Optometry Australia holds firm on “confidential” membership number

CEO Ms Lyn Brodie continues to keep the organisation’s exact mbership figure off the public record, and requests for specific mbership figures to OA president and board chairman Mr Darrell Baker also rain unfulfilled.Rather than reveal its mbership number, much like many of Australia’s other health-related organisations choose to do, OA asks that mbers undertake their own estimation by visiting the Optometry Board of Australia’s (OBA) website and use a percentage to calculate a figure based on the current number of registrants.To clarify this practice, Insight sought comment from Baker as to whether the decision to withhold the official mbership number is a formally endorsed board policy or the choice of OA staff.Baker did not clarify the issue and instead told Insight that Brodie had supplied sufficient information to calculate a mbership number, as well as the reasoning behind the decision.“As such, the Optometry Australia board does not see any need to answer your questions. We fully support our CEO, Ms Brodie,” Baker wrote.This is despite comparing a percentage against figures published on a separate party’s website not being the same as providing the association’s actual paid mbership base.Secret mbershipThe subject of OA’s mbership number initially arose following a routine request in February for a news report in which OA’s mbership tally was relevant. Ms Kerry I’Anson, general manager of marketing and communications at OA, advised that “mbership numbers are confidential”.{{quote-A:R-W:400-I:4-Q: Mbership numbers are confidential -who:Kerry I’Anson, OA}}When Insight brought the issue to Brodie and questioned why OA’s actual mbership could not be provided, she advised: “Mber numbers are not a secret – but a daily moving feast!”Brodie claims this is due to varying mbership categories and renewal periods between OA’s state bodies, as well as a time lag in systs and processing.However, at the time, and despite denying secrecy, Brodie still refused to reveal a specific mbership number, even though the organisation had made the information a matter of public record in the past.Instead, she stated that OA publicly represents a percentage of Australia’s board-registered optometrists, which is calculated annually. Brodie claims this figure is currently 82.5%. The OBA publishes a detailed statistical breakdown of registered practitioners every three months.Confidentiality even surrounds the mbership figure used for OA’s 2017- 2018 Annual Report, published last October, which both Brodie and Baker also would not divulge. The annual report includes a comprehensive breakdown of mbership dographics that would only be possible with an accurate figure for the organisation’s total mbership.OA’s 2017–2018 Annual Report also included a page with a detailed breakdown of the total number of OBA-registered optometrists. However, OA’s own mbership figure was not included.Background reading: Optometry Australia mbership Confidential

Brodie admitted that OA calculates a mbership number annually for internal comparison, explaining: “We work our calculations post-renewal period October, comparing back to OBA data in June. Brodie supplied Decber 2018 OBA data to suggest that OA’s mbership was 4,542 (5,506 registrants x 82.5%), however, in explaining why she would not provide OA’s actual paid mbership figure, Brodie claimed the exact number is ultimately meaningless .“When I speak to government or other stakeholders, giving th a number is meaningless – what they want to know is the percentage of optometrists we represent. Even our mbers would find a number meaningless,” Brodie said.Insight sought clarification on whether Brodie’s comment reflected the position of the board and Baker advised she has the board’s full support.OA’s ‘confidential’ approach can be compared to a number of other Australian health and not-for-profit organisations. When undertaking research in order to compare OA’s stance, 15 similar health bodies (see chart below) either recorded a mbership figure on their website, in their annual reports or freely provided the information to Insight upon request in a transparent manner without debate.Internal inconsistenciesOA’s policy of maintaining confidentiality over its mbership numbers is inconsistent with its state bodies. The 2018 South Australian President’s Report, which is freely available on OA’s recently redesigned website, points to specific mbership numbers as an area of concern.{{quote-A:R-W:400-I:5-Q: Even our mbers would find a [mbership] number meaningless -who:Lyn Brodie, OA}}“Another year has come and gone and I’m proud of the strong and progressive professional association I’m part of. We have spent the year pursuing significant projects, which will impact both current and future optometrists in South Australia,” SA president Mr Kurt Larsen wrote.“We now proudly represent 311 practising and student optometrists across South Australia. Although this number is growing overall, we recognise that as a percentage of total optometrists practising in SA, our representation is dropping.”Larsen added that the association has “better mber statistics than many other professional bodies, but we hope that with passion, effort, and good mber services we can turn this number around and grow our mbership still further. Only through strong mber support can we successfully lobby government and other stakeholders to advance optometry”.In 2018, Optometry South Australia and Optometry Victoria’s mbership bodies voted in favour of amalgamation. At the time of the vote, maintaining mbership numbers was cited as a reason behind the merger.“Both states, individually, are quite successful in terms of hanging onto their mbers, so we think if we can make it better and cheaper we will be even better at that,” former Optometry Victoria CEO Mr Pete Haydon told Insight at the time.OA’s current stance also differs with its previous practice of transparency. The national body last published a specific mbership number in its 2013–2014 annual report, which documented 4,300 mbers. However; the subsequent four annual reports omitted an actual mbership number.Best practics Julie Garland McLellan, a leading governance consultant and professional company director, believes mbership numbers play an important role in associations: “Mbers have a right to understand the financial position and prospects of their association. That means they can expect to know if mbership is growing or declining.”{{quote-A:R-W:400-I:2-Q: Optometry Australia board does not see any need to answer your questions -WHO:Darrell Baker, OA}}As previously reported, Garland McLellan points to a range of regulations and governance standards as set out by the Australian Securities & Investments Commission and the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission. She also points to the Australian Institute of Company Directors guidelines for not-for-profit organisations, particularly principle 7.5 on accountability, as best practice.“It is tpting [for an association] to stop reporting an indicator if it starts to show that performance is not improving, however good governance is to give equal weight to news of equal importance for mbers in assessing the performance and prospects of their organisation.”Garland McLellan also said it can be tpting to exaggerate mber numbers to increase an organisation’s status: “It is typical for large associations to state their mber numbers in submissions and for smaller associations to mention the importance of their mbers to society rather than state the number of mbers they have.”At the time of publication OA had not altered its stance on confidentiality, and of the 15 health-related associations contacted by Insight, it rains the only one unwilling to state its mbership number on the record, preferring to place the responsibility on mbers to undertake their own examination by estimating a figure from a separate government website, which may or may not be accurate.Garland McLellan added: “It is important for a board to draw a distinction between what they consider an appropriate strategy to engage an outside party and what they consider an appropriate response to an inquiry from a mber.”Insight questioned Baker on 5 July on this issue: “If a current mber of Optometry Australia requests a precise mbership number (the October 2018 number, for example) do you, as Board Chairman, undertake to ensure the information will be provided to the mber, without question?”At the time of publication Baker had not provided an answer.

Of the above 15 health related not-for-profit organisations contacted, only OA
refuses to divulge or place its mbership number on the public record.
Chart first published 31 May, 2019
  More reading:

Optometry Australia mbership Confidential

Influencing optometry: OA Annual Report 2017–2018

OA South Australia President’s Report 2018