...it's probably not. It is Gabrenya who is slow. This "March" 1997 issue was mailed in late June, so I am more than one issue behind. However, despite the stale cover date, the contents were freshly prepared and updated through mid-June. I hope to catch up the cover date by the end of 1997.
I'd like to thank Daphne Keats and Rogelio Díaz-Guerrero for sending me Bulletins still missing from the official archive, in response to one of my Bitte Sehr! requests (see December, 1996). Here's what I still need: 1967 Issues 2, 3; 1976 No. 2.
The IACCP holds elections every two years on a schedule that allows new officers to assume their posts at the biennial Congress. See page 7 for information about nominating members for the next election.
At the Montreal Congress, an ad hoc committee composed of myself, Rolando Diaz-Loving, and Shalom Schwartz was formed to look into my proposal for an IACCP-sponsored dissertation grant or award. (See my editoral of June, 1996). Progress is being made on the award concept and it should be presented to the IACCP Executive Council with a month or two.
In June 1996, I introduced my dysthymic theory of voluntary organizations. Rumors that I have been sued by the Boy Scouts of America over comments made in that editorial are scurilous fabrications. I would now like to apply my Hunter S. Thompson (1) School of Journalism skills to the larger problem of the ongoing fragmentation of the field.
It seems that the community of academic intercultural social scientists continues to fragment and consume itself. Several organizations can be characterized as "cultural", "cross-cultural" or "intercultural", including IACCP, SCCR (Society for Cross-Cultural Research), ICP (International Council of Psychologists), SIETAR (Society for International Education, Research and Training), SIP (Interamerican Society of Psychologists), IUPsyS (International Union of Psychological Sciencesactually an umbrella organization), SPA (Society for Psychological Anthropology), and probably others. Each of these organizations has its own Founding Myth, organizational culture, inner circle, quarterly publishing-house journal, annual or biennial conference, some big egos, and a little disciplinary paranoia. Sounds like fun so far.
The catch is that every one of these organizations (except perhaps SPA) seems to be in some kind of difficulty: financial, human resources, managing conferences, or just getting things done. Some are almost too small to exist, some are slaves to their journal. They have good years and bad years. In a good year, somebody takes care of business effectively; other years, anything can happen. Memberships follow a common pattern: the activities of a core set of members are supported by a shifting peripheral membership that pays dues for a few years then moves on. (My son's Boy Scout troop has a similar business model: 75% of the new Cub Scout recruits are gone within a year, but their annual bounty of dues is like the yearly flooding of the Nile River Valley, providing the tents, the cook stoves, and the axes that the kids must have to express testosterone onto tree trunks.) Because there are so many major and topical organizations, faculty who pay their own dues must make some hard choices each year.
Human resources follow a different pattern. After the first decade or two, the organizations seem to begin having trouble finding people to fill those organizational positions that require the most work (and are often the most important, such as treasurer or conference organizer). In larger groups these activities are professionalized, but in smaller ones the critical mass needed to support paid staff is not reached, and all work is voluntary. The organizations are usually founded and initially staffed by leaders in the field who work at large, resource-rich schools, but as time goes by the burden of support falls on faculty at less prestigious, poorer schools. IACCP has had two human resource crises recently, and my University's support for the Bulletin continues to erode as the class system in academia widens.
Into this idyllic scene, two new organizations are about to spring to life!
A group of our colleagues has proposed a new Division of Intercultural Psychology of the American Psychological Association (see "Duck Three Ways", September, 1996). The latest news on this proposal, as reported by Mike Honaker (APA Deputy Executive Director) is: "The Division of International Psychology received candidate status as of the past February Council of Representatives meeting. Candidate status continues for 2 years at which time if it meets the criteria for an APA division (1% of membership, appropriate bylaws, etc.) then Council can give it permanent status." I and other IACCP members have examined the complete proposal, and we feel its scientific goals are at best unclear. A few people suggested that the APA Division looks like a travel club in the making. Why APA needs to divert my dues to a travel club is rather mysterious. I don't think all of the APA members who are members of the existing cultural organizations approach 1% of APA's enormous membership, but as I have noted in the past, most of the people who think of themselves as working in a cultural area do not belong to any of the existing organizations, so perhaps they will sign on to the Division and it will enter the market.
The second insipient organization is the Academy for Intercultural Research (AIR). The birth of this organization is described in an editorial by Dan Landis set to appear in a future issue of the International Journal of Intercultural Relations (IJIR) that he edits. Essentially, SIETAR has split up and its cross-cultural researchers will go their own way, taking IJIR with them. Every journal needs an organization (or vice versa), so AIR will be born on March 19, 1998. The research wing of SIETAR overlaps the other intercultural organizations but, like all of them, is just sufficiently different in members' interests, academic homes (AIR will have more Communications people) and publishing habits that it will find a small niche while competing for members and their travel money. IACCP founder John Berry will deliver a keynote address at the birthing conference. (2)
My sense is that there is something simply irresistable about founding new organizations and journals. Perhaps it is the unconditional positive regard one enjoys in a narrowly-constructed organization, or the ready access to secondary publication outletstuned just right to members' good or bad research habitsthat people achieve in new journals. Eventually, all the trees in California will be cut down, but before that happens Sage and other publishing houses will do up a journal for seemingly any group of 200 people. This fragmentation of a young field such as ours is bad for science and bad for trees.
I welcome letters to the editor in response to my comments.
(1) Inventor of "gonzo journalism" and participant in most of the classic vices. Said to be an associate of Kilhane Trout.
(2) My comments are not to be taken as a criticism of Dan Landis, who has contributed mightily to the field. He and his colleagues are on the tiger's back.
Note. The opinions of the editor do not necessarily represent thos of IACCP, its officers, members, or other adults.