December 2011 - Parks & Recreation - 14

NRPA iN fOCuS continued from page 7

Five Common Myths
About NRPA Networks
n 2010, 18 neWly created nrPa netWorkS replaced a professional networking mod-

el made up of geographic and specialty-area affi liations. The dissolving of the old
model from branches, regions, and sections was recommended to enhance member engagement for a broader sense of mission for the parks and recreation field. Often, those professionals, citizens, and students who would have liked to take on a more
active role and voice within NRPA felt hindered by the limited number of communication channels with the previous model.
The gaps and limitations led the NRPA Board of Directors to create a member-driven task force. The task
force was comprised of one representative from each
of the 18 branches, regions, and sections. They were
charged with researching the concerns and identifying how they can become more effective and relevant
in meeting the needs of their members as well as the
goals of NRPA.
The Task Force determined and refi ned the new
structure of networks. The 18 networks, a mix of topical, specialty-area, and regional groups, were designed and launched in 2010 to offer members a full
range of options-and nearly limitless ways to connect, contribute, and lead. The rationale was, members could join as many different networks as they
deemed appropriate-and their day-to-day involvement and relationship-building could be supported by
the NRPA Connect online community platform.
Like any brand-new model, though, the NRPA Networks model has had its share of growing pains and
misconceptions. In this article, we've attempted to
identify and address five common myths about the
networks:

Network leadership exists to guide
network groups rather than to serve,
advise, and respond to group
members.

Many members have expressed confusion about
network leadership roles. Since there is a formal
leadership structure for each of the network groups,
some have asked, " Are leaders in place to serve the
association? Or to respond to the specific needs and
interests of the smaller group? "
It's true that there are structural guidelines for
leadership across network groups-but it is a structure prescribed by the task force, not by NRPA staff.

Parks & Recreation D E C E M B E R

2 0 1 1 w w w . N R P A . O R G

Each of the networks has a Chair, Chair-Elect, Secretary, National Forum Representative(s), Young
Professional Representative, and up to 15 additional
At-Large Leaders. The positions ensure consistency
and clarity across all networks, and the actual leaders
are selected by group members. Their purpose? To
further the particular goals of the group. For example, network group leaders have served their groups
over the past year in some of the following ways:
■■ ■Led discussions on important trends and issues
■■ ■Identified needed research/education
■■ ■Identified member services/needs relevant to their
specific network
NRPA is also in the process of compiling a network group manual-so that all members can see
at a glance how best to participate and what the networks can do for them.

When the network model was
established, we lost the freedom to
determine and grant local or
regional awards as we saw fit.

We understand the importance of member recognition; however, significantly reducing the number of
awards raises the relevance and prominence of all
the awards. The task force recommended the following award categories:
■■ ■Distinguished Professional
■■ ■Young Professional
■■ ■Citizen
The criteria for all of the awards is now consistent
so that the recipients for each can be forwarded to the
National Awards Program and given consideration in
the following national awards:
■■ ■Distinguished Professional Award
■■ ■Robert Crawford Young Professional Award
■■ ■National Distinguished Citizen Award

December 2011 - Parks & Recreation

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of December 2011 - Parks & Recreation