Demographic Clarification

My comments on March 13, 2014 seem to have created some distress among a few of my faithful readers, who misconstrued my comments as an elitist attitude toward limiting membership to the top 1% of the population. As much as I believe those who are members are normally among the top 1% of the population that perception is the top 1% of goodness and not necessarily financial success; I also believe the top 1% of goodness might easily translate into financial success.

It seems to me the concept of success flowing from ruthless predatory practices is built on faulty reasoning. In fact, Arthur Sheldon, of the Rotary Club of Chicago, proposed the idea of adopting He Profits Most Who Serves Best as the motto for Rotary at the convention in 1910. He was a man who believed the idea of serving your customers was a key to business success. And so it is that those who follow that idea are often financially successful.

My comments last week were aimed at debunking the idea that Rotary had somehow attained market saturation at 1.2 million members. The presumption that 1% of every community are the people who should be members of an organization like ours is based on a simple observation that 1% should be the percentage of the population with the right attitude toward service and the ability to devote some of their time and resources to the ideal of service.

With more than 7 billion people in the world today we can easily calculate that 1% represents more than 70 million people in our demographic group of potential members of Rotary. That number would suggest we are nowhere near market saturation in the demographic group we should be considering as potential members. There are 68 million, or more, potential members waiting for an invitation. They represent both genders, every ethnic background and generally those who are financially secure. That was my point!

1 thought on “Demographic Clarification”

  1. Steve, I like your “1%” statement analysis. In fact, I use that top “1%” to make comparison a lot too. I use it to differentiate income, intellect, talent, style, etc.
    In Rotary, I believe we are that 1%. Only ones who thrive for excellence may be fit to be an elite. Not to mention we, Rotarians who willingly groom others to be elites. If this is to interpret into being an “Elitist attitude”, then this is to say that our compassion, our devotion, our faith, are crudely eliminated altogether.
    Well, the short answer is: I’m on your side.

Comments are closed.