A professional organization in which I am active recently surveyed its membership. For the first time in the organization’s 40 years of existence, each member was given the opportunity to respond to a set of questions that would offer the organization a clear picture of the interests, needs and priorities of the constituency that it serves.

The questionnaire was developed by the organization’s leadership and then fine tuned by a professional who is experienced conducting surveys. Finally, it was made available online to all members, who were reminded several times by e-mail to submit their responses. Filling out the questionnaire took 15 minutes, tops.

Roughly 45 per cent of members filled out the surveys. The professional who helped the organization put together the survey and interpret the results noted that a response rate of almost 50 per cent is usually high. Without even examining the actual results of the poll, he said that such a figure indicates a membership that’s very committed to the organization, one that cares deeply about its operation and future.

I, untutored in the ways of surveys, did not realize until then that, in the world of organizational involvement, when less than half the members of a group respond to such a poll, that represents an overwhelmingly high level of engagement.

But it makes sense. Because the truth is that far, far fewer numbers frequently determine an organization’s policy and direction. Call it the numbers game – it’s important that we pay attention to it.

Take, for example, the resolution brought forth (and, ultimately rejected) at the recent convention of the Modern Language Association, which I described in detail last month in this column. You may recall that the proposed resolution called for the MLA, which represents thousands of language and literature professors worldwide, to defend the academic freedom of professors to criticize Israel on university campuses.

Let’s consider the MLA as representative, in many ways, of similar professionally based organizations. Any member in good standing may put forth a resolution, but few do so. Any member may attend the delegates assembly and debate the merits of a resolution, but few do so. All members are invited to vote yea or nay, by mail and Internet ballot, on resolutions passed by the assembly, but very, very few do so.

These dynamics, which are typical of many organizations, permit a small group of people with strong – and one might even say extreme – views to run the show, while the rest of us sit it out.

All too often, a small, vocal and motivated group has a voice out of proportion to its numbers because most people – whether members of an organization, faculty at a university, members of a union, and so on – are distracted by, well, life.

Most of us have so much on our plate, professionally and personally, that we are more than happy to let an essentially well-run and productive organization or institution do its business without deeply engaging in it, at least most of the time. Often, people with more extreme positions engage more actively, because they feel more passionately about a particular set of issues, and because those issues are at the centre of their lives, rather than simply being part of a constellation of matters they think about. The rest of us would simply let things be.

If we care deeply about certain things, however, simply letting things be may be an indulgence that we need to rethink.

Reluctantly – and being mindful of the many other things that beckon to us, or of our discomfort with public speaking, or of putting ourselves visibly on the line or in the minority – we may need to weigh in and shift the numbers.

Because the numbers game can work in our favour. We can be among those few who bother themselves to move – to articulate a view, to push for or resist a change. It could be our values, our agenda or our causes that the apathetic majority will allow to move forward.

I have been sometimes surprised by how little effort it takes to shift the mood of a group, feel of a room, the result of a vote. Other times, I have been frustrated at how intractable an issue has become. But you have to play the numbers game to know.