A Mensa Standard of Excellence:

It is human nature to want to be recognized for work done well, to have a tangible and personalized yardstick of success that can make the difference in spurring future positive, upbeat and innovative approaches to tasks. In a volunteer organization, this can be especially important.

Is there a point, however, in Mensa when awards become devalued, meaningless or even detrimental to an organization? Can awards themselves change the entire vision of an organization if the criteria for those awards necessitate conformity?

First, we must remember what Mensa is. Mensa is people—not bottom-line assets in a treasury report. Mensa needs our ideas, needs our relationships and needs our game-winning enthusiasm. Is material acknowledgment critical to achieving or maintaining those things? Or, as Angie Richardson from Mensa 76 said, "Volunteers might need and receive recognition and thanks—not an award—simply for having said they would do something and then having done it."

This is enlarged on by Mensan Daniel Gilmore:

"I wouldn't want anyone to think that I wasn't thrilled to receive my Lifetime Service Award (for entertaining at Gatherings for many years), but of course its impact was diluted by all the other Lifetime Service Awards that were passed out that year. In the back of my mind I could hear, `Well, if Gilmore gets it, we have to give one to Lederer and Steinhice too.' (And those names don't necessarily belong in that order—I never kidded myself that I was the prime recipient and the others were merely receiving placattio.)

"Tyger Gilbert received an Owl in 1987 for Much Ado About Mensa. It was stipulated strongly at the time that the award was not an annual one and that no more than one would be given out per year. In other words, the Owl was modeled after the Chopin Competition Awards. Sometimes several years go by without the top prize being awarded in that competition. When the prize is conferred, however, the recipient pianist is deservedly much prouder than if he or she has `merely' won first prize in an annual contest like the Rachmaninoff."

Most Mensans do not seem opposed to awards themselves but are divided on how many, how often, for what they are given and on what criteria they are based. Some believe that we need even more awards than are currently given in order to encourage and maintain a high level of service to Mensa among volunteers, that without awards many volunteer tasks would feel like the stone of Sisyphus. Other members believe that fewer awards or awards implemented in a different way would have a more positive and powerful impact.

American Mensa first considered giving awards in mid-1968. From the beginning, awards were controversial. Less than three months after their first consideration, a committee reported to the AMC that either many awards should be given or none at all. In spite of that recommendation, two "Certificates of Appreciation" became the first formal national awards and were presented in early 1971, followed that summer by one newsletter award that was won by Graffiti, the newsletter of Cleveland Mensa. By 1972, there was a newly named "Award of Appreciation" and six newsletter awards. The newsletter awards became an annual competition.

The number of newsletter awards has increased over the years, with often nearly two dozen given. The Owl was instituted in 1975 for the best overall local group newsletter and was not considered an annual award; however, the last time the Owl was not awarded annually was 1986.

"The Owl," says Alan Fields, "used to be awarded to a newsletter that provided exemplary service to the local membership, service far above and beyond the call of duty. We now hand out three Owls every year, categorized by group size. What used to be the occasional award for the rare, great newsletter is now commonplace. The award has lost value and meaning."

Allen Neuner adds, "Speaking just about the Owl, it was once given to a newsletter that, in the opinion of the award judges, was of such surpassing overall achievement that special recognition was due outside the newsletter categories. It was definitely not given out every year, and not split up by group size."

Awards other than the newsletter awards proliferated also. Life Membership Awards began in 1975. Local Secretaries Awards showed up in 1976. In 1980, the "Margot Award" came into being to honor American Mensa's first Executive Director, Margot Seitelman, and to show the esteem in which Mensa held her contributions to the organization. The "Margot" is to be bestowed only when the occasion arises to recognize exceptional service; the occasion has arisen more frequently in recent years, although the award remains highly coveted. There are National Service Awards and Distinguished Service Awards. We have the Chairman's service awards and we have regional awards. There is an award for the best proctor and awards for community service.

"Not to denigrate past recipients of these awards, but just as in the world of commerce, the rarity of an item increases its value," says Allen Neuner.

Alan Fields comments on another award that has made its mark on the trophy trail in the last few years: "The Group of the Year Award (GOTYA) is based on a scoring system that rewards the things that we are all required to (or should) do anyway; namely, publishing financials, publishing a local directory, recruiting/retaining membership and more. The GOTYA does not reward creativity and service; it rewards conformity. Once again, an award without value no matter how rare."

Does all this mean we should eliminate awards in Mensa? No. It does mean we should look at the purpose behind each award. What are we awarding? Creativity? Consistency? Conformity? And why are we awarding it?

Let's make sure we are giving awards and not Cracker Jacks prizes. Angie Richardson gives an example to which we can all relate:

"Think of the value of an `A' on a paper these days as opposed to 30 years ago. Hell, just 20 years ago, even. Think of the value of a Ph.D. when you know that all you have to do to get one is read the committee's works and cite/quote them heavily in your dissertation to grab that sheepskin from some institutions."

Let's distinguish between the "keepers" and the clutter.

—TJ Lundeen

[Editor's Note: The quotations in this article are from m-Grapevine, an e-list owned by Barbara Hunt. Permission has been given by each individual poster to use his/her material, modified as necessary. Two other authors give more insight into the awards issue in the following articles. Going Forward welcomes your feedback.]