreed that it was important to maintain the identity of the memberships of both the SBS and the ALA. We’ve proposed that within this merged organization we will have two sections, a Biomolecular Sciences section and a Laboratory Automation section. It’s the intent to empower these two sections to be able to propose meetings, symposium and educational services. Both will maintain their own journals and will drive toward fulfilling the needs of their section members. It’s clear that even though we’ll have a merged organization, from a scientific standpoint we’re still going to provide for the members of the two current organizations the ability to maintain their scientific identity and to focus on the needs of their section members.
So, a person could be a member of one or both sections, depending on their interest?
That’s correct. Individuals will be a member of the merged organization and they will have the choice of joining and participating in the activities of one or both sections. That’s where the real strength of this merger comes from.
What will become of some of the current activities, such as the large annual meetings, journals and other programs?
Our current vision as we bring the two organizations together is that there will be a transition period into 2011. During this transition we will have two annual meetings, one that represents the original SBS meeting and another that represents the original ALA meeting. Planned symposium for this period will continue, as will any virtual services currently offered. During this transition period the new Board of Directors, together with the leadership of the two sections will be working together to develop a longer range strategy toward all activities.
Jeff, you are a member of the provisional Board of Directors of this proposed merged organization, correct?
That’s correct. As we moved through the process of developing all the documents necessary to present to the current membership for their evaluation and approval, we’ve put into place a provisional CEO and a provisional Board of Directors. The Board consists of 9 members, representing both the ALA and SBS. We have a very well-balanced group working with our provisional CEO, Greg Dummer, to develop the strategies and policies for the proposed organization and transition period.
What’s the next step after all these documents are prepared?
At this time, we’ve developed the package of documents that are required for the merger of the two organizations. Those are being reviewed by both the SBS and ALA boards for approval. Once those documents are approved by both boards, we will launch a campaign where we will present the proposal to the two memberships. We intend to launch this campaign soon, in the spring of this year. The membership will then have the opportunity to read the documents on a website. We intend to have some forums at the upcoming SBS meeting in Phoenix . We also intend to have a means to answer questions that are posed by members through the website. We hope to schedule the member vote on the merger by the middle of this year, and if approved the merger would be effective in July.
So, the merger is subject to member approval?
Most definitely. Both memberships need to understand what the proposed merger entails, from an organizational standpoint and from the standpoint of the benefits they will receive as members of the merged organization. They definitely have a vote in making this happen.
Both Boards of Directors are 100% behind the merger proposal, and will be reaching out to their respective memberships over the coming weeks to communicate their perspective as to why this is the best path forward for the two organizations and the opportunities it will give all of us to grow our scientific societies in the future.
In the podcast with SBS President Jeff Paslay and ALA Charter Member Steve Hamilton, Jeff says there is going to be a 12 to 18 month transition period. The implication is that the short-term prospects of this merger are going to be challenging and require a lot of work - it’s not going to be easy to make all this happen. But we have the keys to success in our hands – a solid plan as outlined on this Web site, great volunteers, and a strong professional leadership team. There is certainly risk involved in this venture, but the expansive potential of this merged organization may never fully materialize unless we study the options and place our bet. I think it’s a good bet. Also, the SBS and ALA have similar histories and missions and although there is some overlap of content, there is complementary science and technology that can be introduced to the membership in a merged organization. I view the merger as a great way to gain economies-of-scale while expanding the base of technology providers and technology users. I would also emphasize that the pharmaceutical screening community has been a bridge between our two communities and that the evolution of drug discovery, along with the extension of automated-screening to other biomolecular sciences, provides a unique opportunity to define a new organization: one that will serve the members better while retaining the focus and benefits of the two chapters.
ReplyDeleteI’d like to expand on the point Jeff raises about maintaining ALA and SBS identities in the new society. As the workforce (“the group of 8”) analyzed different options for this proposed merger in 2009, we all felt it was important to build on our strengths and allow members and volunteers in each society to enjoy the benefits of the membership as before, while bringing new and expanded ones. This is all about the members -as it must be-, and we hope that after a successful approval from every member of each association, we will all enjoy not just the same opportunities for meeting, networking training and enhancing our science as we did before the merger, but many more exciting options to interact with experts in related disciplines.
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, this model allows adding new sections that could come from other existing organizations wishing to join this exciting team, or a group of members with the desire to focus on a new area under our widened umbrella.
The future is bright in Lab Automation and Screening Sciences!
It looks clear that SBS and ALA members can keep their individual society connections while still taking advantage of the benefits of a merged group. That and distinct missions for each section make it clear that each will maintain its original focus and its scientific roots.
ReplyDeleteWhat do you think of the name of the proposed society, SLAS (Society for Laboratory Automation and Screening)? Names are often the most obvious and commented on aspect of societies, companies or consumer products. They tend to sound odd when first encountered but some become a part of our vocabulary. SBS was like that in 1994. There were many comments, not all favorable, on what it meant or how it sounded. Today it's part of our vocabulary. SLAS will be the same.
I've been using it for about a month now and it already sounds familiar. In voting for the merger, I ask you to consider the benefits of the merger and not vote on just the name. Look at the mission of the SBS and ALA sections and read the recommendations from long standing members and leaders of each. Forward you questions and comments so we can have an informed exchange of views. However you might feel about it, I encourage you to get involved.
Merging these two organizations - for sure - will result also in administrative synergies. I am sure we will see substantial savings.
ReplyDeleteCan anybody comment on this issue, please?
As someone who was a part of the joint team analyzing this during my membership on the ALA board, and a member of the new provisional board, we certainly anticipated many ways that the merger will create more opportunities for efficiency and leverage.
ReplyDeleteThat said, we're still in the process of figuring out specifics and their financial impact. The "synergies" will only become evident with time - as it's been said, our first charge is to ensure that current members of both organizations feel no loss of benefits or identity, so we're being careful and deliberate on this front.
I am glad to see that ALA and SBS are putting in great effort to inform their members about the proposed merger. Scientists and engineers need to know, we like to draw our own conclusions anyhow. One perspective I have not seen discussed is one that wonders what would happen if the merger did not take place? Yes, we would continue to spend tens of thousands of dollars on duplicitous expenses such as office space or contractors, while relying on, perhaps over-burdening a common pool of SBS and ALA volunteers for very similar initiatives. However, more importantly in my opinion, ALA and SBS would start hopping on one leg, become visibly deficient to grow as an educator/forum for scientists and engineers faced with R&D challenges of the 21st century. The current and future challenges will need to be addressed with an integrated knowledge of the exact and natural sciences as well as engineering. Certain companies and academic institutes have already in place such multi-disciplinary organizations and use them to improve discovery or development work flows. I am most familiar with ALA, less with SBS, but I see ALA's strength in matters of engineering and IS complemented with SBS’ scientific expertise, and vice versa. With SLAS, we have increased our ability to remain appealing to a membership from whom more is expected in their jobs. SLAS is a better mirror of its members' employers than ALA or SBS separately.
ReplyDelete