Comments on: Time to back an association for the rest of us http://www.ethnography.com/2008/01/time-to-back-an-association-for-the-rest-of-us/ A group blog on a wide variety of topics realted to anthropology Fri, 30 Dec 2011 16:34:11 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Mark http://www.ethnography.com/2008/01/time-to-back-an-association-for-the-rest-of-us/comment-page-1/#comment-183 Mark Wed, 16 Jan 2008 01:13:35 +0000 http://www.ethnography.com/2008/01/time-to-back-an-association-for-the-rest-of-us/#comment-183 Hello Tom Thank you for your comments, is it an interesting part of the conversation. I will be sure to forward comments to you. Hello Tom

Thank you for your comments, is it an interesting part of the conversation. I will be sure to forward comments to you.

]]> By: Tom May http://www.ethnography.com/2008/01/time-to-back-an-association-for-the-rest-of-us/comment-page-1/#comment-182 Tom May Tue, 15 Jan 2008 23:47:05 +0000 http://www.ethnography.com/2008/01/time-to-back-an-association-for-the-rest-of-us/#comment-182 I was directed to your exchange by a colleague who thought that I might be able to inform a part of the dialogue and thus permit your discussions to move forward more productively. I am the Executive Director of the Society for Applied Anthropology (SfAA). I was trained in Medical Sociology and Medical History and have retired from an academic position. The origins (and current direction) of the SfAA provide a reasonable answer to some of your interests. The Society was founded in 1941 by a group of people who were interested primarily in moving the social/behavioral sciences outside of the university in order to address and solve contemporary issues. The group crossed disciplinary boundaries - William F. Whyte (former president of the ASA), Conrad Arensberg (anthropologist), Charles Loomis (rural sociologist), Fred L. W. Richardson (social geographer), and so forth. The group held in common the commitment to 'application' and problem definition/resolution. The Society has retained it's separate corporate status since 1941. From the mid-1970s until 1984, the Society had a management contract with the American Anthropological Association (AAA) to provide a comprehensive package of administrative/management services. This contract was terminated in 1985 because the Internal Revenue Service found that the AAA was in potential violation of regulations governing not-for-profit organizations (annual revenue in excess of 18% was generated from activities not essential to the mission of the organization). The Society was invited to dissolve its corporate status and become a part of the AAA. The membership rejected the offer through a formal ballot. Following that action, the AAA formed the section, National Association for the Practice of Anthropology (NAPA). The Society welcomes your interest and your comments. We perceive ourselves to be a "house for many people". We believe that we can learn through dialogue with individuals from all of the social sciences. Our 68th Annual Meeting in Memphis, TN, in late March, will feature sessions that deal with the Human Terrain System, participation in Department of Defense activities, and related topics. Please visit our web site to view the Preliminary Program. By implication, we suggest that it is more productive and indeed respectful to engage actively these topics and subsequently, to urge individuals to find their own ethical compass. We would welcome your inquiries. We are at www.sfaa.net. A minor note. I am a bit too old to be an active blogger. Could you please copy comments that touch directly on the above statement, or the Society in general to my e-mail address which follows - tom@sfaa.net Thanks for the opportunity. Tom May I was directed to your exchange by a colleague who thought that I might be able to inform a part of the dialogue and thus permit your discussions to move forward more productively.

I am the Executive Director of the Society for Applied Anthropology (SfAA). I was trained in Medical Sociology and Medical History and have retired from an academic position.

The origins (and current direction) of the SfAA provide a reasonable answer to some of your interests. The Society was founded in 1941 by a group of people who were interested primarily in moving the social/behavioral sciences outside of the university in order to address and solve contemporary issues. The group crossed disciplinary boundaries – William F. Whyte (former president of the ASA), Conrad Arensberg (anthropologist), Charles Loomis (rural sociologist), Fred L. W. Richardson (social geographer), and so forth. The group held in common the commitment to ‘application’ and problem definition/resolution.

The Society has retained it’s separate corporate status since 1941. From the mid-1970s until 1984, the Society had a management contract with the American Anthropological Association (AAA) to provide a comprehensive package of administrative/management services. This contract was terminated in 1985 because the Internal Revenue Service found that the AAA was in potential violation of regulations governing not-for-profit organizations (annual revenue in excess of 18% was generated from activities not essential to the mission of the organization). The Society was invited to dissolve its corporate status and become a part of the AAA. The membership rejected the offer through a formal ballot. Following that action, the AAA formed the section, National Association for the Practice of Anthropology (NAPA).

The Society welcomes your interest and your comments. We perceive ourselves to be a “house for many people”. We believe that we can learn through dialogue with individuals from all of the social sciences.

Our 68th Annual Meeting in Memphis, TN, in late March, will feature sessions that deal with the Human Terrain System, participation in Department of Defense activities, and related topics. Please visit our web site to view the Preliminary Program. By implication, we suggest that it is more productive and indeed respectful to engage actively these topics and subsequently, to urge individuals to find their own ethical compass.

We would welcome your inquiries. We are at http://www.sfaa.net.

A minor note. I am a bit too old to be an active blogger. Could you please copy comments that touch directly on the above statement, or the Society in general to my e-mail address which follows – tom@sfaa.net

Thanks for the opportunity.

Tom May

]]> By: Tony http://www.ethnography.com/2008/01/time-to-back-an-association-for-the-rest-of-us/comment-page-1/#comment-181 Tony Tue, 15 Jan 2008 21:48:10 +0000 http://www.ethnography.com/2008/01/time-to-back-an-association-for-the-rest-of-us/#comment-181 Mark, You raise good questions. I have been trying to write of my frustrations with the American Sociological Association for some years, but have yet to figure out how to do it. I have been a member for maybe 7 of the last 10 years, mainly it seems because that is what sociologists are supposed to do. For $150 I get a lot of junk mail, an interesting quarterly newsletter (but which is also on-line), and a rather dry academic journal. Oh yes and I get to attend an annual meeting where I spend more money. The meetings are frustrating to me, even as an academic. It has always struck me that the largest number of attendees are nervous graduate students whose mentors have somehow convinced them that the only way to get noticed academically is to attend these things. A smaller but more prominent group are the old sociological lions. They run the show, and mill about in the hotel foyer just enough, recreating the disciplinary pecking order. In between they run plenary sessions to roomfuls of graduate students. These sessions often have a political axe to grind which is sometimes interesting for me, and sometimes not. Usually, it is something along the lines of “if policy makers would just listen to sociologists, the world would be a wonderful place.” Oh yes, then there are people who are unhappy with their current job, and who are “networking” to find out where the next stepping-stone might be. They can often be found milling with the lions, as well (wannabe lions?). As for me, I usually hang out at the book show, which is often excellent. The highlights are bumping into old classmates from grad school, or wherever. Then there is the getting nervous for presenting my paper which it turns out only three people want to see (more graduate students again). At the end of it all, my research account is usually about $1000 lighter, I am exhausted from a cross-country flight and hotel rooms, and about a week behind on class preps and paper grading. I also wonder if my time would have been better spent in the library reading, grading papers, or perhaps typing away on a new paper or ethnography.com blog. In my flights of fancy I can imagine a vigorous conference that would be a little less stale. But this is a tall order. I admire your willingness to get out there and tilt against this windmill in Anthro. Perhaps in a few days the muse will strike me a little more forcefully, and I will think up a blog to post here about how it might occur in sociology as well! Mark,
You raise good questions. I have been trying to write of my frustrations with the American Sociological Association for some years, but have yet to figure out how to do it. I have been a member for maybe 7 of the last 10 years, mainly it seems because that is what sociologists are supposed to do. For $150 I get a lot of junk mail, an interesting quarterly newsletter (but which is also on-line), and a rather dry academic journal. Oh yes and I get to attend an annual meeting where I spend more money.
The meetings are frustrating to me, even as an academic. It has always struck me that the largest number of attendees are nervous graduate students whose mentors have somehow convinced them that the only way to get noticed academically is to attend these things. A smaller but more prominent group are the old sociological lions. They run the show, and mill about in the hotel foyer just enough, recreating the disciplinary pecking order. In between they run plenary sessions to roomfuls of graduate students. These sessions often have a political axe to grind which is sometimes interesting for me, and sometimes not. Usually, it is something along the lines of “if policy makers would just listen to sociologists, the world would be a wonderful place.”
Oh yes, then there are people who are unhappy with their current job, and who are “networking” to find out where the next stepping-stone might be. They can often be found milling with the lions, as well (wannabe lions?).

As for me, I usually hang out at the book show, which is often excellent. The highlights are bumping into old classmates from grad school, or wherever. Then there is the getting nervous for presenting my paper which it turns out only three people want to see (more graduate students again).

At the end of it all, my research account is usually about $1000 lighter, I am exhausted from a cross-country flight and hotel rooms, and about a week behind on class preps and paper grading. I also wonder if my time would have been better spent in the library reading, grading papers, or perhaps typing away on a new paper or ethnography.com blog.

In my flights of fancy I can imagine a vigorous conference that would be a little less stale. But this is a tall order. I admire your willingness to get out there and tilt against this windmill in Anthro. Perhaps in a few days the muse will strike me a little more forcefully, and I will think up a blog to post here about how it might occur in sociology as well!

]]> By: Jennifer http://www.ethnography.com/2008/01/time-to-back-an-association-for-the-rest-of-us/comment-page-1/#comment-180 Jennifer Tue, 15 Jan 2008 14:11:21 +0000 http://www.ethnography.com/2008/01/time-to-back-an-association-for-the-rest-of-us/#comment-180 That makes sense to me! I believe that having a separate organization like you describe will also be beneficial in that it would be able to better explain, encourage, and inspire future generations of applied anthropologists who are interested in business or design anthropology. Currently it seems like there is no strong outlet for students to research this field except for EPIC. When I first read the 2006 EPIC proceedings and became interested in this type of research, I could not find further information beyond that. Having a supportive organization for this type of anthropological research would be helpful in uniting those who do this research in order to share ideas, and also in sharing with others why our research is valuable. Even if the AAA decided to support this group of applied anthropologists, having an organization dedicated to this type of research would probably still be a more effective avenue of support and vehicle to sharing ideas and experience. I do not have experience with the other organizations that you mentioned, but EPIC as the epicenter certainly seems fitting to me. That makes sense to me! I believe that having a separate organization like you describe will also be beneficial in that it would be able to better explain, encourage, and inspire future generations of applied anthropologists who are interested in business or design anthropology. Currently it seems like there is no strong outlet for students to research this field except for EPIC. When I first read the 2006 EPIC proceedings and became interested in this type of research, I could not find further information beyond that. Having a supportive organization for this type of anthropological research would be helpful in uniting those who do this research in order to share ideas, and also in sharing with others why our research is valuable. Even if the AAA decided to support this group of applied anthropologists, having an organization dedicated to this type of research would probably still be a more effective avenue of support and vehicle to sharing ideas and experience. I do not have experience with the other organizations that you mentioned, but EPIC as the epicenter certainly seems fitting to me.

]]> By: Cindy http://www.ethnography.com/2008/01/time-to-back-an-association-for-the-rest-of-us/comment-page-1/#comment-179 Cindy Mon, 14 Jan 2008 03:40:14 +0000 http://www.ethnography.com/2008/01/time-to-back-an-association-for-the-rest-of-us/#comment-179 It seems to me that a wide range of practices are encompassed under the general label of "applied anthropology." Some of these, I think, such as employment at various kinds of think-tanks and NGO's have quite a bit in common with "academic" anthropology (in terms of methods, theories, and products). These people, I would wager, identify as anthropologists first, and with their organization of employment second. In other cases, however, for example in many corporate settings, these individuals identify with other areas - such as design, or marketing, or research & development first, and anthropology second. There is nothing wrong with that, but it is, as Mark implies, a different identity (or profession) with different needs in a professional organization. I don't think these two are mutually exclusive, obviously - let's take a potentially parallel example - you can't do engineering without studying math, but industrial engineers don't do the same thing as mathematicians. Industrial ethnographers do not do the same thing as anthropologists, even though, clearly, the concept of culture and the method of participant observation are the algorithms of their practice. It seems to me that a wide range of practices are encompassed under the general label of “applied anthropology.” Some of these, I think, such as employment at various kinds of think-tanks and NGO’s have quite a bit in common with “academic” anthropology (in terms of methods, theories, and products). These people, I would wager, identify as anthropologists first, and with their organization of employment second.

In other cases, however, for example in many corporate settings, these individuals identify with other areas – such as design, or marketing, or research & development first, and anthropology second. There is nothing wrong with that, but it is, as Mark implies, a different identity (or profession) with different needs in a professional organization.

I don’t think these two are mutually exclusive, obviously – let’s take a potentially parallel example – you can’t do engineering without studying math, but industrial engineers don’t do the same thing as mathematicians. Industrial ethnographers do not do the same thing as anthropologists, even though, clearly, the concept of culture and the method of participant observation are the algorithms of their practice.

]]>