CPA governance restructuring and section autonomy: a case study in organizational resistance to structural diversity

Abstract

Abstract This case study critically examines governance changes enacted within the Canadian Psychological Association (CPA) following internal advocacy for structural representation of Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) members. Drawing on qualitative document analysis, the study examines a series of bylaw amendments proposed and approved by the organization’s leadership that centralize authority within the Board and Chief Executive Officer while reducing the autonomy of constituent member groups (CPA Sections). Using the lenses of power hoarding and the division of powers framework, the analysis explores how governance reforms may reshape organizational authority, representation, and accountability. The findings illustrate how the amendments systematically shifted decision-making power away from Sections and toward central leadership, despite emerging in a context of explicit calls for greater structural diversity and power sharing. As such, the reforms can reasonably be understood as a form of organizational resistance to structural diversity. This case contributes to understanding how governance reforms may influence equity initiatives within professional organizations and offers practical implications for organizational governance, diversity consulting, and institutional accountability.