The Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 279 No 7459 p15
7 July 2007

This article
Reprint   Photocopy

PDF 30K, Acrobat Reader

Can the Society convince members to join the new royal college-type body?

By Chijioke Agomo

Separating professional regulation and representation General Pharmaceutical Council and a royal college-type body for the Society

Probably, nothing in the history of the profession has generated as much debate as the recently published White Paper recommending the split of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society. Although the profession appears divided about the decision, most pharmacists are now beginning to accept that it is irrevocable.

It is expected that the split will lead to a General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC), the body to take on the regulatory functions of the Society, and a body akin to a royal college to handle the representative functions. Although, the GPhC remains a responsibility of the profession (and the pharmacy profession should now be arguing for a pharmacist majority on its council), the debate is, however, now focused on the formation of a body akin to a royal college. It is the wish of the Society and the Government that, after the split, most of the membership of the Society will transfer their membership to the representative body.

However, we all know how difficult this will be unless something is done to convince the membership of the need to join the new representative body. In realising this truth, the Government has now directed the Society to use the next year to convince the membership of its vision of a body akin to a royal college, and the need for the membership to join the new body.

Not many pharmacists are likely to want to join the new representative body if membership is voluntary. It is, however, envisaged that the new representative body for pharmacy will be a voluntary organisation, unlike the GPhC, which will have to be a mandatory regulatory body for pharmacists and pharmacy technicians. One of the major difficulties, which the voluntary nature of the royal college will create for the Society, will be how to ensure that the new representative body generates enough money to finance its numerous financial obligations.

This financial burden has, therefore, led some members to suggest that allowing enthusiastic technicians and pharmaceutical scientists to join the representative body will help guarantee the financial future of the new representative body. Those opposing the inclusion of non-pharmacists argue that the agendas and aspirations of this group are different from those of pharmacists. Although the consideration for financial independence is something paramount for any organisation, this should not necessarily override the overall long-term vision of setting up a representative body.

Politicians frequently apply marketing principles in order to win votes. The situation is not much different in the investment and marketing sectors, where marketers use methods based on discovering customer needs to market new and old products. In these situations, when a particular brand or product is not performing well, as is common when the life cycle of a product is nearing its end, companies rebrand or sell more benefits of the original brand to the customers through advertising to maintain or surpass sales targets.

A good example of this is what happened in the last UK council elections, in which the Conservative party used similar methods to win back votes from the other parties. These basic marketing methods can be adopted by the society to convince the membership to join the new representative body. One step would be to recruit or seek the advice of a marketing guru to guide the Society on how to overcome this all-important hurdle.

Some tips from PSNZ (Inc) might help. PSNZ (Inc) is the professional body that survived when regulation, in the form of a Pharmacy Council, was separated from the Pharmaceutical Society of New Zealand (PJ, 16 October 2004, p555, and 28 October 2006, p509); it retained most of its members.

Locally, we can learn from the Pharmacists’ Defence Association how the organisation has been able to recruit over 12,000 pharmacists as members within three years of existence. The British Medical Association is another story, as its membership is now in excess of 120,000, while that of the Royal College of Nursing stands at over 300,000.

These organisations are all voluntary bodies with membership open mainly to their own key professionals and students. With the present pharmacists’ membership of the Society standing at over 40,000, can we really go wrong? I do not think so, particularly when there are many other notable representative bodies around the world, for example, the PSNZ Inc and the Canadian Pharmacists’ Association with pharmacists’ membership of less than a quarter of that of the society.

As a member of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society who is also in touch with the ordinary members of the Society — usually employee pharmacists — I am aware that employee pharmacists are usually uncomfortable in identifying with the policies and aspirations of the Society. Employee pharmacists are usually the cows that produce the milk for the farm and without them the profession would probably grind to a halt.

Over the years most pharmacists have felt neglected by the profession, caused mainly by the Society’s dual role, which unintentionally made it difficult for the Society to represent individual members in the right way. As the Society works towards engaging with the membership, many of the issues it will need to consider will include:

• Finding out what the needs and aspirations of its members are

• Finding out how it can offer better representation of individual pharmacists — and groups — offering more support in times of crisis

• Negotiating on behalf of employees with employers for better working conditions and fair remuneration, in line with the rewards received by other similarly skilled professionals in the UK

• Ensuring that the image of pharmacists to the public, the Government and other health care professionals exudes confidence and trust

If the Society engages with pharmacists as responsible professionals who are capable of making individual decisions for the overall benefit of the profession then it will have no difficulty in getting them on board the newly envisioned body akin to a royal college. This cannot be achieved by assuming that most pharmacists do not care about what happens to the profession. Most pharmacists are passionate about their profession, but it is the way that they have been left to fend for themselves that has been the cause of the apathy shown by many towards the Society and its policies.

If the Society is rebranded to create a more attractive image, I do not see why most pharmacists will not see it as an indispensable ally. However, using the short-term strategy of attracting non-pharmacists to fill the anticipated vacancies created by unimpressed pharmacists, on the excuse of inclusiveness, will probably do the profession more harm than good in the long run.