Financial priorities.  Respondents rated 12 priorities on a continuum from (1) very low priority to (5) very high priority.

The following priorities were rated highest:

• Provide support for doctoral students (3.89)
• Facilitate member research  (3.81)
• Enhance the program content at the conference (3.72)
• Enhance members’ professional/career development (3.71)
• Promote/market SMA to a broader audience of academics (3.66)
• Provide support for junior faculty (3.57).

Facilitating member teaching (3.25) was the next-highest-rated priority, followed by several priorities that were rated near the middle of the scale:

• Enhance rewards and recognition provided by SMA (3.05)
• Promote/market SMA to a broader audience of practitioners (2.97)
• Enhance social activities at the conference (2.94).

The business meeting at SMA 2006 in Clearwater Beach, FL

Providing more free meals and snacks at the conference was of a lower priority (2.44) than those mentioned previously, and developing members’ skills in academic administration was the lowest rated priority (1.9).  Interestingly, this last priority was the only one for which members’ ratings differed significantly from nonmembers’ ratings.  Members rated this priority lower (1.82) than did nonmembers (2.11).

Specific suggestions.  Respondents also shared their level of support for specific SMA activities.  The following ideas received the strongest endorsement on a scale of (1) I do not support this idea to (5) I strongly support this idea:

• Provide opportunities for developing research partnerships (3.15)
• Provide digital projectors/laptops instead of overhead projectors for presentations (2.92)
• Sponsor a dissertation award (2.9)
• Significantly enlarge the offering of professional development workshops through SMA Institute (2.89).

Information related to financial priorities and the specific suggestions mentioned above as well as the open-ended comments related to these issues will be considered by the Board at the Strategic Planning Retreat in February 2007.

SMA communications.  SMA has made some changes in recent years related to how the association communicates with members. The website has been redesigned and more emphasis is being placed on electronic communication.  Overall, respondents are comfortable with the extent to which SMA now uses electronic communication (3.92 on a 5-point scale from [1] strongly disagree to [5] strongly agree). Ratings of the extent to which respondents read the newsletter and find the information in the newsletter helpful were 3.4 on the same 5-point scale. Suggestions and comments provided as open-ended responses have been given to the SMA Communications Coordinator, Gary Castrogiovanni, for consideration. The SMA website was rated slightly more favorably than the newsletter: ratings of ease of use and presence of useful information were 3.7 on the 5-point scale.  Again, suggestions and comments have been given to Gary Castrogiovanni and to Aquinex, the firm that manages the SMA website.

Neal Ashkanasy and Anson Seers at the SMA business meeting.

Paper submission. Five items assessed respondents’ reactions to the submission process used for the conferences in 2005 and 2006.  The average score for the 153 respondents who submitted papers was 4.2 out of 5 (on a scale of [1] strongly disagree to [5] strongly agree with items such as “I found the submission process system easy to use”).  Open-ended comments and suggestions have been given to Allen Amason, Vice President and Program Chair for the 2007 SMA conference in Nashville, TN.

Conference placement services.  Respondents indicated that the SMA conference placement services provided are useful to them and that SMA should continue to provide placement services (4.18 out of 5 where 5 = strongly agree).  Nearly 10% of respondents have successfully hired a candidate using SMA placement services, and 13% of respondents report that they have found a job using SMA placement services.  Because the number of jobs and candidates registered in the SMA placement services has declined in recent years, the Board considered the future of placement services. These survey data were instrumental in making the decision to continue placement services at the annual SMA conference.  In addition, there was support from respondents for SMA to post job openings on its website (4.36 out 5 where 5 = strongly agree). This action is being considered by the Board. 

Conference location. Respondents indicated that the specific city, the ease of transportation to the city (i.e., travel time), cost of transportation, easy access to restaurants and entertainment options, and cost of hotel rooms are the most important factors in judging the desirability of a conference location. The specific cities most strongly preferred by respondents were the sites of recent conferences (Charleston, SC and Clearwater Beach, FL).  Other cities that received strong ratings were Hilton Head, SC and Savannah, GA.  In addition to the 31 cities that respondents specifically rated, the survey asked for other suggestions respondents may have: 63 additional cities, from Albuquerque, NM to Winston-Salem, NC, were named. This information will be considered by the Board of Governors each year as decisions are made about conference locations.

Additional information:  If you have any questions about the survey or additional results, please feel free to contact Peg Williams (mlwillia@vcu.edu).  In addition, a more comprehensive set of findings will be posted on the SMA website no later than March 1, 2007.

Margaret (Peg) Williams and Claudia Cogliser,
Survey Coordinators

   

<< Previous Page [SMA Conference Coordinator Nominations]

Next Page >> [Newsletter Changes]