I became a member of some professional societies in the past and paid annual dues to them. This allowed me to present at their conferences. However, if I do not intend to go to a conference in a given year, then I see no use in paying dues for that year. I may pay to join in a future year if I decide to go to the conference again, and did not switch fields so that is very possible. When listing memberships in my CV, is it okay to list these with my current memberships, or should I make note of the status in any way?
My search terms must not be right. All I can find is this stackexchange, but the asker never got a clear answer.
As a member of academic search committees, I’ve read and discussed tons of CVs. I don’t think we ever talked about what societies and associations people belonged to and we certainly never checked to see if they were paid up. And while my own CV would never, ever have an inaccuracy like that, :rolleyes: I’m pretty sure the same cannot be said of my colleagues. And if for some reason someone did challenge my CV entry, I’d do one of these :eek:and say the cheque was in the mail.
Also from the reviewer / search committee side (academia, STEM field): I’ve never cared at all about professional societies. By this I don’t mean I would approve of listing membership when you didn’t have it. Rather: why do you want to include these at all?
(Please don’t take the following as snark. I just want to give my honest take!) My opinion of a CV holder actually goes down a notch when I see these things listed. All it takes to get such a line item is to pay some organization $350 or whatnot. Why would I care that you did that? Active engagement in the field is assessable elsewhere on the CV (e.g., if you presented at a conference, that’ll be listed somewhere). Lists of professional societies feel like padding and/or naivety when I see them.
This question (well, certainly my answer) is in IMHO territory, though, so YMMV.
Some fields care about them. I allowed mine to lapse, but I would always just put the years in which I was active (most recent). They tend to matter more when you’re younger and more anonymous. The longer you go in a career, it’s more about what you’ve done in the field.
That’s what I’m unsure about. Most fields have a habit of including them, but that’s a different thing from anyone who looks at the CV actually caring. I readily admit that fields can have wildly different standards of assessment, but I have trouble fathoming that inclusion of these lists is anything other than perfunctory.
There’s a distinction between generalist and accrediting professional bodies. In the former anyone regardless of qualification or work in the field can pay their money and get the Pitcairn Geographical Society Journal, conference discounts and all the rest.
Societies that set professional standards will have a generalist category for fellow travellers, but their main business is to evaluate and certify people as meeting professional standards (relevant academic qualifications, requisite experience, adherence to a code of ethics perhaps). Often membership is closely tied to ability to practice, and in many ways they are trade unions for uni graduates. People work hard for the privilege of being a full professional member of the Easter Island Engineering Association, and don’t want someone coat-tailing on their reputation.
Banksiaman really has it. Those professional societies that matter you would not let lapse. They are part of your professional accreditation. Some you can’t actually let lapse, the accreditation is the membership and that is final. (Medical degrees in specialist fields often work this way. If you are a Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons, that is your accreditation, and the equivalent of a postgraduate degree.) Certified Engineer similarly, you would not be letting lapse.
Having been elected to fellow status, or similar, probably looks good on a CV for some things, but you can’t buy that, and it is doubtful it goes away if you let your membership lapse.
Technically, many societies do not regard you as a non-member if you don’t pay. You are simply non-financial. Your remain a member, but you have no membership rights. You may discover that if you “rejoin” you get back your old membership number and even joining date. To become a non-member you actually have to formally resign your membership.
No, I don’t include them because I expect people will care, I do it because colleagues do. And while resumes are supposed to be concise and specific (traditionally, 1-2 pages), academic CVs include everything and can be dozens of pages long.
I don’t expect them to check, I just don’t want to do something I shouldn’t. Although the information is somewhat redundant with published abstracts/talks/posters, it might be argued it is still useful as it shows what “circles” you run with.
Right. But freedom of space doesn’t mean you have to pad it out. Including them is mostly harmless, but in a “harmless with the potential for a roll-eyes” sort of way.
As for colleagues including them: most CVs are not good at their intended purpose(s). Listing professional memberships of the type you’re talking about (rather than accrediting groups and the like) is one of several commonly promulgated aspects of CVs that are either not helpful or actively anti-helpful. Like including birth date or birth place.
In any case, if you do include these, I’m in the camp that (1) you should state things without falsehoods, and (2) there is no way in a million years that anyone would follow-up on the years of membership.
Academic CVs are just plain stupid. We used to joke that one of my colleagues would go to the toilet and then rush back to his office to add it to his CV.
Back when I used to be in the race, I’d ignore the vast majority of what was on an academic CV. We all knew the game, and simply didn’t even bother to read all the stupid junk that was accreted. You looked for the important bits, and built a short-list.
All that matters is that the applicant can show they are going to bring in dollars. Ability to publish in high end journals and get grants. (Or that they have the promise to become such a person.) Everything else is ignored. Really.
I check, and I think it’s unethical to imply you’re a current member of a group if you’re not. I have the opporutnity to cross examine expert witnesses pretty often. Earlier this year I made a doctor look pretty shady by exposing the fact that 6 of the 8 societies he claimed to be a member of on his CV said he hadn’t been a member in years. Just say “Michigan Psychological Association (1995-2003)”
The only time it was brought up was when they explained that for accreditation I had to become a member. They almost expected my membership to have lapsed.