-
Am J Health Behav.™™™™™ 2010;34(5):563-572 563
Formation and Early History of TheAmerican Academy of Health
BehaviorRobert J. McDermott, PhD, FAAHB; Elbert D. Glover, PhD,
FAAHB
Robert J. McDermott, Professor and Co-Direc-tor, Florida
Prevention Research Center, Depart-ment of Community and Family
Health, Univer-sity of South Florida College of Public Health,
FL.Elbert D. Glover, Professor & Chair, Departmentof Public
& Community Health, University of Mary-land School of Public
Health, and Director, Cen-ter for Health Behavior Research, College
Park,MD.
Address correspondence to Dr McDermott,Florida Prevention
Research Center, Departmentof Community and Family Health,
University ofSouth Florida College of Public Health, 13201Bruce B.
Downs Boulevard (MDC 056)Tampa, FL33612. E-mail:
[email protected]
Objective: To document the for-mation and early history of
TheAmerican Academy of Health Be-havior. Methods: Recollectionsand
interactions with selectedfounders of The Academy activein building
the organizationthrough its formative years. Re-sults: A
professional organizationcame into existence whose solemission is
fostering research skilldevelopment and research dis-semination
across health behav-ior-related disciplines that in-
creases the likelihood of improvedtranslation and
evidence-basedpractice. Conclusion: Creation andsurvival of this
organization re-quired visionary leadership, dedi-cated early
adopters, a commit-ment to excellence, and outreachto new
researchers.
Key words: The Academy, re-search, AAHB, American Acad-emy of
Health Behavior, healthbehavior, organization
formation,meritocracy
Am J Health Behav. 2010;34(5):563-572
The inspiration for a new and differ-ent kind of professional
organiza-tion came from Dr Elbert D. Gloverand evolved from a dream
and vision hehad for more than 2 decades to create anacademy of
scholars. Dr Glover trained asa health educator and, similar to a
cadreof his contemporaries, believed that aca-demic health
educators often were lessrespected (and less rewarded) on
univer-sity campuses than their peers in other
academic disciplines. Part of this “lesserrespect” seemed to
emanate from a per-ception that in many research-intensiveand
doctoral degree-granting institutions,health education research
often lacked“centrality” with respect to the mission ofthe
university compared to the researchcarried out in other
disciplines. The no-tion also persisted that a significant
pro-portion of health behavior-related re-search that was not
subject to this allega-tion was emerging from fields such
aspsychology, behavioral medicine, andother social science areas.
In addition,some health education programs and pro-fessional
organizations appeared to befocused heavily on their teaching
andservice missions, with high-quality re-search being relegated a
lower priority.Concurrent with these developments, anumber of
long-standing and tradition-rich health education professional
prepa-ration programs around the country (in-cluding doctoral
degree-granting pro-grams) were closing, being merged withother
academic units, or otherwise beingdiminished in stature, arguably
becausetheir faculties were not meeting the com-
-
The American Academy of Health Behavior
564
petitive demands of the new researchenvironment. Whereas there
most cer-tainly were professionally prepared doc-toral-level health
educators who conductedresearch of substantive quality and
quan-tity, these “heavy hitters” were only rarelypresenting
original research at meetingsof national health education
organiza-tions. Moreover, when they publishedtheir work, frequently
they were doing soin more prestigious or higher impact
peer-reviewed journals whose readerships werenot comprised
principally of health edu-cators.
Taking the initiative and attempting tobring life to the dream
he had envisioned,beginning on April 1, 1997, Dr Glover in-vited
many of the aforementioned “heavyhitters,” particularly ones whose
researchhe knew best, to join him in founding TheAmerican Academy
of Health Behavior.Initially, he identified 34 researchers withwhom
he shared his vision, along with adraft of proposed organizational
bylaws. Ul-timately, 32 individuals accepted the invi-tation and
formed the body of FoundingMembers of The Academy between April
8and May 29, 1997. The Founding Memberslisted in Table 1 are
presented in thechronological order in which they joinedThe
Academy.
Dr Glover’s belief and intention wasthat by forming a solid
member base oflike-minded prolific researchers, thesewell-known and
widely respected schol-ars would attract other researchers toThe
Academy. Because even these com-mitted individuals were skeptical
aboutthe likely acceptance and success of anew professional
association for healtheducators focused principally on the
re-search enterprise, Dr Glover provided acompelling incentive by
subsidizingFounding Members’ first 2 years of orga-nizational dues,
including a subscriptionto the American Journal of Health
Behavior,which was designated in the bylaws asThe Academy’s
official professional jour-nal. At that time, the American Journal
ofHealth Behavior had been in existence forover 2 decades and owned
by Dr Glover.The Journal was already well respectedand gaining
traction as a venue for pub-lishing quality health-behavior
research.Dr Glover reasoned that by naming theJournal the official
publication of The Acad-emy the organization would gain immedi-ate
visibility and credibility. Today,whereas the Journal remains a
privatefor-profit business and The Academy anonprofit organization,
Dr Glover’s rea-soning was prophetic, and the 2 entitieshave
flourished in their coexistence.
After recruiting The Academy’sFounders, Dr Glover opened up the
orga-nization for membership to other quali-fied applicants. Each
of the 18 personswho joined during the subsequent year orso was
given the designation of CharterMember. Arguably, the Charter
Membersbecame the backbone of this new organi-zation, earning
themselves a deservedspecial status in The Academy inasmuch
1. Elbert D. Glover2. Chudley E. Werch3. Mark B. Dignan4. Terri
Mulkins Manning5. David R. Black6. Robert F. Valois7. Mark J.
Kittleson8. Cheryl J. Rainey9. Kenneth R. McLeroy
10. Robert J. McDermott11. David F. Duncan12. Scott J.
Leischow13. James H. Price14. James M. Eddy15. Michael Young16. Ray
Tricker17. Robert M. Weiler18. John P. Foreyt19. Ian M. Newman20.
Min Qi Wang21. Thomas W. O’Rourke22. Beverly S. Mahoney23. Mohammad
R. Torabi24. Stuart W. Fors25. Robert S. Gold26. Molly T. Laflin27.
Paul D. Sarvela28. Melody P. Noland29. Mary S. Sutherland30. Cheryl
L. Perry31. Lawrence W. Green32. Rick A. Petosa33. Nicholas K.
Iammarino
Table 1Chronological List ofFounding Members of
The American Academyof Health Behavior
-
McDermott & Glover
Am J Health Behav.™™™™™ 2010;34(5):563-572 565
as they were the first dues-paying mem-bers. These Charter
Members can bedescribed aptly as “risk-takers” for em-barking on an
organization whose finaldestiny was an unknown. They are listedin
Table 2 in the chronological order inwhich they joined.
Some Conceptual Underpinnings ofThe AcademyThe Academy was
founded to transform
the health promotion and health educa-tion field from one that
some authoritiesfelt had become dominated by its teach-ing and
service missions to one with astronger research foundation in
whichdiscovery would be valued as a means ofimproving practice and
enhancing popu-lation-based health. Thus, the origin ofThe Academy
was based on the belief thatthe credibility of the health
promotionand health education field rested on cre-ating a strong
research evidence baseand disseminating this work on at least
anational level. It was felt that improvingthe “science” of health
behavior researchwould indeed combat the image of lowrespect for
health education within theacademic community as well as create
apotential for launching the profession intothe national spotlight
in a way that medi-cine, engineering, the biological and natu-ral
sciences, and other disciplines hadlong enjoyed.
Establishment of The Academy set inmotion a new direction for
the field thatwas grounded in a distinctive set of con-ceptual
underpinnings. The first of theseprinciples was the establishment
of ameritocracy that acknowledged the com-petitive nature of the
research environ-ment, challenged members to producequality
research, and recognized out-standing research contributions.
Thesecond belief was that advancement ofevidence-based practice
would be morelikely to occur if nurtured by a profes-sional
organization that explicitly identi-fied research as its primary
focus. Thethird tenet recognized a need for a forumto review and
evaluate research beingconducted so as to improve its quality
anddissemination. The fourth underpinningwas the desire to overcome
partisan, pro-tective agendas of traditional disciplinesby
stimulating multidisciplinary researchand learning. Finally, The
Academy wasestablished to inform and educate schol-ars about the
latest in research innova-
tions as well as to inspire a commitmentto high-quality
investigation amongemerging researchers and students indoctoral
education programs. By acknowl-edging and pledging commitment to
thesephilosophies, The Academy began to se-cure its unique niche
among professionalorganizations.
To represent its underpinnings as aprofessional society, The
Academy adoptedthe lamp of learning (the intellectualsource of
light) as the central focus of itsofficial seal (Figure 1). The
lamp is archedby a banner containing The Academymotto that Founding
Member Dr RobertM. Weiler proposed. It reads: “MoresScientia
Sanitas” (Behavior-Knowledge-Health). The lamp is underscored by
2laurel branches, symbolic of conquest (ie,of knowledge); a series
of 5-pointed stars,which from heraldry represents knightlyrank and
is an ideogram for seeking outthat which is mystic; and finally,
the yearof The Academy’s founding, 1997.
Scientific Meetings of The AcademyThe Founding Members and
Charter
Members of The Academy had partici-pated in their share of
professional con-
Table 2Chronological List of Charter
Members of The AmericanAcademy of Health Behavior
1. Dennis L. Thombs2. Ansa Ojanlatva3. Gregory H. Frazer4.
Patricia D. Mail5. Raymond L. Goldsteen6. Eugene C. Fitzhugh7.
Lynda B. Ransdell8. Randall L. Cottrell9. Mark. G. Wilson
10. Michael W. Felts11. Patricia C. Dunn12. John P. Sciacca13.
Mary A. Nies14. Susan K. Telljohann15. Jennie J. Kronenfeld16.
Karen D. Liller17. Stephen B. Thomas18. David A. Sleet
-
The American Academy of Health Behavior
566
ferences that had attracted 10,000 ormore attendees and
necessitated thatthese meetings be held only in largecities such as
New York; Chicago; LosAngeles; San Francisco; Boston; Wash-ington,
DC; and the like. Moreover, activeparticipants in these conferences
rarelyhad opportunity to enjoy the venue inwhich their conference
took place and, asoften as not, became overwhelmed by thesize of
the meeting and the chaos of themetropolitan location. Founding
Membersand other early joiners who had enjoyedboth widespread
professional and personaltravel saw the advantages of having asmall
scientific meeting and pledged thatThe Academy would leverage this
advan-tage to host its scientific meetings in“unique and unusual”
settings – loca-tions that did not require space for thou-sands,
but rather, for 125-150 partici-pants. From its inception, the
FoundingMembers never envisioned The Academyas needing to become a
large organiza-tion in order to thrive, nor did they be-come
aggressive in soliciting members.The Academy’s mission was to
promoteand disseminate high-quality researchand be a home for
persons conductingrigorous health-behavior investigative
studies. The absence of great concernabout organizational size
opened the doorto the distinctive elements of exceptionalhotels and
venues of quaint hospitalityand other unique features. The first
sci-entific meeting of The Academy was heldin Santa Fe, New Mexico,
in September2000. Subsequent to that meeting, theBoard of Directors
moved to make thescientific meeting one that was held inthe first
quarter of the year. Consequently,no meeting was held in 2001; and
thetradition of having an early-year meetingbegan in 2002 with the
meeting in NapaValley, California. The full iteration ofmeeting
sites to date is shown in Table 3.
In addition to the unique and unusualfeatures of the locations
for the scientificmeetings, it was determined that the sci-entific
program itself would be entirelyplenary rather than diluted into
multipleconcurrent sessions. Moreover, some ofthe most renowned
researchers availablewere recruited as speakers for each ses-sion.
Whereas the emphasis of the plenarysessions of the first several
scientific meet-ings was to expose attendees to examplesof
rigorously conducted, cutting-edge re-search and a diverse set of
presenters andtopics, meeting organizers gradually be-gan to plan
around specific themes. Thefirst theme-directed conference
occurredat the fourth scientific meeting in 2004,“Translating
Health Behavior Researchinto Action.” The Academy returned to amore
generic program structure for its2005 scientific meeting, but since
2006,again has taken a thematic approach toconstruct its plenary
sessions.
Finally, the philosophy guiding the pro-gram plan was that a
portion of each daywould be free for persons to participate
inoptional workshops, meet informallyaround professional interests,
or disdainprofessional affairs for a period of the dayto return in
the early evening for struc-tured social activity concurrent with
sci-entific poster presentations. Thus, theoverscheduling that
occurs in many con-ferences was avoided, and the opportu-nity to
enjoy the comforts and attractionsof the host site with
professional col-leagues was encouraged.
The Development of MembershipCriteriaMost of the Founding
Members and
Charter Members of The Academy be-longed to one or more of the
traditional
Figure 1The Official Seal of
The American Academy ofHealth Behavior
-
McDermott & Glover
Am J Health Behav.™™™™™ 2010;34(5):563-572 567
professional health education organiza-tions – the American
Public Health Asso-ciation, the Society for Public Health
Edu-cation, the American Association ofHealth Education, the
American SchoolHealth Association, and the AmericanCollege Health
Association – as well as anumber of other professional groups.Some
had even held leadership positionsin one or more of these
associations.Whereas few of these early joiners of TheAcademy
abandoned other organizations,indeed they saw the potential of The
Acad-emy to play a unique role in advancingboth practice and the
status of the profes-
sion through the stimulation of research.Members of the first
Board of Directors
of The Academy were appointed by DrGlover. This Board was
described as a“worker bee” group inasmuch as therewas no true
executive director, no his-tory, and no previous modus operandi.
Inaddition to Dr Glover, members of theFounding Board included Dr
David R. Black,Dr James M. Eddy, Dr Nicholas K.Iammarino, Dr Mark
J. Kittleson, Dr MollyT. Laflin, Dr Terri Mulkins Manning, DrRobert
J. McDermott, Dr Mohammad R.Torabi, Dr Robert M. Weiler, and
DrChudley E. “Chad” Werch (Figure 2). Be-
Table 3Sites and Content Elements of The Academy’s Scientific
Meetings
Santa Fe, NMSeptember 23-27, 2000Hotel Loretto"Tobacco and
Alcohol, Nutrition, Obesity, DataSources"
Napa, CAMarch 24-27, 2002Embassy Suites"Theory-Driven and
Qualitative Research, Riskvs. Protective Factors, Technologies"
St. Augustine, FLMarch 16-19, 2003Casa Monica Hotel"Environment
and Policy, Prevention Science,Ethics, Health Communication,
andMethodological Advances"
Sedona, AZFebruary 29-March 3, 2004Enchantment
Resort"Translating Health Behavior Research intoAction"
Charleston, SCFebruary 20-23, 2005Charleston Place"Alternative
Paradigms for Health Promotion,Research with Racial Minorities,
Genetics andBehavior, Chronic Disease Management,Substance
Abuse"
Carmel, CAMarch 5-8, 2006Carmel Valley Ranch"Components of
Theoretical or ConceptualModels"
Savannah, GAMarch 25-28, 2007Westin Savannah Harbor"Multilevel
Health Behavior Research throughTrans-disciplinary
Partnerships"
Oxnard, CAMarch 9-12, 2008Embassy Suites Mandalay
Beach"Addictions: From Cells to Societies"
Hilton Head, SCMarch 8-11, 2009Sea Pines Resort"Adoption,
Adherence, and Maintenance ofHealth Behavior Change"
Clearwater Beach, FLFebruary 7-10, 2010Sheraton Sand Key
Resort"Implementation Science: Translating Evidence-Based Health
Behavior Research to Practice"
Hilton Head, SCMarch 20-23, 2011Westin Hilton Head Island"The
Art and Science of Community-BasedParticipatory Research: Methods,
Measures,and Evidence for Health Behavior Change"
-
The American Academy of Health Behavior
568
cause Dr Glover’s vision for The Academywas that it was going to
be different fromother health education groups, it wasnecessary to
cast aside some belief sys-tems so as to maintain a dedicated
focuson high quality with respect to all endeav-ors.
Initially, the Board strongly supported 3types of members:
Qualified, Associate,and Affiliate. In addition to meeting
othermembership criteria (detailed below),Qualified Members had to
possess at leastone of their formal degrees in healtheducation.
Associate Members met thesame criteria but could have their
formaldegrees and training outside of healtheducation. Affiliate
Members were ex-pected to be new researchers who did notyet meet
the qualifications to be Qualifiedor Associate Members. The Board
also
strongly supported a bylaws statementindicating that no more
than 25% of themembers of The Academy would be fromfields outside
of health education. Withina few years, that statement was
elimi-nated from the bylaws, in part, because itwas the antithesis
of the multidisciplinaryand “hybrid vigor” approach that was oneof
The Academy’s underpinnings. Basedupon similar reasoning, the
AssociateMember category also was eliminated,and requirements
specific to membershaving a health education degree weredropped
altogether.
Joining most professional organiza-tions merely involves
completing a facesheet of personal information and profes-sional
data, followed by submitting it alongwith payment of member dues.
The Acad-emy was the first organization of its type
Figure 2Members of the Founding Board of Directors of The
Academy
February 11, 1999
Front row L to R: David R. Black, Elbert D. Glover, Molly T.
Laflin, Chudley E. WerchBack row L to R: Terri Mulkins Manning,
Mark J. Kittleson, Robert J. McDermott,James M. Eddy, Robert M.
Weiler, Mohammad R. Torabi, Nicholas K. Iammarino
-
McDermott & Glover
Am J Health Behav.™™™™™ 2010;34(5):563-572 569
to require that applicants meet certainminimum qualifications
related to re-search prowess. To be a Qualified Mem-ber, applicants
needed to: (1) provide evi-dence of scientific training beyond
theundergraduate level; and (2) have authoredor coauthored at least
10 data-based pa-pers (quantitative or qualitative) publishedin
national or international journals thatregularly report the
findings of originalhealth behavior, health education, orhealth
promotion research. Thus, themembership criteria fulfilled another
ofThe Academy’s basic tenets – that ofbeing a meritocracy. The
category of Af-filiate Member was open to new profes-sionals and
doctoral students holding orworking toward a doctoral degree
whodemonstrated evidence of scientific train-ing beyond the
undergraduate level andhad at least 2 refereed data-based
papers(quantitative or qualitative) published innational or
international journals. Re-quiring data-based publications even
ofnew researchers made an emphaticallypowerful and proactive
statement aboutthe importance that The Academy at-tached to
research as well as serving as asegue later on for mentoring of
AffiliateMembers by Qualified Members.
Skeptics and Naysayers within theProfessionIt is accurate to say
that the emer-
gence of The Academy was not uniformlyembraced by everyone in
the health edu-cation field. Some said that creating andpromoting a
new health education orga-nization in what was already a crowdedand
fractionated field would only confoundthat situation further.
Others viewed TheAcademy as an unnecessary upstart be-ing promoted
by “a small minority of mal-contents.” Some saw The Academy as
acompetitor. Still others described it withactual contempt,
identifying The Acad-emy as being “elitist” (presumably be-cause of
its membership eligibility crite-ria and choices of scientific
meeting sites)and “sexist” (presumably because just 14of the
original 51 Founding Members andCharter Members were women). What
iscertain is that The Academy by and largedid not go unnoticed by
persons in theprofession. As time has passed, The Acad-emy has
established a niche for itself,has ongoing discussions with some of
itssister associations, and for a period ofmore than 5 years, was a
member of the
Coalition of National Health EducationOrganizations (CNHEO)
before opting towithdraw in 2009 to pursue other direc-tions.
Leadership and AchievementWithout question, The Academy came
into existence and survived its infancy asa result of the
vigilant oversight and fi-nancial infusion provided by Dr
Glover.The legal name and nonprofit status ofthe organization, the
establishment of ameans of dealing with income and expen-ditures,
the assignment of a professionaljournal, and the creation of an
organiza-tional logo were activities brought intofocus by Dr
Glover. The Board of Directorsand an Executive Committee of the
Boardheld semimonthly teleconference callsfor more than 2 years to
hone the bylaws,review applicants, identify officer rolesand
responsibilities, and forecast a timeand a place for the first
scientific meet-ing. While a faculty member at West Vir-ginia
University, Dr Glover hosted a meet-ing of the Executive Committee
at hishome in Morgantown during the summerof 1998. The first
face-to-face meeting ofthe full Board of Directors was hosted byDr
Werch at the Sea Turtle Inn at AtlanticBeach, Florida, in February
1999.
Dr Glover and others had been namedFellows in other
organizations where of-ten one’s service contributions,
namerecognition, and organizational longevityalone seemed to
satisfy inclusion crite-ria. Research and other scholarship,
ifrequired at all as credentials, needed tobe only modest. In
contrast, Dr Gloverwanted The Academy’s Fellow status tonecessitate
meeting explicit, rigorous,and verifiable criteria based
exclusivelyon one’s demonstrable scholarship withrespect to
research – peer-reviewed pub-lications, grants, and presentations
toscholarly audiences. Thus, in keepingwith the meritocratic theme
of the orga-nization, Dr Glover established the Fellowstatus for
researchers who had 50 ormore data-based peer-reviewed
publica-tions in journals of at least national dis-semination, and
who met at least one ofthe following criteria: (1) had made atleast
75 scientific presentations, (2) hadbeen awarded at least 25
grants, (3) hadbeen awarded cumulative grant fundingof at least
$1.5 million, or (4) had contrib-uted significantly to the
advancement ofknowledge in health behavior through
-
The American Academy of Health Behavior
570
research conducted and disseminated ofsuch magnitude as to equal
any of theother categories above. The Board of Di-rectors embraced
and approved the estab-lishment of these criteria.
Moreover, the Board discussed DrGlover’s recommendation and
eventuallyagreed to the establishment of a uniqueaward designated
for Fellows whose ca-reer made them stand out, even in a fieldof
accomplished individuals. This awardbecame the Research Laureate
Medal-lion of The Academy. Unlike the variousplaques, trophies, or
certificates that arecommonly received by individuals whoemerge as
the best in their field, theResearch Laureate Medallion was
in-tended to be an exceptional and prizedrepresentation of
excellence. The con-cept of the medallion and its eventualdesign
was a consequence of the com-bined labor of Dr Glover; Dr Robert
M.Weiler, a Founding Member; and Dr MollyT. Laflin, a Founding
Member, and later,President of The Academy. Dr Glover in-spired the
belief that being a recipient ofthe Research Laureate Medallion
couldone day be the benchmark of fame forhealth behavior
researchers. The firstrecipient of this prestigious award was
DrLawrence W. Green, a highly respectedresearcher, theoretician,
and philosopheracross numerous disciplines related tohealth
behavior and health care. TheAcademy quickly established the
tradi-tion of having the previous year’s recipi-ent become the
presenter of the ResearchLaureate Medallion to the subsequent
year’s awardee. A complete list of recipi-ents to date is
provided in Table 4.
In 2000, the Board of Directors grantedspecial recognition to Dr
Glover in theform of The American Academy of HealthBehavior
Lifetime Achievement Awardin acknowledgment both of his researchand
his tireless work as the visionary inestablishing The Academy. The
awardhas been presented to only one otherindividual, the noted
psychologist, re-searcher, and theorist, Dr Albert Bandura,in 2006.
Lifetime Achievement Awardrecipients clearly represent the “rarest
ofcompany” in The Academy.
By consensus approval of the Board forspearheading establishment
of the orga-nization, Dr Glover served as TheAcademy’s first
President for its forma-tional period. He was succeeded by
DrChudley E. Werch, The Academy’s first
Table 4Recipients of the Research
Laureate Medallionof The Academy
Table 5Presidents of The Academy
2000 Lawrence W. Green2002 Brian R. Flay2003 John P. Elder2004
Cheryl L. Perry2005 Steven Y. Sussman2006 Herbert H. Severson2007
Bruce Simons-Morton2008 Elbert D. Glover2009 Raymond S. Niaura2010
Kenneth R. McLeroy
Elbert D. Glover1997-2002
Chudley E. “Chad” Werch2002-2003
Robert J. McDermott2003-2004
Mohammad R. Torabi2004-2005
David R. Black2005-2006
Bruce Simons-Morton2006-2007
Steve Y. Sussman2007-2008
Molly T. Laflin2008-2009
Dennis L. Thombs2009-2010
David W. Seal2010-2011
-
McDermott & Glover
Am J Health Behav.™™™™™ 2010;34(5):563-572 571
official Founding Member, who also hadbeen instrumental in
performing a num-ber of the organizational tasks to launchthis new
professional group. Following DrWerch’s one-year term, The
Academybegan electing its President and otherBoard members,
choosing Dr Robert J.McDermott to lead the transition from
theFounding Board of Directors to its new eraof a member-elected
Board. Under DrMcDermott’s leadership, The Academy’sstrategic
planning process was launched;developed further by his successor,
DrMohammad R. Torabi; and completed dur-ing the term of Dr David R.
Black. A list ofall of the Presidents to date of The Acad-emy
appears in Table 5.
No less important in leadership func-tion was the assignment of
a person totake on the role of first Executive Directorof The
Academy. This role was capablyhandled by Dr Terri Mulkins
Manningfrom 1999 to 2005. Although an adminis-trator in an academic
institution at thetime of assuming her responsibilities, DrManning
was also a professionally pre-pared health educator, a Founding
Mem-ber of The Academy, and someone whohad a clear understanding of
the inten-tions of Dr Glover and the other FoundingMembers for
developing this new group.Using a set of skills established
beforeshe entered academia, Dr Manning wasin large part responsible
for the financialaffairs of The Academy and the negotia-tion of
venues for the first several scien-tific meetings. The increasing
demandsplaced on the Executive Director as TheAcademy matured as an
organization,accompanied by the evolving responsi-bilities of her
academic career, necessi-tated her departure as Executive
Direc-tor. She was succeeded by Dr Lori Marks,also a professionally
prepared health edu-cator, who guided The Academy for thenext 2 1/2
years. She, in turn, was suc-ceeded briefly by Cindy Hooker and,
later,by Joanne Sommers, the current Execu-tive Director.
The Academy has attracted scholarsfrom several disciplines,
shaping it intothe multidisciplinary group that was en-visioned.
Its scientific meeting receivedits first recognition of extramural
fundingin 2008 through a $12,750 grant from theUS Centers for
Disease Control and Pre-vention administered through the
FloridaPrevention Research Center. The an-nual scientific meeting
is now a coveted
Table 6Selected “Firsts” among
Members of The Academy
Member:Elbert D. Glover
Male Founding Member:Chudley E. Werch
Female Founding Member:Terri Mulkins Manning
Male International Member:Lawrence W. Green (Canada)
Female International Member:Ansa Ojanlatva (Finland)
Male Charter Member:Dennis L. Thombs
Female Charter Member:Patricia D. Mail
Conference Registrant:Mark Tomita
Master’s Degree Member:Penny N. Glover
Male Fellow:David R. Black
Female Fellow:Cheryl L. Perry
President:Elbert D. Glover
Member-elected President:Robert J. McDermott
Female President:Molly T. Laflin
Judy K. Black Award: Lisa A. Benz Scott
Lifetime Achievement AwardElbert D. Glover
Executive Director:Terri Mulkins Manning
-
The American Academy of Health Behavior
572
venue to be either an invited speaker ora research poster
presenter. The meet-ing has become an avenue for thementoring of
young researchers – throughroundtables, special mentoring
work-shops, and by means of the numerousinformal opportunities
provided to inter-act with highly accomplished research-ers. To
give formal recognition to anemerging researcher, The Academy
es-tablished the Judy K. Black Early CareerResearch Award as
further demonstra-tion of its commitment to nurturing re-search.
Judy K. Black was the wife of DrDavid R. Black, one of The
Academy’sFounding Members. She died in a tragicautomobile accident
in 2003. She washerself a dedicated professional, motiva-tor, and
mentor to students. This specialrecognition has been awarded 4
timessince its establishment, with the firstrecipient being Lisa A.
Benz Scott in2006. Subsequent recipients includedYvonne Brooks
(2007), Meena Fernandes(2009), and Yan Hong (2010). The Acad-emy
indeed has had a number of “firsts”that are worthy of
acknowledgment. Inaddition to some of those previously iden-tified,
a list of significant firsts is providedin Table 6.
A Reflection – What It Takes toCreate and Build a New
OrganizationThere is insufficient space to account
for every note and detail to explain what ittakes to evolve an
organization from anotion in one person’s mind, throughconcept
development and, ultimately, toone that has completed its 10th
scientificconference and is on the cusp of surpass-ing the
200-member benchmark. How-ever, a glimpse of the requirements
mightinclude
· A person with an inspired idea,· A cadre of dedicated
individuals mo-
tivated to help see it through,· A group of members with a
commit-
ment to excellence,· Time to grow and succeed,· Outreach to a
new generation of
scholars,· A pledge to take on new research
challenges, and· A bond to hold on to cherished con-
stants – high standards of excel-lence and a passion for
discovery.
As The Academy completes its firstdecennial of scientific
meetings, it canreflect favorably on what has been accom-plished.
It has abandoned neither its stan-dards nor its passion. It has
silenced mostof its skeptics and detractors. Most impor-tantly, it
has fulfilled the promise of itsvisionary: to place science and
discoveryas the premiere values of a field of en-deavor and to draw
upon the richness ofskilled investigators from a wide array
ofdisciplines. Whereas the richness ofthought and tradition among
members ofThe Academy alone may never succeedentirely in conquering
every health-be-havior research challenge on the hori-zon, The
Academy can take pride in hav-ing encouraged the spirit of many
re-searchers to seek out further discoveriesand new solutions. To
that end, and asThe Academy guard has changed, everynew
member-researcher has within hisor her grasp the possibility of
contributingto its further evolution.
AcknowledgmentsThe authors gratefully acknowledge
The Academy’s Founding Members, itsCharter Members, and those
memberswho have stepped forward to uphold thestandards upon which
The Academy wasfounded. They also thank selected mem-bers of the
Founding Board of Directorswho reviewed and provided feedback
toearlier draft of this paper: Drs David R.Black, James M. Eddy,
Nicholas K.Iammarino, Mark J. Kittleson, MohammadR. Torabi, and
Chudley E. Werch.