Re: What would you like to see changed in the Maso
Let's make sure we are on the same page here. I am delighted to see that California is one of the few states with an increase in membership. Here is the report for 2012:
CALIFORNIA
| (2011) 57,250 | (2012) 63,546 net gain: | +6,296 |
Regardless of your success, the national net decline was -29.964 in 2012.
Membership is a trailing indicator. It tells what happened decades ago. The issue is NOW not decades ago.
What is needed is a leading indicator not a trailing indicator. There are in fact a leading indicators available. They are initiations and raisings. Those are the numbers to graph. Look up the initiations and raisings in your jurisdiction to see what has been happening. A few years ago I compared every decade in Illinois history plus the most recent decade. Both initiations and raisings saw a downward trend that bottomed out well over a decade ago. Both initiations and raisings are now in an upward trend.
To have better data I suggest calculating a 5 year rolling average and graph that per year. Do it for initiations, raisings and membership. Do it for your jurisdiction and every jurisdiction you have data for. At least California and Texas already see increasing membership - the trailing indicator of what already happened long ago. Currently Illinois sees some years with increasing membership and some years with declining membership - we have had an increasing trend of initiations and raisings long enough that the membership is bottoming out approximately now.
It is the leading indicators that predict, so they are the ones that need to be used for projections. The leading indicators are very clear that all 3 of my jurisdictions California, Illinois and Texas have a growing trend of new members. When I hear the anecdotal evidence of lodges elsewhere struggling to keep their degree teams functioning to keep up with the load, I conclude the trend is up across most US jurisdictions.
When predicting the future use the leading indicators. When analyzing the past use the trailing indicators. What far too many brothers are doing here is using the trailing indicator to predict the future and ignoring the leading indicators.
Whatever it is that California is doing, should be emulated by other states.
... and Texas and the other jurisdictions where the trailing indicator already shows growth. The two jurisdictions have very different practices and policies by the way. What is common is they are magnet states for young adults - They are riding a wave of generational change not of their own creation. Both have been very good at accepting new brothers of the new generation.
Also those jurisdictions where the leading indicators show growth. That's a *lot* more jurisdictions than the few with membership growth.
Where do you see this national growth?
In the predictive aka leading indicators.
[/QUOTE]If you wish to have faith in the fraternity, then wonderful.[/QUOTE]
I also have faith in the right numbers - initiations and raising trends - and in the wave of generational trends that has young men petitioning in droves. Industry might call them Millennials. I think we will end up calling them the Life Balance generation.