In her first PRAASA panel presentation, MSCA 09 Secretary Ryan W. presented on Panel 4: “Carrying the Message Inside A.A.,” on the topic of “Intergroup Participation in the General Service Structure.” With her permission and for your information, her presentation follows:
Good Evening,
INTRODUCTION
My name is Ryan and I’m an Alcoholic. My sobriety date is 12/6/11, my Home Group is The Family Afterword, which meets on Friday nights in Costa Mesa, CA., and I am currently serving as the Panel 70 Area 09 Secretary. I love Alcoholics Anonymous and it is a privilege and honor to be here.
Before beginning, please allow me to thank the individuals that shared their knowledge and experience with me in preparation for the topic today: Intergroup’s participation in the General Service Structure.
TIME STARTS:
This presentation is organized into three parts:
- First, a brief overview of Intergroups and the General Service Structure.
- Second, it explores Intergroup’s participation in the General Service Structure.
- And third, identify some “food for thought” items that might help spark ideas on how to grow and improve the relationship and involvement between the two entities.
First, a brief overview of Intergroup/Central Offices, which I will sometimes refer to as ICOs, and the General Service Structure
Intergroups and Central Offices are an “A.A. service that involves partnership among groups in a community.” They are often described as the A.A. front line and provide services such as meeting directories, answering phones, setting up 12th step calls, and selling literature. As of late, there are some with a chat functionality, extending their reach.
According to the General Service Office, as of 2/23/2020, there are around 370 Intergroups or Central Offices in the U.S. and Canada (around 320 in the U.S. and around 50 in Canada). Please keep in mind that the numbers can fluctuate.
Moving along to the basics of the General Service Structure for the U.S. and Canada …
The Service Manual states, The General Service Structure is the framework in which “general services” are carried out. It is a method by which A.A.’s collective group conscience can speak forcefully and put its desires for Conference-wide services into effect. It ensures the full voice of A.A. will be heard and guarantees that the desired services will continue to function under all conditions.” It is visually represented by the “Upside-down triangle”.
Intergroup participation in the General Service Structure – Nuts and Bolts
Intergroups and Central Offices do not have a specific or defined role in the General Service Structure.
In a 2011 letter, former General Service Board Chair, Ward Ewing, sums up the relationship, “In some places, a reciprocal relationship exists between Intergroups/Central Offices and the Area structure. In these cases, an Intergroup may have a liaison to the Area and the Area may have a liaison to the Intergroup – in some instances the liaisons will have both a voice and a vote on Office or Area matters and sometimes only a voice. Any expansion of [Intergroup/Central Office] participation in the Conference structure, beyond the aforementioned, would have to go through the General Service Conference process.” As a note: In the Pacific Region, about half of the Areas give Intergroup Liaisons a vote in Area Assemblies.
Thus, at the General Service Conference and Board of Trustees levels, two key components of the structure, Central Offices and Intergroups are not represented. There is a sentiment by many that there is a need for more communication and greater considerations of the impacts GSO decisions and policies have on Intergroups and Central Offices. For example, the use of Intergroup/Central Office Meeting Guide information to feed find a meeting results on aa.org (website managed by GSO) and the decision to start selling literature direct to consumers on aa.org. It is generally felt by Intergroups that many Central Offices have closed for financial reasons since the AA.org online sales distribution model changed, and many attribute the closures to a loss of literature sales.
Although Intergroups and Central Offices do not have a direct role in the General Service Structure, there are relationships between GSO and Intergroups that are important, in some cases, vital, to supporting the fellowship. Examples include:
- Literature and Literature Sales – According to the General Service Office, currently, an estimated 55-60% of literature sales came from Intergroups/Central Offices. In 2018, this represented roughly $6.7 million of a $10.7 million total. As was mentioned in previous panels, Literature sales support GSO by covering the difference between operating costs and group contributions. (Note: did not have time to say this in the presentation – While this is true at the GSO level, it can also be true for Central Offices. This is the reason that when GSO changed the literature sales model, Central Offices were financially impacted, and as previously mentioned, some had to close.)
- The Meeting Guide App – The Meeting Guide App requires support from Intergroups/Central Offices and the General Service Office. The key information provided, meeting information, comes from Intergroups/Central Offices. As of last week, according to the GSO, approximately 300 Intergroups/Central Offices provide their meeting directories to the App.
- ICOAA – This stands for Intergroup, Central Office, AA World Services, AA Grapevine. This body was established with the goal of expanding education, fostering a partnership, improving communications and sharing ideas between Intergroups themselves, and between Intergroups and General Service. There are annual “Seminars”, which are attended by Intergroup/Central Office representatives and members of AA World Services, AA Grapevine, AA Board of Trustees, and GSO Staff.
Also, again outside of the scope of the General Service Structure, there are efforts being made to improve communication and connectedness. Examples include:
- Intergroup/Central Office Communication Committee – Intergroups and Central Offices recently formed a “Communications Committee”. One of the committee’s primary goals is to create/foster an open dialogue between Intergroups/Central Offices and the General Service Office.
As such, GSO and the ICO Communications Committee initially planned to have quarterly calls. However, after the first meeting, scheduled in Jan 2020, was cancelled, the two parties are stepping back and clarifying the purpose of the committee. - New Consultant at GSO, Bob W., was recently brought on and is part of the GSO team focused on improving communication and cooperation with Intergroups/Central Offices.
“Food for Thought”
Now, some food for thought – assessing the current relationship(s) and identifying possible ways to grow and evolve the relationship between the two entities.
- Is the General Service structure, as it is today, giving sufficient consideration to Intergroups?
- Does it adequately consider the effects of its decisions on AA Intergroups? Provide them with timely and adequate information in order for them to have a voice in the decision-making process and to prepare for the consequences of a change?
- Does a representative of your District attend Intergroup meetings? What about your Area? Are Intergroups invited to your Area meetings? Do they have a voice? A vote? Both?
- Are we considering each other’s calendars when scheduling events?
- Are we coordinating Public Information and Cooperation with the Professional Community efforts?
Again, these are just a few comments to help spark ideas and generate conversation.
To summarize, both historically and at this time, Intergroups do not have a defined role in the General Service Structure, and any change to this would have to go through the General Service Conference Process. That being said, it is still critical that the two organizations communicate and work in parallel to support the fellowship.
(did not have time to say this in the presentation…
And, in closing, a quote from Bill W.s about our structure in Concept VI: ‘Of course there is no desire to freeze these relations into a rigid pattern. However satisfactory and right ,… the future may reveal flaws that we do not yet envision. New conditions may require refinements or even considerable alterations… God forbid that Alcoholics Anonymous ever become frozen solid in its ways of doing or thinking. Within the framework of our principles, the ways are apparently legion.”)
In Love and Service, Ed. L,
MSCA 09, Panel 70 Delegate
msca09delegate70@yahoo.com
(760) 964-0012