The Challenge

The advance of Rotary to its present position constitutes a romance of organization development. Eighty nations have, to varying extent, experienced its benefits. The splendid progress thus far made is the result of the efforts of Rotarians of a limited number of nations where Rotary has been longest established. With the other nations, the propulsion has had its origin outside their borders. What will be the measure of accomplishments when Rotary becomes as well entrenched in all nations as it is today in the United States, Great Britain, and Canada?

Rotary and the numerous other organizations which have risen in its wake are considered by students of social movements as among the most remarkable developments of the period; this period facetiously referred to by Mr. Chesterton as “this Rotarian age.” How has it all come about, and how can the Rotarian plan of restricting membership in clubs to one representative of each line be, in good conscience, justified?

Many think of the classification plan as the distinguishing feature of Rotary. It might even be said that to many outsiders, the classification feature is all that there is in the movement. It is all they know and may be all they care to know.

Ethically-minded men within the membership, and many without, have stormed the citadel of the classification plan. “What possible purpose can it serve except the selfish purpose of diverting the business of club members from natural channels into the pool of club membership?” “How can a club so constructed be anything other than a ‘You scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours’ circle?” “Why not be frank? Rotary claims to be democratic; where is the democracy of an organization that limits its membership to one representative of each trade and profession? If that is democracy, what is autocracy?” “Where would Christianity be today if the church limited its membership to one representative of each trade and profession?” “Rotary is supposed to stand for service; where does service appear in that system?” “If Rotary is good for you, why wouldn’t it be good for me also?” And while you are answering these questions, please answer another:

“By what right do your members represent their various trades and professions in Rotary? Who delegates them? Is your beloved Rotary not built upon a false foundation? If so, it is destined to fail.”

Such considerations as the above challenge thoughtful Rotarians who are anxious to stand four-square to the wind, and most Rotarians are. These questions have been asked so frequently that they can not be ignored. It is clear that to some the exclusive representation plan is a fatal defect in an organization which professes to be an exponent of high principles; that it strongly savors of hypocrisy.

Recognizing the wide-spread interest in Rotary, a committee selected from leading social scientists of the faculty of the University of Chicago have recently completed a survey of the Rotary Club of Chicago. Their findings have been published in book form under the title  “Rotary?” and should be read by all students of the movement, particularly by those seeking further light on the exclusive representation plan. On that most interesting question the members of the committee in substance say that after having carefully read all available literature of the earlier period and of more recent date, and after having submitted to present members of the Rotary Club of Chicago pertinent questions on the subject of their motives in joining, etc., they are convinced that the early Rotarians were, and in fact, present day Rotarians are, moved to join by prospect of personal gain of one sort or another and that the personal gain expected was and is, as a rule, through the increase of business.

The members of the committee, however, contend that their finding does not necessarily imply that the exclusive representation plan is selfish or that it is irreconcilable with Rotary’s high-sounding slogan, “Service above Self.” They go on to say that if one brands as selfish all organizations in which the profit motive has part, he will soon find himself in a sorry plight because he will have removed the underpinning from the entire business and social structure. After this reasoning, the committee suggests that Rotarians, with the above explanation, get on with their business, which as at present conducted, is reasonably good, and with modifications, can be made very effective. Thus there is hope as well as despair in this detached view point.

There is little likelihood, however, that the prospects of business advantage will ever regain standing as a reason for joining Rotary. Rotarians will undoubtedly prefer to continue to “hitch their wagon to a star,” the star of pure idealism, even though it may be the case that few, if any, rise to the high mark set. If the desire of pecuniary profits was recognized as a suitable motive for joining Rotary clubs, it is not difficult to see that it would result in the loss of many of our best members. If more realism is necessary it will, it is hoped, be obtained through moving the backward members forward rather than through moving the forward members backward. The writer is surprised that the members of the University Committee, who by the very nature of their own vocations must have dedicated their lives to the “Service above Self’ ideal, can be skeptical about the attempt of Rotarian business men eventually to rise to the same high standards.

It might be interesting to know that a campaign was launched by a Rotarian of Seattle, in 1913, for a “Greater Rotary;” a Rotary which was to eliminate exclusive representation. Certain leaders wanted to learn what the reaction of the members would be to the project of changing from limited to unlimited representation. The result of a canvass of the membership made at that time was overwhelmingly in favor of the retention of the existing plan. It is not, however, contended that there is great probative force in such evidence; preference for the established order may have indicated lack of thoughtful analysis, or even selfishness.

Let us consider the question, “How can an individual member of a craft constitute himself the representative of that craft?” The committee on philosophy of the Rotary Club of Birmingham, Alabama, were the first to attempt to answer. Their answer in effect, was that the member is not an ambassador from his craft organization to Rotary; he is an ambassador from Rotary to his craft organization. Others, ignoring the seeming inconsistency in assuming representation of a craft or association without official authority from the governing body of such craft or association, have in an effort to gain every possible advantage proclaimed Rotarians ambassadors both to and from Rotary.

Under the present system, members of Rotary clubs are privileged to present to the board of directors the names of any whom they consider worthy of membership. The board refers the matter to the membership committee who make exhaustive study of the general character and business standing of the candidate, and of the question whether his proposed classification duplicates that of any member. If the finding is that it does not, an application may be submitted to the board of directors, and the candidate will be voted upon in due course. The present practice therefore, is that the board of directors select the individual whom Rotary desires to have represent the particular classification in its membership. The representation is limited to Rotary’s own particular purposes, and is loaned, not given. Members have no other authoritative representation of vocations.

It is manifest that clubs organized on the exclusive representation plan, succeed. Would the present unprecedented high percentage of attendance be obtainable in any other manner? It is doubtful. The difficulties of introducing busy men to abandon business and attend club meetings are many. Thirty or forty per cent attendance is high in many organizations, and even ten per cent is considered passable.

A Rotary club, the average attendance of which is less than seventy per cent, is considered to have fallen short. Rotary could not put its important objectives into effect  without a high average attendance. The best clubs are those which stand best in attendance. A club, for in stance, of two hundred and fifty members which turns out, year in and year out, fifty-two meetings per annum, with an average attendance in excess of ninety-five per cent, is a real Rotary club and is bound to be a success in every department.

But even this may be aside from the question. Even though success in the pursuit of a club’s objectives may be dependent upon obtaining high average of attendance, and high average of attendance dependent upon the exclusive representation plan, even then the exclusive plan may not be justifiable.

Throwing aside for the time being the questions of expediency, how does the exclusive representation plan of Rotary stand, viewed solely as a moral question? If the exclusive representation plan is unethical, it is unethical because it restricts membership. The writer is not pre pared to concede that it is restrictive. It is his belief that the plan, taken by and large, enlists more men in the cause than would be possible without it. The effect of the plan is to introduce system into the selection of membership; if it closes the door to one, it opens it to another, frequently to two others.

And there are other sides to the question. There are many organizations, the membership of which is confined to one profession or trade. Such organizations play exceedingly important parts in the modern world. They enable men of a given trade or profession to come together to exchange ideas and experiences and to discuss problems of common interest. No one thinks of them as exclusive, though they exclude all not engaged in the particular profession or trade; their success depends upon their so doing. It would be ill-advised for an association of surgeons to admit to their membership a manufacturer or a merchandiser. The success of the organization and its promise of usefulness depends upon its exclusion of men not versed in the science of surgery.

And while it is true that a surgeon can gain much from contact with his fellow surgeons, one who has social contact with surgeons only would become a dull fellow. He needs the broadening influence of contacts with those engaged in other professions and business undertakings. He will obtain such contacts to a limited extent in his church and social club, but the church and club are not organized to fill the particular need. If one is admitted to membership in a Rotary club, he will enjoy the broadening influence of contact with men of all vocations.

It is not contended, however, that Rotary is entirely dependent upon its classification system. It is believed that a fair measure of success could be maintained without it. Rotary principles afford rallying points sufficient to attract men and hold them together as is demonstrated by the fact that there is in existence a worthy and successful organization known as the Altrurians (All True Rotarians) composed entirely of ex-Rotarians who for one reason or another, without fault of theirs, have lost the privilege of membership. All worthy ex-Rotarians are eligible, regardless of the question of vocation. The Altrurian clubs are faithful to Rotary ideals. They also maintain an international association.

Perhaps the fact that there are such groups drawn together by their love of Rotary fellowship and principles, is the best conceivable testimonial to the worth of the movement. Not being able to gain access to the banquet hail, they are content to sit in the ante chamber. God bless the Altrurians. Possibly something some day will come of their appeal which has not always been mute.

The classification plan gives the movement the very thing which all ethically-minded men, within and without, demand — the opportunity to project its beneficial influences far beyond the limits of membership, out into the rank and file of every trade, profession and occupation by which men earn their daily bread.

Under the exclusive representation plan, the representative of each vocation bears peculiar responsibilities; he is the connecting link between Rotary and his fellow tradesmen. Rotary functions not only in organizing trade associations where there are none, but also in promoting high ethical standards throughout the entire membership of the various trade and professional associations.

The writer believes that what has seemed to casual observers restrictive, is the opposite; that the one best way of accomplishing its objectives and of doing the greatest amount of good to the greatest number of people is through adherence to the exclusive representation plan. He also believes that Rotary need not concern itself with further refinements of the question.

This does not mean that the writer is a stand-patter. He is for all innovations which give reasonable promise of usefulness and practicability. He believes that Rotary must in the future, extend its influence in many ways other than those already in operation.

The Rotarians of London, England, have solved the problem to their apparent satisfaction through duplication of clubs within London’s metropolitan district. There are at present, a total of sixty clubs within that area.

The writer finds satisfaction in the fact that the Kiwanians, Lions, and others have come into existence as a result of Rotary’s example and that they have dedicated themselves to the same exalted purposes.

In Australia, a youth movement, founded on Rotary principles, is well under way and they also have high ambitions for extension to other countries.

It is heartening also to know that the wives, daughters, and mothers of Rotarians in many cities, impressed with the value of Rotary have organized clubs of their own and are doing effective service in charitable enterprises. The women’s movement has gained greatest momentum in Great Britain where their clubs, nearly one hundred in number, have already established a national unit which is doing extension work in British dominions. The writer is convinced that women who can spare the time from family affairs, need contacts with other women more than men need increased opportunities to meet their fellows. Business provides men with contacts and also with a form of discipline of which women, by reason of their sheltered lives, are deprived. If women are more critical than men, it is because they have had less experience with their kind. Inexperienced men are suspicious and difficult to deal with, while women whom circumstances have compelled to enter the field of business generally become less suspicious, broader in their outlook and more understanding.

Considerable effort has been made by business and professional women to have the doors of Rotary opened to them. Lady Astor, appearing before a Rotary conference in Great Britain in their behalf, made her usual strong appeal. While the business and professional women have been unsuccessful in their efforts to gain admission to Rotary, they have not been unsuccessful in their efforts to embrace Rotary principles. They now have several strong and growing organizations of their own.

The writer hopes that the organizations of the Rotary type now in existence will increase until the time arrives when there will be clubs for all business and professional men and women and youths who are imbued with the ideal of service.

Was it something like that you had in mind, Mr. Chesterton, when you coined the phrase, “This Rotarian Age" One of the outstanding reasons for the phenomenal growth and success of Rotary and of the kindred organizations which have followed, seems to the writer to be the fact that there is in the hearts of nearly all men, a desire for an ethical fellowship. The service doctrine affords a platform acceptable to all: to devotees of the various religions, because they have already acknowledged allegiance to it; to those who have never subscribed to any form of religion, because they feel special need of it. It is the aim of Rotary to make its doctrine operative in all phases of everyday life.

Becoming a Rotarian neither necessitates adoption of any creed, nor does it do violence to any. One may hold membership in a Rotary club, and at the same time give his church whole-hearted support. A member’s standing is dependent upon the life he lives and not upon the faith he professes. He may be American, European, or Asiatic, Protestant or Catholic, Jew or Gentile, Mohammedan or Buddhist, so long as he is willing to do his bit. Rotary holds that the interests of society demand that there be a place where men of diverse races, faiths, and political parties can meet in happy fellowship, and proposes to provide that place. If a more general spirit of tolerance proves to be the only permanent result of its efforts, Rotary will not have existed in vain.

Rotary is neither a religion nor a substitute for religion; it is the working out of an ancient ethical conception in modern life, and particularly in business.

Top of Page