200 Practical Decisions for Membership Organizations

By David Patt

Find out how organizations can be more successful by making practical decisions that work best for their groups, rather than by blindly adhering to rules, customs, or so-called professional "norms." Applying common sense and independent judgment will generate greater success than just doing what everybody else is doing. Practical decisions may sometimes be outside the mainstream. They may often be different than commonly accepted organizational practices. They may not always be embraced by others. But decisions should be made because they are the right choices for the organization, not because leaders want to be like everybody else. The liklihood of success, not a desire to conform, should govern the decision-making process.

• Language: English
• Publisher: David Patt
• Release date: May 16, 2012
• ISBN: 9781476271774

David Patt

David M. Patt grew up on Chicago's far north side, graduated from Boone Elementary School and Mather High School, and served as President of the North Town Community Council and of the Jewish Community Council of West Rogers Park.He served as an aide to Chicago Alderman Marion Kennedy Volini, working on legislative, zoning, and neighborhood development issues. He held leadership positions in political organizations and was the Independent candidate for 50th ward Alderman in 1983.As the Executive Director of not-for-profit organizations he represented community groups, runners, and nursing home residents and earned the CAE (Certified Association Executive) designation in the association management profession where he headed groups of event directors, appraisers, doctors, and others.

Book preview

200 Practical Decisions

for Membership Organizations

By David M. Patt, CAE

200 Practical Decisions for Membership Organizations

by David M. Patt, CAE

Copyright 2012 David M. Patt

Smashwords Edition

This ebook is licensed for your personal enjoyment only. This ebook may not be re-sold or given away to other people. If you would like to share this book with another person, please purchase an additional copy for each recipient. If you’re reading this book and did not purchase it, or it was not purchased for your use only, then please return to Smashwords.com and purchase your own copy. Thank you for respecting the hard work of this author.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever including Internet usage, without written permission of the author.

Digital edition by GoPublished

www.gopublished.com

Preface

The organization was quickly running out of money. Revenue had shrunk by more than half, for-profit competitors had cut deeply into our customer base, member services had deteriorated, and we could not pay our bills on time.

The program model I had inherited when hired as CEO just didn’t work. Members were runners and they wanted us to provide them with quality running opportunities.

We did that by producing numerous running events and by managing races (for a fee) owned by other entities. We spent most of our time and money staging these races, viewing other organizational activities as less important . That was the model followed by running groups everywhere. For us, it just didn’t work.

Members and other runners didn’t care who was managing these events. Private companies were competing with us for race management gigs and offering an equal level of quality and service. Our racing program wasn’t making enough money and we weren’t offering enough other benefits to improve our bottom line. The organization was in serious trouble.

So, to the surprise of many, we stopped managing races, sold our equipment to a for-profit competitor, and produced only two events for which we outsourced management (we soon reduced to just one – and eventually sold that one to a sponsor).

Instead of producing and promoting our own events, we drafted Standards for quality races and promoted others’ events (for a fee) if they agreed to adhere to our standards. And we focused on other member-based activities.

Many colleagues (and not-yet-paid vendors) thought our strategy was foolish. How could a running organization not produce races, they asked. While other running groups were expanding their event management services, we were eliminating ours. Where would our money come from?

It came from training programs, advocacy, and membership growth. Although that was not compatible with the culture of our industry, it paid off. Our programs grew to become our biggest profit center, advocacy efforts enhanced our reputation, and customer feedback evolved from disparaging criticism to contented praise. Our membership grew larger every year.

We had made a practical decision that was not popular at the time. But it was the right decision. It worked.

***

Organizational leaders should make decisions they think will work best for their organizations, even if doing so forces them to stray from commonly accepted practices.

They should be willing to ignore conventional wisdom and not blindly adhere to rules or customs or so-called professional norms. Very often, better choices will be available.

Here are 200 examples that demonstrate how membership organizations can make practical decisions to achieve positive results. Applying common sense and independent judgment will generate greater success than just doing what everybody else is doing.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

200 Practical Decisions

I. Priorities

II. Governance

III. Structure

IV. Management

V. Rules

VI. Personnel – employees

VII. Personnel – operations

VIII. Finance

IX. Membership

X. Meetings

XI. Marketing

XII. Government affairs

XIII. Publications

XIV. Web issues

XV. Culture

XVI. Ethics

XVII. Postscript

XVIII. About the author

I. Priorities

1. Benchmarking

Associations often want to find out how their income and expense items or their membership recruitment rates or their staff salaries compare to those of other organizations. They may even make decisions about fees and services based on what other groups report.

Benchmarking surveys are widely available in the association industry and in other industries and professions. In fact, they are often used as guidelines to help associations judge whether or not their operations are in line with their peers and, thus, being carried out appropriately.

But is it practical to accept benchmarking results as a guideline that should be followed? Are travel, printing, and meeting expenses, for example, the same for all associations? Does every organization favor the same staff salary schedules?

Does every industry or profession have the same culture? The same member needs? Should it be expected that associations representing consumer industries with high turnover, for example, will also experience high membership turnover?

It may be more practical to NOT follow benchmarking surveys. It may help to know how other associations conduct their business, but it may not be necessary to try to emulate them.

Every industry and profession is different, and every association within each industry and profession may be different, too. Modeling after other’s spending patterns, renewal rates, and salary schedules may not yield the same results in your association.

2. Board agendas

Most association Board meetings consist of reports. The Board Chair reports. The Executive Director reports. Committee chairs report. Perhaps staff or task force chairs report. A vendor or consultant may report, too.

A great deal of information is shared and Board members may be fully informed about association activities. But there may not have been any discussion of how the organization has progressed in meeting its goals. All that’s known is that a lot of people have been busying themselves with a lot of activities.

But is it practical to hold a meeting of the association’s governing body without addressing organizational goals and objectives? Were all the reports really necessary? Do some committees meet just so they can report that they’ve met?

How does the Board know if the association is actually fulfilling its goals and objectives?

It may be more practical to craft an agenda that focuses on the association’s strategic goals and doesn’t waste time on reports that are not directly related to those goals. Written reports can be included in Board packets for informational purposes. There is usually no need to talk about anything in those reports, so they don’t need to be on the agenda.

The Board agenda should consist, primarily, of the organization’s strategic goals. Committees and/or individuals responsible for programs dealing with those goals should relate the progress made toward their achievement. The Board should discuss whether particular milestones have been met and if goals or objectives need to be revisited.

Every committee does not need to report at every meeting. And some committees and individuals may need to report on more than one item.

If other issues require Board approval, those can be voted on before or after discussion of the strategic issues. The Board should not waste time reporting on, nor talking about, things that don’t move the association closer to fulfilling its strategic goals.

3. Dues increases

Association leaders don’t like to raise dues. And association members seem to share that attitude (sounds like government and taxes). So, associations often keep dues at the same level every year, despite the fact that salaries and operating expenses increase on an annual basis.

Associations continue delivering the same services – or more services, all the while searching for belt-tightening strategies to avoid dues increases. Sometimes staff salaries are frozen or other expenses trimmed to avoid charging higher rates to members.

Only when it becomes absolutely necessary does the Board revise the membership dues structure.

But is it practical to keep dues at the same level when everybody – even members – knows that legitimate expenses continually escalate?

Do members really appreciate an unchanging dues level when they value the services and know the association is paying more for them every year?

Are members impressed with the association’s economy-driven decisions or do they feel an obsession with low dues payments may be preventing growth and innovation?

What will happen when the association finally raises dues? Will the increase have to be so large that members will complain?

It may be more practical to raise dues a little bit every couple of years. Most members will understand the need and many won’t even notice the increases.

Besides, if the association is providing value to members, they’ll renew. If members don’t think the organization is worth a tiny dues increase, it probably won’t think it’s worth the old dues, either.

4. Comfort zones

Associations often adopt cutting edge formats for meetings and other events. They want to position themselves as leaders and offer ideas and ways of conducting business that are new and different. They want their organizations to seem vibrant, contemporary, and open-minded.

Most new concepts involve some form of social interaction, beyond what people might do on their own. Interactive educational sessions, idea sharing, and working lunches are among those. Speakers, facilitators, and meeting chairs may make concerted efforts to draw people out and lead them to become more engaged in group activities.

But is it practical to assume that everybody wants to be social and interactive? Is it really best to force people out of their comfort zones? Will everybody participate in these kinds of events? Or will some avoid association activities, for fear of being forced to do something they don’t want to do?

It may be more practical to include a mix of new and traditional types of events. Many members don’t want to talk, discuss, or share opinions. They just want to listen. They don’t want attention called to them. They may fear being embarrassed or forced into situations that make them feel uncomfortable.

Associations can schedule conferences with sessions having different types of formats. They can alternate programs between various modes of delivery. Above all, they should ask members what they want and advertise what is being provided, so members can make their own choices. And members should be given real choices, including formats that may not be considered new.

Avoiding the try it, you’ll like it attitude and respecting members attitudes and fears, will increase member participation and will allow members to become engaged in whatever way they choose.

5. Meeting in person

Associations are finding that some members are less willing or less able to spend time or money to attend meetings. Even local organizations often experience difficulty drawing people out of their offices and into meeting venues. But meetings of various sorts are still needed, so alternative modes are often implemented.

Webinars may supplement, or even replace, in-person educational sessions and sales opportunities. Virtual meetings may take the place of major educational conferences, utilizing continually developing technology to improve the quality of these events.

Board meetings and committee meetings are often conducted by telephone or video. That often makes it easier for members to participate, fulfill their decision-making responsibilities, and stay connected to the association.

But is it practical to totally switch from in-person to virtual meetings? Do virtual meetings offer the same opportunities for discussion and interaction as do in-person meetings? Can participants read physical cues – like facial gestures and fidgeting – when not meeting in person? Can they see everybody present at the meeting?

Are attendees of webinars and virtual meetings really engaged? Or are they distracted by other goings-on around their computer terminals? Do they actually tune out and do other work or do they pay attention as much as they would if they were meeting in person?

Can meeting goers – especially in small meetings, like Board meetings – speak more than once in a particular discussion without being perceived as chronic talkers? Does the etiquette of a remote meeting actually inhibit discussion and interaction?

It may be more practical to hold in-person meetings as much as possible, and not simply abandon them in favor of teleconferencing or virtual meetings. While respecting the travel and spending limitations of many people, in-person meetings are still beneficial.

Participants can interact personally (which is always better than remotely), use all of their senses to view all meeting activities, and can make more meaningful connections with each other.

6. Board confidentiality

Many associations prohibit Board members from revealing details about Board meeting discussions and votes to anyone, even members.

They feel that Board members will discuss business items more frankly if they know their words – and even their votes – will never be divulged.

But, in a world of heightened transparency, is it practical for a Board of Directors to cloak itself with an iron veil of secrecy?

Board meetings, by law, are open to all members of the association, so they are not secret. Except for items discussed in Executive Session, members can be privy to everything. Additionally, if members have to vote for Directors and Officers, shouldn’t they know how those people voted on issues important to the organization or the industry?

Association attorneys often take a great deal of time explaining to Board members how not to talk about Board activities. Wouldn’t it make more sense for them to tell how to talk about things? What they should or should not say? When and how they should or should not say it?

Some Directors are told to refer all inquiries to the Board Chair? Doesn’t that merely raise a red flag? Could that turn an innocent question into a controversial inquiry?

Secrecy may just breed suspicion and lead members to mistrust their leaders. Perhaps Board members who feel uncomfortable having others know what they said or how they voted should not be on Boards.

It may be more practical to teach leaders to be responsive, not how to be secretive. Members will appreciate the openness.

7. Dissent

Associations usually don’t like it when people disagree. Boards of Directors like unanimous votes and staff favors consensus about plans and procedures.

People who disagree with the majority are often looked upon as disruptive, argumentative, disloyal, or just plain wrong. So associations try to silence them, keeping them off Boards and committees, not hiring them for jobs, and not allowing them to write for newsletters or speak at meetings. They may rejoice when the naysayers are driven away or just drop out.

But is silencing dissent a practical decision?

Is the majority always right? Should all discussion be one-sided and all votes unanimous? Are there alternative ways of conducting association business? Should those be discussed?

Are dissenters really rabble rousers or are they just as committed to the association’s mission as are those who try to silence them?

It may be practical to not only allow dissenting views but to