Collaborating for Increased Effectiveness: APHA, Its Sections and Affiliates

This presentation reviews the history of APHA's community, as defined by its internal organizational structure, and how that structure challenged organizational effectiveness over time. Issues of organizational complexity and inter-component conflicts are addressed. Historically, APHA's confusing and sometimes internally competitive structural model (sections, SPIGS and caucuses based on substantive expertise relative to Affiliates, focused on regional practices) has posed challenges. Today, APHA's substantive (sections (Intersectional Council - ISC))and geographic (affiliates (Committee on Affiliates - CoA)) work collaboratively. After a period of unproductive friction, sections and affiliates realized the need to define common interests, especially in pursuit of larger Association-wide goals. A 2004 strategic meeting of substantive (ISC) and geographic (COA) components spurred purposeful efforts toward increased collaboration while maintaining constituent interests, and toward expanded communications. The power of this collaboration has helped to reposition APHA advocacy roles, establish APHA as the ‘go to' organization for public health in general – and pandemic flu, in particular; and strengthened the case for cause development. Critical management and organizational issues that facilitated this trajectory of collaboration merit continued consideration. Areas already maximized by collaboration include reenergized advocacy; shared expertise on important public health issues; a broadened, more visible and viable organization; improved division of labor; enhanced dialogue; and even the effort to place a single face on public health. The future of APHA in particular and public health in general, requires our continuing efforts to work as the unified voice of the public health community.