Reader Response To Our Ten Question Editorial Rant Was Overwhelming... And Thought-Provoking

Here’s to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The troublemakers. The round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently. They’re not fond of rules. And they have no respect for the status quo. You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them. About the only thing you can’t do is ignore them. Because they change things. They push the human race forward. And while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius. Because the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world, are the ones who do.

Apple/Steve Jobs

A little over a week ago, I noted that I was learning a lot in the process of researching the necessary issues to be pursued at the upcoming Aviation transformation Conference. I learned a lot from hundreds of conversations... both in what people said... as well as in what they questioned.

This inspired the Ten Questions Editorial that I published a few days ago... and ANN readers responded in great numbers and even greater detail. So much detail, in fact, that I think it behooves us to whittle down some representative selections from the flock of responders and allow each question to be answered via the many thoughts, comments and even more questions raised by those who took SO MUCH time to respond with extensive replies.

Herewith, are some of the responses to Question #10...
Whaddya think... Is AOPA a better organization with its new leadership (Fuller) or was it better when Phil (Boyer) was running things? Same question for EAA (possibly a mite premature at this point)... is EAA better now with a year's worth of new leadership, or was it better with Tom Poberezny's leadership?

ANNRep--ANN Reader Responses

ANN Reader John Y: Short answer is it is the same. Many probably liked Phil better than Craig; but the organization was not addressing the problems under Phil any better than under Craig. The issue is that there are probably more factors and organizations effects aviation today than 20 years ago. Phil said that as well. Craig has actually reorganized and hired more people to better deal with the number of issues. Phil started to have AOPA do more services and Craig has continued that. Those cost $ and so here is more fees for those added services. I don't think you can please everyone. I want a more active AOPA that is doing research in to the cost of aviation and gather data on the impact of legislation, regulation and litigation and then proposing remedies and educating the appropriate bodies and trying to build consensus to make real change. That is going to take a new AOPA that has more research capability and is doing more to effect the change. The AOPA members have to better articulate what they want AOPA to do from them. There should be more dialog. Do we need an organization more like a consignor or a strong lobbyist or both? Right now; I think Craig is not doing enough strategic planning to get the staff positioned for the next 5 years. Their membership is dropping. They need to show that they can be the leaders not just maintain status quo.

EAA has a far better change of growing than AOPA. Amateur Built aircraft will soon be the only private aviation that is still reasonably priced that common citizens can participate in. EAA is about to have the government attack them. NTSB and FAA are not investigating their accident structure. EAA will have to insure that they are not regulated out of business. The only way they can stop the government is to step forward and take on more of the educating and DAR type function. EAA has tried to develop a network of chapters with a HQ oversight function. I think who the leader is over the next 5 years will be more about how they build up the network of technical support. The new kit maker network is starting to get FAA attention and that could bring more oversight on kit builders as well. I think Rod did a far better job of his transition. Craig's background and personality is more Washington based and that is causing the field to be less happy with Craig over Rod. Both men are very capable and great aviation advocates. It is how each will lead us through the challenges that we are presented with that will determine their legacy. It is not about whether they are better than the men they replaced. Replacement is a normal part of any organization. Each organization has to adapt and change. One thing is for sure; we need both organizations performing at their best for GA to remain in this country.

ANN Reader David N: (AOPA) too early to tell - I am unhappy with wine clubs etc. but not the advocacy. (EAA) WAY too early to tell. Only after Hightower has earned a place at the table in Washington DC with a few congressmen and senators will we know (how many candidates running for president have pilots licenses?)

ANN Reader Skip L: No. And No. You recently have made the AOPA case, and EAA is even more greatly burdened with overhead, both personnel and plant. As it is the nature of successful enterprises to expand as they grow, AOPA and EAA are both victims of their own successes. As we, the members, are not privy to the plan B, it seems that #9 applies here as well.
Under both Phil and Tom, the organizations grew, so to quote Obama, it's Bush's fault. Fuller seems to have fallen under the spell of the Plantation Party of AOPA in years gone by. And they have gone by, so he needs a reality check. Unless he really screws up and ignores reality, it is likely a rather more modest AOPA will survive.
Rod, on the other hand, has not yet put his imprint on EAA. Tom was burdened by Paul's success in good times, and, being competitive, needed to make his own grand mark on the organization. Which he did, most recently with the large, expanded exhibit buildings and the site restructuring. The long term debt may not challenge Obama, but perhaps Tom saw the writing on the balance sheet and said "time". Hopefully, Rod, and BOD, have a workable plan, and he will institute it last week. He seems like a good guy, likeable with some good past experience and I hope he can dance, because his on-the-job experience will most certainly require a light-footed operator.

ANN Reader Ken R: Of all of your questions, this is the one I feel strongest about. Phil Boyer was better by far. Personable, approachable and no oversized ego. Fuller, on the other hand is self serving, egotistical, and pompous. I do not live far from Frederick, MD, AOPA's headquarters town. Two other pilots and myself flew to Georgetown, DE (GED) for a $100 hamburger at the airport restaurant. We were the only ones in the restaurant and there was only one plane parked out front. We were obviously pilots. I even had on my AOPA hat. Fuller landed in the AOPA Caravan, came in with 2 other people, and never said a word to us or even acknowledged our existence. Additionally, I wrote a letter to him (not an e-mail) regarding the ongoing overkill of solicitations for the four AOPA sub-organizations. I actually sent checks for 3 of the 4 but refused to contribute to the political AOPA-PAC. Never received an acknowledgement of my letter (the 3 checks were cashed) even though I had included my e-mail address to give him (or even his secretary) a chance to reply. NOTHING. And one other validation of my opinion was experienced this year at Oshkosh. I went to the AOPA tent. Fuller was there and in the 30 minutes or so that I was observing, he never once took the time to speak with anyone other than AOPA staff members.
I keep hoping to read a press release announcing the return of Phil Boyer. Short of that I am seriously considering canceling my membership. I am tired of the solicitations by mail and e-mail. They never end (even if you send checks as I did). AOPA is an out of touch organization. The only tangible benefit is the magazine and the flight planning and they hardly have a monopoly on either. They couldn't even stop the absurd requirement for pictures on our licenses. Hardly what I would consider effective.

ANN Reader Dave H: (AOPA) Phil was much better. As a whole AOPA is worse now. I have considered dropping my membership. (EAA) I go to OSH every year. My A26 broke this year and we spent 5 extra days at the B17 hgr. I was able to meet Rod and was very impressed. A co-worker lives in OSH and is a Chairman of an EAA committee. He was ecstatic that Tom retired and sees only great things from Rod. I have the utmost respect for Paul P.

ANN Reader Hunter H: (AOPA) I miss Phil. (EAA) Better now with a year's worth of new leadership, or was it better with Tom Poberezny's leadership? My EAA number is 37,802, so my involvement goes back a ways. I know Paul and Tom personally and find it difficult to imagine an EAA without either of them at the helm. I've met Rod Hightower, and he seems an enthusiastic nice guy, but whether he will be an effective leader in terms of GA's survival, it's too soon to say.

ANN Reader Richard E: Mr. Fuller was … and is … a political being. He owes his current job to his past political roots - and it is not likely that he is going to change who he is or what he has done to be successful in the past.
Mr. Boyer had an airplane background which provided the incentive and focus to how he directed AOPA during his tenure. He did not change who he was or what he had done in the past that made him successful.
Associations … corporations … even ANN … are derivatives of the leadership at the top. Employees and/or volunteer workers are "punished" or "rewarded" by the way they reflect the values of what the leadership wants, expects, needs, or believes.
The real question to be asked is not whether one leader or the other is or was better - but rather, is the current leadership what is needed for the future?
And the answer to that question lies in what the "membership" (and/or Board of Directors in the case of a corporation) thinks is best for its long term interests. If the membership believes that the government and the FAA is going to prevail in the future - that "politically attuned" leadership may be the answer. If the membership believes that the organization must change the course or path of the industry, then "entrepreneurial" management might be a better choice.

(EAA) Behavioral studies of leadership change management suggest that any person walking into a new job has 90-days to establish a new path; and up to 24 months to validate that the new path is achieving whatever goals or targets have been established.
As noted above, all of the alphabet soup aviation entities are fighting for new members from a declining population base. It's a fight for survival. While they are all banding together in an attempt to expand the base - it is expansion in the name of self-interest.
Within that framework, the current leadership of EAA has set out to accomplish some new and different goals. Whether they will work is not yet clear; but they do seem to be making more headway than the programs implemented by AOPA over the past few years.
As for my personal views, I've learned from experience to not trust Fuller; and by example, to not trust Poberezny - even though they are at opposite sides of the behavioral platform in leadership styles.

ANN Reader Pat M: (AOPA) Too early to tell but I don't think so. He's too interested in raising money... (EAA) Too early to tell.

ANN Reader Ben E: (AOPA) Better with Phil Boyer. I don't like all the other money-making schemes. Plus, the number of mailings is excessive. For instance, I buy the Christmas cards, because I like them, but, even after I buy them, they send me multiple packets to try and get me to buy. They just wasted the money they made on my buying them. I can't understand how it is anything but a losing proposition. Also, they have become more political than ever, with the same drivel coming out of their mouths on a constant basis. I miss Phil. While he did beat the political drum at times, it wasn't constant and he did seem to pick the fights a little better.
(EAA) Nice change. I think I will like Rod Hightower as he is very in touch with his flying roots. He does not seem very political. It was time for a change.

ANN Reader Tom B: (AOPA) Not sure. It seems Craig is at least getting the blame for some of the dumber things that are happening within the organization. Phil seemed to take credit for things that maybe he helped change (user fee's).
(EAA) Premature. I will say the newer sport aviation magazines are much nicer, and readable, even though the size is funny.

ANN Reader Ralph R: AOPA is a joke run by a marketing pin head - I am no longer a member.

ANN Reader Scott K: I don't think that AOPA is better under new leadership. Both it and the EAA have diluted themselves too much trying to handle all the different aspects of GA during a declining interested population. Using the internet, it would be better to focus on specific sub-populations. I.E. I really don't care what is going on in the turbine area, but I do care about LSA's because I may be getting too old for my twitchy Lancair. OK, Experimental certified LSAs. The EAA should rename itself the Eclectic Aircraft Association with an Experimental division - Golly, its logo could stay the same.

ANN Reader Dale S: I have not seen any difference except I seem to get more mail trying to get me to renew or selling something. Too early to say about the EAA.

ANN Reader Kirk V: AOPA - Gone too far toward turbine and big $$$$. EAA - Seems to be getting it. I wouldn't join for years because they were too much about warbirds and other mega buck projects. I am now a member.

ANN Reader David T: AOPA has gotten to be a joke. A WINE club?? Seriously?! The only thing good I can see they do is help with FAA medicals.

ANN Reader George P: I don't think AOPA is on the right course. Craig Fuller seems focused on "inside the beltway" legislative issues to the exclusion of the rest of General Aviation. Every time I see him talk at town halls or aviation gatherings, his rhetoric is akin to that of a politician. Phil Boyer did a better job of bringing balance to AOPA. He handled Washington issues when needed but still found time to act like a pilot and seemed to have more in common with the rank and file of AOPA membership.

ANN Reader Eric W: I see little difference. You would think there would be somebody making some noise at Congress, but no one does. Those guys have been derelict in their duty, but the FAA and AOPA play all nice about it. 

FMI: ANN Readers Respond To Our 'Ten Questions' Editorial Changes At AOPA and EAA