#membership-structure

#membership-structure

Curiosity is foundational in the arts, as demonstrated by the Menil Collection's exhibition, which transformed a gallery into an education room through public programs.

The first event is a roundtable on "Zhuangzi: Fate, Desires, Transformation" on April 6th at 9:00am Beijing time.

Modern scientific societies are increasingly vulnerable due to their dependence on membership fees and journal subscriptions, which are being challenged by the rise of virtual networking and open-access publishing.

The labor of this kind of organizing was invisible and deeply exhausting. In a precarious workplace, where a so-called 'performance review' could amount to job loss, organizing meant building a bridge while standing on it.

Most for-profit companies still confine nonprofit relationships to corporate philanthropy. Donations flow through foundations, annual reports highlight community contributions, and nonprofit engagement is framed as evidence of corporate responsibility.

Social platforms promised reach, scale and frictionless distribution. In exchange, publishers ceded control of audience relationships, data and, ultimately, trust. Today, that bargain is not working. Social media is imperfect. Feeds are flooded with bots, synthetic engagement, misinformation and bad actors operating under inconsistent or nonexistent moderation standards.

Losing staff could be detrimental to the projects we worked on, and there was a growing dissatisfaction with how meetings were run. These mostly one-sided discussions left the quieter half of us feeling pushed aside, like our thoughts didn't matter much. If things stayed this way, I worried the good people on our team would start quitting one by one.

Cuts that hurt are obvious: layoffs, program closures, college closures, furloughs, deferred maintenance, pay freezes, travel freezes, etc. It's a well-worn playbook at this point. Most of the moves in this category involve either attacking employee compensation, which causes obvious pain, or putting off necessary investments and living with gradual declines in quality.

In the early 20th century, sociologist Max Weber noted that sweeping industrialization would transform how societies worked. As small, informal operations gave way to large, complex organizations with clearly defined roles and responsibilities, leaders would need to rely less on tradition and charisma, and more on organization and rationality. He also foresaw that jobs would need to be broken down into specialized tasks and governed by a system of hierarchy,

Some of the significant partnerships emerging today are less about bolt-on capabilities and more about re-architecting how financial services show up inside everyday workflows, be it taxes, shopping, or rent. They are being designed to be invisible to the end user, yet foundational to how money moves, decisions are made, and trust is established.

It's been a hard year for higher education. He argued that the sector has been insulted, demeaned and assaulted, which has "disrupted our work" and "threatened our ability to do what we do for students, for communities and for America."

The change in the administration's tactics in Minneapolis is not a retreat. Instead, they are regrouping and planning another mode of attack, with the hopes that their repression might be met with resistance that is easier to control and contain. People who garner their relevancy and power through the dehumanization and oppression of others will do whatever it takes to cling to their soulless sense of self.

U.S. worker engagement has stagnated for decades, with more than two-thirds of workers feeling detached or disengaged. To reverse the trend, many executives have strived to build an "ownership culture," hoping personal responsibility will drive productivity. Yet most omit the most vital ingredient, actual ownership. We spent the past four years studying companies that committed to this missing piece, extending equity to all employees.

Executive team roles come with high expectations-and often minimal onboarding.

I've seen this before-many times, in fact. What you're describing is not unheard of in the nonprofit sector. Founder energy is one of the most powerful forces driving new missions into the world. It can also be one of the riskiest. Many organizations, especially those built from lived experience, passion, and necessity, begin with little more than a vision, a problem to solve.

Dear Transparency-Committed Reader, You're not alone. So many of us want decision-making to reflect our collective values (like transparency, care, and shared power), but it's hard to actually put those values into practice. That gap between what we believe and how we decide can be frustrating. And getting stuck in the process is a common concern I hear from groups. I am happy to share, though, that decision-making doesn't have to be a nightmare.

I'll never forget the moment that changed how I think about leadership. It happened during my tenure as president of the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, when I learned that one of our longtime supporters, a commercial real estate developer named Irwin, was nearing the end of his life and despairing that his contributions no longer mattered. We brought him to campus to show him otherwise.

Not too long ago, in the time before they became chiefs, our VPs would have been called deans, directors or, in the case of our chief financial officer, treasurer. (Indeed, some retain a dean title along with their vice presidential one-the vice president of student affairs and dean of students, or the vice president and dean of admission and financial aid.) I respect and value the work that they do, regardless of their title. I know them and am aware of their dedication to the college and the well-being of its students, faculty and staff.

The survey measured belonging by asking students to rate their agreement with the statement "I feel that I am a part of [school]" on a five-point scale, where 1 means strongly disagree and 5 means strongly agree. Students who rated their sense of belonging in their second year one step higher on the five-point scale than they did in their first year-such as moving from neutral to agree-were 3.4 percentage points more likely to graduate within four years.