Customer Service Matters

One of our client associations is very deeply involved in measuring customer experience and its role in companies' profitability or lack thereof. From my perspective, then, it's very easy to see how the treatment of customers (or members) can have an enormous impact on the success or failure of companies large and small. But the importance of good customer service comes into even sharper focus when one is dealing with a customer service process that seems like it was designed to alienate and upset customers.

This little experience that I'm about to describe has convinced me that AT&T is striving to achieve the same infamy as has found companies like Comcast, Sprint Nextel, and, AOL, which have been rated by customers as abject failures in customer service.

========================================

I almost never make international calls from my home. There's just no need. But on May 27, I had to participate in a very long telephone call with a group of people who were meeting in Lisbon, Portugal. Because their meeting began at 9:00 am local time, I had to call in at 3:00 am local time. I was not interested in going to my office to make the call, of course. I didn't think anything of it; I just dialed in on my home phone and got on the call.

The next day, or the day after, I arrived home from the office to a voice message from AT&T's fraud department, asking me to call right away. When I called, I learned they wanted to verify that I made the call. I said I had and expressed appreciation that they would double check to make sure my phone service was not being abused. Toward the end of the conversation, though, I got a shock. The representative to whom I was speaking said, "You should get an international rate plan. That was a very expensive call." I asked how much; "about a grand," he responded.

I gasped and said that was preposterous. He agreed and suggested I call another department to get an international plan. I made the call as he suggested.

After a lengthy call that made me feel for all the world that I was being extorted into paying a monthly fee to avoid such absurd charges, I finally felt that the problem had been resolved. (The actual charge was $1,013.20; I was told the call would be about $35 under the international calling plan.)

The woman with whom I had spoken had assured me that the international calling plan would be instituted and would be made effective May 26, one day before the call. She transferred me to a third-party "verifier" who confirmed that I wanted the service, that I wanted AT&T to be my domestic and international long distance provider, etc. I obediently said "yes" to every question, as the woman had instructed.

About ten days later I received a letter from AT&T saying my attempt to get a new service had failed. The letter, dated June 9, said, "On June 9, you called us to request a change in your AT&T telephone service." It went on to say they could not verify the order and further claimed to have tried to contact me by telephone "today" but could not reach me. (Apparently they don't leave voice messages...I had received none.) Because I could not be contacted, the letter said, the order was cancelled.

So, I got back on the phone and started the entire process over. I gave the representative my confirmed order number, but they could not find any record of it. The only choice was to go through the entire process again. This time, I made a record of exactly what was said, what questions I was asked, etc., etc. The person I spoke to said I should call AT&T as soon as I received the phone bill that included the expensive call to Lisbon and that they would take it right off and replace it with the newly-rated call.

A few days later, toward the end of the week, the bill came. I waited until early the following week to call about the adjustment. Both calls from my office to AT&T that day were unsatisfactory; the customer service representatives could not find any records; I was told the "system is down" and they could find nothing. They asked me to call back; I responded by asking if they could call me back, instead, since I had made a number of calls already. No, I was told, we cannot. Period.

A later call reached a young woman who finally agreed to mark the amount of the Lisbon call as "in dispute." But the "systems" would not allow her to find anything of use, either. She advised me to try back later that evening and talk to the long distance unit. That evening, I called and spoke first to "Jude," who could find absolutely no record of any international calling plan on my account, any record of me calling, etc., etc. Then, he put his supervisor, "Tash," on the phone.

Tash said that what I had described (all of my calls heretofore) was impossible and, moreover, than there is "no way" that any AT&T representative would have ever told me an international calling plan could have been backdated to May 26. He then tried to explain that there are multiple AT&Ts and that what someone from another of the AT&Ts may have told me was not valid for his AT&T.

I was getting nowhere with him, so I asked to speak with his supervisor. He claimed he does not have a supervisor; he insisted that he reports to no one that I could speak to. He finally relented and said he did have someone who conducts his performance appraisals, but that he was under no obligation to give me that person's name.

After quite a lot more back and forth with him, he said the best he could do would be to cut 50% off the bill. I said "fine," fully intending to dispute any bill they sent my way. And we said our goodbyes. By this time, I though I had reached the peak of anger at the organization's customer abuse.

And then he called back and said his offer of 50% off was good only if I agreed to the international calling plan. I screamed into the receiver that I had ALREADY ORDERED THAT SERVICE TWICE! He said he just wanted to be clear about that.

I have not received a follow-up bill yet. But I have no doubt I will. And I have no doubt that, the moment this quagmire of customer abuse and torture is finally over, I will completely and irrevocably cut my ties with AT&T and will heartily recommend the same to anyone who will listen. Or who will read this blog.

My experience with AT&T in this incident demonstrates, I think, why customer service matters. Wouldn't it have been more to the company's benefit to make it easy for me to be rid of what I think any right-thinking person would agree is an indefensibly high telephone bill than to repeatedly go to the mat with me? Incidentally, that same call for which AT&T decided to charge $1,013.20 would have cost me $26.82 plus tax with the carrier I use in my office.

The Contemplative Sciences

Association management is, in and of itself, an odd profession (if, indeed, it is a profession, which I question). When one is employed as a direct staff member of an association, one becomes engaged in a business in which financial profit takes a back seat to many other objectives.

Instead of focusing one's energy on that one bright target...profit...one's objectives in an association management environment are spread over several targets. Profit is but one rather weak commandment. Member service and satisfaction also become key measures of success in the association world. While customer service is a tool for achieving profit in the for-profit world, it is an objective unto itself in associations. Oftentimes, member service is of such overarching importance that it takes precedence over profit and, not infequently, becomes antithetical to profit. These are hard concepts to grasp, much less to implement successfully in ways that serve the association and its members well. The association executive cannot allow member service to decimate the organization's financial well-being, but frequently he or she must fight to acheive an uncomfortable balance between them.

If association management is, in and of itself, an odd profession, owning or working in an association management company adds complexity and angst to the mix, because no longer is the primary objective either profit or member service, it's both. The intrinsic competition between between money and service is exacerbated in an association management company environment because not only do employees have to balance sometimes competing objectives in a single organization, they must balance those objectives between multiple organization clients and even between clients and their employer!

Given these rivalries, you'd expect it to be very tough to find staff who can operate effectively in those types of environments. You might think so, but it's not really so tough to identify the characteristics you're looking for...but it IS hard to find people who possess the requisite characteristics.

So, the association management company executive is constantly on the lookout for bright, perceptive, hard-charging, self-motivated, entrepreneurial souls who care as much about friendship and comaraderie as they do about money. And they must be able to shine the spotlight on others and shade themselves from it. And, speaking from experience, these people are hard to find.

I have always wanted to find someone to join my staff who not only wants the clients to excel operationally and financially but also wants to own a piece of the business so that, one day, he or she can prove that they can run the business better than I have or better than I can.

There is no better reason for writing these words today than my interest in the contemplative sciences at the moment. That is, I enjoy marrying hard sciences with soft, fluffy mind-wandering. And this little bit about life in an association management bubble is the result. More later. Maybe.

Connections

I had lunch with a colleague recently, a woman who I've known for several years. She has been active with one of our client associations and was president of that association a few years back. In addition to her service as president of that association, she was the driving force for forming another organization, an organization dedicated to fostering mentoring among women to help members find their strengths and empowering them to use those strengths.

Occasionally, we meet for lunch so she can ask me questions about "nuts & bolts" issues facing the women's association. The organization is not able, yet, to afford an executive director, but the vision of its founders continues to burn and propel it forward.

Yesterday, as I listened to her discuss the organization's mission, it occurred to me that she was describing the fundamental purpose of ALL associations: encouraging connections between people with common concerns or challenges. It doesn't matter if an organization is a trade association whose members join together to promote their industry or a professional society whose members come together to enhance their stations in their professional lives, they're all about helping people make connections.

Now, that wasn't a revelation. I've been in association management for long enough to know that's what it's all about. But even seasoned pros can forget to focus on the basics, sometimes. So, I'm reminding myself, and anyone else who reads this message, that successful associations give sufficient attention and adequate resources to their fundamental reason for being: connecting people.

That having been said, connecting people need not be exclusively through a "personal" connection. A Twitter tweet, a Facebook post, an electronic newsletter, and a blast voicemessage can all contribute to connections. I suggest those should not replace person-to-person connections, but they should augment one another. And a true "personal" connection is always the clearest and most direct way to establish connections...in my opinion.

It occurs to me, too, that organizations that owe their very existence to connections between people with common bonds should be able to easily address disagreements between members. After all, members' commonality should always trump their differences. Well, that may be a topic for another post.

As you go about your business of planning events, formulating policies, beating revenue goals, and building websites, remember that they should all be powered with the fuel of connections.

Scenario Planning: Interesting but Impractical

Virtually everyone involved in association management probably has been involved in strategic planning exercises. A major component of such exercises is the discussion of likely and not-so-likely social, political, and economic events that might influence our lives and the ways in which our associations will operate. These tips-of-the-hat to the future are among the most intriguing to me, probably because I find it interesting to try to analyze the chain reactions that might come as a result of a significant change in just one element of our business lives. Invariably, though, I come to the conclusion that the complexity of our world, and the relationships within it, is too great for anyone among us to ever get the predictions right. While scenario planning is interesting, it is probably most useful as a tool to improve our analytical skills, rather than as a tool that can truly help guide our associations through uncharted waters.

Recently, I listened to part of an interview on our local PBS station with George Friedman, president and CEO of a company called STRATFOR, a private intelligence company. Friedman also is author of a just-released book entitled, The Next 100 Years: A Forecast for the 21st Century.

Friedman posits that the changing demographics of our society* will have a radical effect on the United States as a society. Those demographic adjustments, coupled with geopolitical transformations (that, he argues, are underway and easily can be seen) will bring about massive change. He suggests that China is destined to split apart and to watch its communist philosophy and means of control diminish to the point of disappearing. He says the current battles to keep Mexican and Central/South American immigrants at bay will cease. Instead, he says it is an "arithmetic certainty" that in 30 years labor will be scarce and we will have to incent people to come to the U.S.

*a birthrate that is dropping dramatically, an aging workforce that requires replacements to perform the jobs from which it is retiring and to perform additional services it wants, etc.

I found myself being drawn in by his predictions and allowing myself to think "big thoughts" about almost incomprehensible changes that will take place in the next hundred years. I began to wish that I would be around to witness these massive shifts in global society.

But then I started questioning how realistic, how plausible, how likely Friedman's predictions really are. I concluded that virtually all of them are possible, virtually all of them are plausible, but that virtually all of the predictions further out than 5-10 years are pure conjecture and not worthy of serious discussion. My reason for coming to the conclusion that his predictions are pure conjecture? Back to my original point: the world we live in is far too complex and we are insufficiently capable of understanding the reality of "cause and effect" to have more than a minor statistical chance of being right in trying to predict the future. In fact, our capabilties have not yet evolved to the point to which we are particularly good even at predicting the past.

Let me hasten to add that I have not read Mr. Friedman's book. I might yet do so and I may very well be highly entertained by it, but I don't anticpate that I will be persuaded by it.

The lesson here is not to abandon scenario planning, but to recognize it for what it is and to avoid putting too much stock in our ability to see the future in our imperfect crystal balls.

Training for Performance

Occasionally, I will use this blog to admit guilt. This is one of those occasions. And my admission today is this: I am guilty of saying one thing and doing quite another. I am a hypocrite, a dissembler, a sophist, a charlatan, a poser, an impostor and a phony. Alright, that's off my chest. Now, here's what I really need to get off my chest:

I preach about the necessity of training and the value that training brings to business, but I do not practice what I preach with the degree of consistency or depth that I believe are appropriate.

Oh, I don't utterly abandon my staff without any instruction (well, not all that frequently), but I do not sufficiently engage in training the way I think it ought to be done: deliberately, repeatedly, and with a clear expectation of the outcome, both about "what" and "when." One of my resolutions this year, which I intend to keep, is to ensure that I clearly articulate to my staff what I expect them to know and to do and when. Beyond that, I intend to provide them with the tools they will need to meet my expectations.

Now, lest you think this post is not a serious one, let me clearly say that training is vitally, critically important. Were it not for superb training, Sully Sullenberger almost certainly would not have successfully ditched US Air Flight 1549 in the Hudson. Had Captain Sullenberger simply been told, "Fly the airplance safely and be sure to respond well in emergencies," the outcome of his well-publicized emergency would have been catastrophic.

A staff member failing to understand what to do, how to do it, when to do it, and under what conditions can be catastrophic for any business. An untrained staff member can deliver a ruinous member service experience or can destroy an important document without knowing what he or she is doing. Failing to file governmentally-required reports can be financially devastating. Misunderstanding the amount of time it will take for a shipment of boxes to arrive at a conference site can ruin the conference experience. Ignoring the need to renew property and casualty insurance in a timely manner could be utterly devastating in certain circumstances. Suffice it to say that a lack of adequate training can be cataclysmic to an association.

Now, the concept of "training" is a rather broad one; it includes on-the-job training, classroom training, hand-on-workshops, participation in webinars, information about where specific procedures can be found, online education and testing, and many, many other forms of teaching or otherwise ensuring that a person knows what to do in a given set of circumstances.

Fortunately for me, I have staff who know when they don't know enough to do the job...and they ask. And that's part of training...teaching staff that it's expected that they will know when to ask for help. But what I need to do on a more regular basis (and what I preach to others) is this:

1. Clearly articulate to staff their duties and responsibilities;
2. Quantify, and share that measure with staff, the way in which the success of training programs (whatever form they take) will be measured;
3. Provide time for staff to participate in training, and make sure training takes multiple forms (because different people tend to learn in different ways);
4. Take advantage of the fact that some staff have, or appear to have, inborn talents at teaching and training others;
5. Develop and implement procedures and processes so that there is a consistent "way we do this" for staff to latch on to;
6. Recognize and reward exceptional performance compared to the standards you have set for "acceptable" performance;
7. Talk about training and what training is needed...not from your own perspective, but from your staff's perspective;

When your staff performs during your organization's own emergencies as capably and as flawlessly as Sully Sullenberger performed, you will see the value of training as clearly as you possibly can. And your staff will appreciate your recognition that they have achieved a level of performance that is far more than just "acceptable."

Dealing with the Recession

More. Bad. News. Every. Day.

The economy is tanking. Automobile manufacturers are on the verge of bankruptcy. We're looking at the prospect of at least a 1$ TRILLION stimulous package that could re-start the economy, but could leave our great, great, great grandchildren in debt until their dying days. Ugliness on the economic front prevails in almost every headline. Well, on the positive side, gas is cheaper. OH, GREAT! We're being encouraged to drive more to hasten the arrival of the time the tanks go dry!

I have believed from the earliest days of what is now agreed to be a deep recession that now is NOT the time to pull in our horns and bury our heads. I believe now is the time to invest, take risks, and grow one’s business. While there can be no mistaking that tight credit, etc. can hamper one’s ability to grow, my approach has always been to depend more on cash than credit. And if you're not in a position to be so sanguine about the scarcity of credit, there's always barter.

Our company is trying to take advantage of a battered marketplace by growing our business. The death spiral to any business begins when it stops investing in its own growth; the businesses that continue to invest and grow in this economy will be much stronger when the economy emerges from this temporary time “in the ditch.”

I acknowledge that my approach carries with it huge risks. Investing money that might be needed later to pay the rent or pay salaries is an enormous risk and it could be a crushing mistake. But I'd rather try and fail than whimper my way to poverty.

That philosophy (perhaps without the whimpering poverty) is just as applicable to associations as it is to for-profit businesses. It is precisely at times like these that associations should take measured, well-conceived risks to help lead their members out of the weeds. Now is the time when associations should look carefully at how the association can help the member bridge the gap between panic and prosperity. Examples abound of panic-induced business decisions that should cause us to question the competence of executives.


For example, despite the unmistakable importance that the sales force is to the success of any large business, sales departments seem to be among the first to be trimmed or to "get the axe" altogether when costs are cut. That's brilliant! Stop investing in selling your products and services. Now, let's see how far that takes you. Or, do what some big businesses do and cut your training departments; that's another example of panic-induced wrong-headedness.

Back to the point at hand. Association can invest in training programs to replace internal capabilities...helping the association weather the equally catastrophic (and remarkably ill-advised) decision to stop spending on association membership. And associations can gently but persuasively remind their members that cutting the sales force is akin to severing the spinal cord.

One thing associations should NOT do is take a leadership role in spreading a message of scarcity and fear. Cancelling or postponing meetings should not be considered unless there is absolutely no alternative. If there are concerns about attendance due to financial constraints, plan for a smaller meeting; take advantage of the situation by videocasting and/or podcasting conference events. The point is this: the association should LEAD the membership and provide guideance and support; running scared and sealing the hatches sends exactly the WRONG message.

Times of economically-induced business panic provide perfect opportunities for associations to experiment, doing things they otherwise might not do. Obviously, all of this is easier said than done. Cutbacks may, indeed, be necessary. Frugality most certainly IS necessary. But neither should be pursued at the expense of leadership and risk-taking and trying to show members a positive direction.

Associations can shine in bad times. Perhaps that's when they can shine brightest.

Diversity: Not Just An Economic Imperative

I spent the early part of this week with a group of other association executives. We're all members of a board of directors of a professional association of association executives, so the information and ideas we shared were especially relevant to our day-to-day work lives.

While we discussed many issues of substance, the one that I found particularly appealing was one that has been challenging associations for years: diversity. How do we, as association executives, encourage diversification within the ranks of our own staff and within the ranks of the associations we manage? How do we encourage our members to recognize and appreciate and truly value diversity in their own organizations? And why should we?

First and foremost, it became apparent that we must all understand just what we mean when we say "diversity." We mean, of course, diversity of race and ethnicity. We mean diversity of gender. But we should mean much more when discussing and planning for diversity: foundation of religious belief or nonbelief; sexual orientation; language; culture; experience.

Certain aspects of diversity in one association can be meaningless in another. For example, an interest in geographic diversity among the members of a statewide association might be irrelevant to a local association in a big city; diversity of organizational size may be important in a trade association representing an entire industry, but irrelevant to a national professional association representing individual practitioners of a specific discipline.

Back to the reasons for promoting diversity. The primary reason I have for appreciating diversity is the simple fact that, in my view, diversity opens our eyes to many different perspectives. Aside from being fundamentally the right thing to do in terms of encouraging minorities and women to have full and complete access to social structures that have long held them at bay, encouraging diversity enriches our own experience. While the economic value of reaching a diverse audience certainly has its place among the reasons to value diversity, it is by no means the most important one (in my view). Frankly, an organization that promotes racial and ethnic and gender and other forms of diversity as engines of economic advancement is unlikely to get much support from the groups it ostensibly hopes to encourage to participate.

Encouraging diversity along the lines of economic and social and geographic and ethnic and many other attributes helps open our minds to looking at the world through multiple lenses. It makes us all better people. And in my opinion, it makes associations better organizations.

The question many association executives have, of course, is "how do I get more diversity?" That is not a rhetorical question; it can be tough to attract a diverse audience to a specific discipline or a specific workplace. Many of today's largest and most successful businesses have long used an aggressive strategy, for example, of actively recruiting the "best and the brightest" minority students from colleges and universities. Associations are rarely able to compete economically with large companies, so they find themselves wanting for suitable candidates for jobs.

One of the solutions that was suggested during my meetings earlier this week was a simple one: identify one or more individuals from various diverse populations and ask them for help in identifying sources of talent or sources of members. Another solution was just a simple: tell the world that you value and seek diversity. People tend to gravitate to places they know they will be welcome. And, finally, make sure your environment truly does value diversity. If your association says it seeks diversity, on the one hand, but doesn't behave in ways that support that position, you will do your organization more harm that good.

I think it's best to think about diversity from an individual perspective...and for me, that's MY individual perspective. I enjoy all sorts of ethnic foods and appreciate learning about them from people who grew up eating them. I prefer to have discussions about the differences between Guatemalan culture and Mexican culture with people who have lived in those cultures. I prefer spirited arguments about Islam and atheism and Christianity among people who live in and understand those belief systems. The same is true across all the "diversities" with which I deal. Some people don't have quite that level of inquisitiveness, so for them a more measured and slower approach might be best.

My bottom line is this: diversity is good. It enriches us. It makes us understand more about our world. And associations do those things, too. So associations should recognize and encourage diversity for their own selfish reasons, as well as the broader social reasons. We all benefit.

After the Election

The election of Senator Barack Obama as President-Elect of the United States will result in a massive amount of gnashing of teeth and tearing of hair in associations across the land. The same would have happened had Senator John McCain won the election. Association executives and the boards of directors to which they report reacted in elation or horror at the results.

I'll readily admit that there will be significant changes in our lives as a result of Senator Obama's election. There would have been changes had Senator McClain been elected. But I caution all associations against behaving as if the sky is falling, on the one hand, or that manna from heaven is raining down, on the other.

Regardless of whether the results of the election make you happy or unhappy, understand that the election was not all about you and your association. As tough as it might be to imagine, there are things more important than your association. The country's future takes precedence.

In my view, the best way to deal with a new administration, whether it's your party or the opposition, is to embrace it. That having been said, I fully understand how hard it was for many people to embrace the Bush administration, especially in the second term. This just goes to show there are exceptions to any rule. But back to less extreme circumstances...

If it's not your party in the White House, take advantage of the opportunity to learn a little humility and try gentle persuasion and education to accomplish your objectives. If it is your party, remember that it won't always be so; remember the phrase, "what goes around, comes around." In either case, the exercise of civility and respect serve one's purposes rather well and they're among the best of human traits.

If association executives don't know the importance of compromise, I don't know who does. I suppose we'll see how well they translate that understanding into practice after the new administration takes office.

Lessons from an Economic Crisis

It has been three weeks since the Dow sharply reminded us of the severity of the financial crisis in which the U.S. is embroiled. Unfortunately, we did not respond as a nation with the collective determination that this, too, shall pass and that, together, we will weather the storm. Instead, we responded with panic, rage, distrust, fingerpointing and outright terror that the Second Great Depression was upon us. Moreover, some of us responded with greed and scrambling to protect our share of the spoils of the war against an economy gone sour.

There is plenty of room for fingerpointing. There's more than enough opportunity for expressing concern and outright fear that, if our response is not appropriate, our economy could tank. There's ample reason for distrust of many of the players who contributed to the mess in which we find ourselves. Even the mirror can take some of the blame.

We can reasonably lay blame on the people who took out mortgages they could never hope to repay, as well as on the financial institutions that irresponsibily lent them the money. It is not inappropriate to blame previous Democratic administrations for relaxing lending guidelines under Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. It is reasonable to hold the current administration and the Republican majority in recent years accountable for allowing the problems to fester and grow.

It is not wrong, it is reasonable, but it is useless. Blame is about the past. What we need to do is focus on the future.

The reason I write about all of this in a blog intended to address association management topics is the fact that many associations have jumped on the bandwagon of blame, while simultaneously doing all they can to look out after their members' self-interests, even while ignoring broader national interests. This is an embarrassment to the profession and a disservice to the nation. I won't name names because it won't do any good, but if you look around carefully (or not so carefully), you can find examples of the behaviors to which I am referring.

Let me reiterate a point. We, as a nation, did not put our collective wills behind finding a solution. We allowed a small group of men and women to decide that in our checkbooks and in the checkbooks of our children and their children stood a ready reserve of money to help address the underlying problems that "caused" our current economic maelstrom. We did not offer up our checkbooks, but we allowed them to be emptied. We allowed them to be emptied because we were worried that, if we didn't, we'd have to empty our bank accounts, too.

I'm not suggesting that the "bailout" was not right; I don't know whether it was or not. But many people did not and do not agree with it. Yet we abdicated our own responsibilities and let our elected representatives assume them on our behalf. We were too concerned, as a people, about avoiding a depression to get involved in conversations about what might be right.

The reason I'm so alarmed at associations that jumped into the fray to look out after their self-interest is this: associations should operate on the premise that they exist to look out after the self-interests of their members but that, and this is a given, anything that hurt society at large cannot take precedence. Associations should hold to an ethic that does not allow them to blatantly serve their members' self-interests at the expense of the common good. Nor should associations ever adopt positions that accept that the end justifies the means. Robin Hood was not an association executive.

All the bad "stuff" that is going on in our economy today gives us ample opportunity to learn how important it is for associations to inculcate ethics into their vision and mission statements and, then, into their operating principles. I intend to share that lesson with our client associations and I hope other association executives will do the same.

Seizing Opportunities vs. Embracing Burdens

The difference between success and failure sometimes can be the simple difference between seizing an opportunity and embracing a burden.

My association management company is almost always actively seeking new clients, both associations seeking full-service management and organizations looking for help managing or executing programs. The opportunities in both areas are almost boundless. I use the term opportunity loosely, though, because as often as not they would simply be burdens to our company if we chose to pursue them. So we don't.

Let me explain.

A car dealership and a shoe store both sell products, but they won't interchange their products for a very simple reason: their business models are very different. What is an opportunity for one is a burden for the other.

In the case of my company, our business model is to make the best strategic use of our staff's talents in furthering the objectives of our client associations. Many associations are not looking for the kinds of talents we bring to the table. They are not necessarily looking for strategic thinkers to form alliances with their leadership. Many associations, at some point in their evolution, are simply looking for solid clerical support. While we have solid clerical and administrative support, we're much more interested in providing those skills as a byproduct of our core service, management.

If we simply pursued any association that came along looking for help, we'd be drowning in administrative overload. Our staff, who enjoy being involved in every aspect of our client associations' deliberations and decision-making, would be bored to tears with full-time clerical tasks. We might be paid for the time and talent we bring to the table, but almost all of us would quickly tire of the routine. It just wouldn't fit our model. Don't get me wrong, we're as dedicated to good clerical and administrative support as any other company, we're just not interested in focusing solely on those areas.

We want to work with associations that offer challenges, that have significant potential for either growth or reinvigoration, and that want and need our brand of unbridled enthusiasm and broad, deep pool of talent.

When presented with opportunities that don't fit that model, we opt to decline. It's better for both of us; the association wouldn't be any happier with us than we would be with the association.

All of this is simply a prelude to my main point: it is my strong contention that associations are no different than the car dealership and the shoe store or my own company. They must be clear about what they want to be; if they try to be all things to all people, they instead become nothing to anyone. Associations should carefully determine who or what sort of businesses they want as members, what programs and projects they want to pursue, and then stay the course.

If your association is looking too much like the car dealership trying to sell shoes, neither your members nor your board will be fulfilled. Make time to articulate, clearly, your association's perfect opportunities and leave the burdens to another association to which they are better suited.

A Socio-Political Economic Rant

Before you read this, please understand: while my post may seem unrelated to associations, from the outset, it is definitely related to associations and their ability to change the world..

I find it simultaneously interesting and deeply depressing to hear both Democrats and Republicans try to blame one another for the rising prices of energy. What's even more depressing is the parties' lack of leadership in addressing the fundamental problems that have led to our current dilemma. Even worse, neither party has the backbone to acknowledge the realities of what must ultimately be done if we are ever to find a way out of this wilderness of energy dependence.

Let's go back in time just a little. When I was in high school and college, in the early 1970s, students were exposed to stark realities, realities that were presented to us as warnings and directives:

• oil won't last forever;
• conservation is both wise and required;
• alternative sources for fuels [and products that are oil-dependent (e.g., plastics)] must be sought after and perfected; and
• failure to curb humankind's materialism-gone-awry is the recipe for disaster.

Neither our politicians nor, from the looks of our society today, the rest of us "got" the message. Had we been as intelligent as we wanted to believe we were, we would have directed our energies not toward delaying the inevitable, but toward harnessing the possible...creating a new future with new sources of energy, replacements for oil-based products, and a social consciousness that did not worship at the altar of economic superiority and materialistic gain. We would have insisted on very high gas mileage standards years ago; we would have demanded a Manhattan-style project, with renewal sources of energy as its raison d'être; we would have changed our own lifestyles; and we would have begun teaching our children what we had learned.

But we did not do what was intelligent. Instead, we ignored the gas lines of the early 1970s and paid no heed to the warnings that our lifestyles of excessive consumption and environmental disdain would come back to haunt us.

The chickens inhabiting the lavish coops we built with our own arrogance have now come home to roost.

And what do our politicians say? The Republicans' new mantra on energy, is "Find more. Use Less." When I read such nonsense, I simply sigh and hope for an insurrection. Anyone with a basic understanding of economics understands that such drivel is not an energy "policy," it's a bad and dangerous slogan.

But Democrats must have the correct solution then, right? Would that it were...but, no, they are equally made of nothing but self-puffery. While the Democrats rightly oppose opening up irresponsible drilling in environmentally precarious places, they do not have the courage to complete the thought. No, they want the government to step in and cut prices, while punishing the bad energy giants. Like the Republicans, they are unwilling to acknowledge the laws of supply and demand. They, too, will not accept the reality that we're using too much energy and destroying our environment in the process. They huff and puff and demand that the poor, overburdened middle class be dragged out of the pit it helped create through its conspicuous consumption. Rather than calling on us all to accept the fact that oil will, indeed, run out, they want to delay the economic pain of change to a future generation. If future generations could come back to exact their revenge, today's generations would be rightfully trembling in fear.

What does all of this have to do with associations, you might wonder? Associations have the capacity to bring about change in this political stalemate borne of fear.

They don't have to be energy-related organizations. They don't have to focus on engineering solutions to energy generation. They don't have to have an obvious connection to the environment or politics or policy. All they need to do is to educate their members and encourage their members to, in turn, educate their politicians. If just ten percent of the members of associations in the United States would send a message to their political leaders that they demand real solutions and that they are willing to be led by real leaders who have real answers, things would change, quickly and for the better.

If associations would simply give their members some "talking points," that could go a long way. Here are a few:

• The supply of oil is dwindling quickly and we must find, with a great sense of urgency, alternatives;
  
• Conservation is required and it will require sacrifices by all of us;
  
• Priorities for availability of oil-based products must be assigned so that transportation of critical products (e.g., food, medicines, and the like) can be protected;
  
• As painful as high prices can be, we must make energy use a conscious and uncomfortable choice in order to protect what is now a limited supply;
  
• Give entrepreneurs, including major energy companies, who seek solutions, incentives to take risks; and
  
• Once people understand the true, critical nature of energy availability, they will be willing to sacrifice and, in the meantime, they must be made to sacrifice.

Associations, which helped build this country, can help save it. They have power, influence, and the unique capacity to help their members who share common traits, needs, and wants achieve important objectives.

There are associations, of course, whose own survival is at odds with what I have said here. Their own members are potential victims of new energy sources and conservation measures. You can be absolutely sure that those associations will do all they can to preserve the status quo, minimize the impression that an urgent need for alternative sources exists, and derail any efforts to redirect their own economic engines. To my way of thinking, a company or an association that would put its own short-term profits or even its own survival above the survival of our economy and our way of life is an organization that deserves neither our help nor our sympathy.

Finally, I hope this diversion into political and economic and social minefields will be appreciated or, at least, forgiven. For my next post, I will return to a strictly "association management" topic.

Networking...Social and Otherwise...Associations Need to Catch On

Associations once had an almost ironclad lock on opportunities to meet and communicate with like-minded professionals or with business associates from one's industry. Whether those opportunities were considered professional networking or social networking, they were the primary occasions most people could count on to find others with professional and business commonalities and to establish ties with them.

Association conventions or conferences were gold-mines for networking and they were milked for all they were worth by people who understood the value of community. Many of today's association leaders risk losing those gold-mines to other associations or even to companies and invididuals who recognize that "networking" is undergoing an enormous transition. They are risking this loss because they are either ignoring innovations or they simply do not comprehend the depth and breadth of the changes taking place before them.

It is no longer necessary to initiate networking at an association function. Instead, one may network by using Plaxo, LinkedIn, Ning or any number of other social or professional networking sites and services that are readily available on the Internet. The two former services have pre-existing platforms that enable one to easily link to others with shared personal or business interests. The latter, and many more like it, enables individuals or groups (or associations) to create their own social networking services. Now, networking can start well in advance of a live event. The live event is simply the natural extension of the network's reach. Other social networking sites have morphed from having primary objectives involving personal networking to some business-oriented sites (e.g., Facebook, MySpace).

The problem, as I see it, is that associations tend to be very slow to adopt alternatives to their traditional networking opportunities. They tend to want "tried and true" solutions to their problems, so by the time they are ready to give in to the trends that surround them, it may be too late. I'm not advocating the abandonment of traditional meetings for education, information, and networking. But I suggest that meetings should be viewed not as the beginning of the networking process as has traditionally been the case but, rather, as the culmination of the first phases of the process and the launchpad of new, more vibrant, and much more valuable networking processes. I view these more valuable networking processes as enablers all manner of transactions between participants, from information exchange to personal friendships.

While I think associations, in general, are far too rich in value to be replaced (at least not yet) by a social networking service, they are at risk unless association leaders insist on augmenting their traditional means of helping people establish connections by taking advantage of social networking opportunities.

I see signs that associations are opening up to using technologies to enable and to support social and professional networking. In fact, at least one such social network is geared toward educating association staff about the value of these technologies. But unless more associations follow the lead of forward-thinkers who recognize the need to adapt and adopt, associations at large risk becoming less relevant. And that would be a shame, because associations offer so much more than networking opportunities. Unless they offer networking opportunities in the very best and most useful ways possible, though, they do risk becoming dinosaurs. And we have a general idea about what happened to them.

The Impact of Gas Prices on Associations and Their Members

Associations, like every other type of business, are feeling the impact of rising petroleum prices. The effect of high gas prices will be felt for the forseeable future. Associations must, therefore, decide how they will deal with the inevitable impact on their members, their employees, and their vendors and business partners. Unfortunately, none of us have the luxury of time to consider how to cope. That luxury has been available to us since the oil embargo of 1973, but few of us possessed the wisdom or the will to put that time to good use. Now, it's time to react quickly to what amounts to an emergency.

What effects are we going to have to face? I suspect no one is absolutely certain, but here are just a few that I believe are very likely:

• Travel to Meetings: Members will be unwilling or unable to justify the frequency of travel we have heretofore enjoyed, thanks in part to high petroleum prices;
  
• Airline Travel: Airline travel fares, which have already begun a rapid ascent, will spiral ever higher, making flying a business luxury rather than a business byproduct;
  
• Close-in Renaissance: The exodus from cities to suburbs and exurbs will reverse course, making "close in" living a very highly sought after lifestyle for association staff (except in associations which have already fled to the suburbs) [while gentrification has already started this trend, it will accelerate];
  
• Adaptive Zoning: Zoning laws will have to re-adapt to neighborhood-based businesses, as people are apt to insist on staying closer to home.
  
• Telecommuting: Associations and their member businesses will have to institute widespread telecommuting in order to attract high quality workers.
  
• Hyper-Local Employment Markets: The advent of more neighborhood-based small businesses will make associations and their member companies face a much more highly competitive and highly localized market for employees;
  
• Long-Distance and Virtual Events: As face-to-face meetings become more and more difficult to orchestrate, thanks to high costs of travel, associations will have to invest resources toward creating educational "events" that take place long-distance, usings webinars, video conferences, social networking sites and processes, and other technological options; events may begin to take place over longer periods of time, with event components pulled together technologically as "virtual events;"
  
• Hotel Transformations: Meeting-supported hotels will be forced to transform into localized technological resources for associations that cannot, or do not want to, invest heavily in long-distance meeting technologies;
  
• Transportation Infrastructure: Public transportation systems will be much more likely to win competitions for transportation infrastructure dollars;
  
• Potential Preeminence of Associations: Despite the challenges, the financial and environmental pressures to keep people apart (at least long-distance) are apt to have a highly positive effect on associations that are able to understand and take advantage of their unique capacities to be the "binding for the social fabric" of their industries or profession;
  
• Ruinous Results of the Failure to Act: And, in spite of the potential for associations, their failure to take advantage of the opportunities presented to them could be ruinous. The ease with which social networking sites can be established by one person, by himself or herself, offers evidence of what can happen if associations fail to react quickly to the challenges facing their members and their employees (and, of course, I'm referring as well to AMCs as well as associations). The failure to act quickly could easily give other organizations or individuals the opportunity to act earlier and take advantage of the opportunities to lure away association members (and staff members).

As frightening as the rapidly-escalating price of energy is, it provides us with an opportunity to think about new ways to do business. We can work to be more resourceful and more attuned to financial and environmental realities. We can be more conscious of the fact that our business practices and personal choices as association members and association executives can affect the world around us.

We're All Human, Don't You Think?

Recently, almost all of the financial news that has come across my desk, television, or computer screen has been bleak. The dollar is weak almost to the point of collapse. The U.S. mortgage debacle continues to reverberate throughout the world's economy, wreaking havoc in industry after industry. Households are awash in debt. Businesses are cutting back. Food prices are skyrocketing worldwide and food riots are taking place all over the globe. In some places people are starving. In others they are battling one another over political issues that, in reality, can almost always be traced back to economics in one way or another. People with obscene wealth are fighting to keep what they believe is their birthright. People living in abject poverty are fighting to escape what has become punishment for being born to the wrong parents in the wrong society in the wrong era. It's a mess. It's almost enough to bring crusty old men to tears.

The way businesses and individuals and families are reacting to what has yet to be "officially" labeled a recession perplexes and concerns me, one of those crusty old men (well, 54 is not so crusty, I suppose).

Businesses are cutting back on their own engines of survival. Their marketing and advertising dollars are being dramatically restricted and their customer service measurements and expenditures for tracking brand compliance are being slashed.

Individual consumers are complaining about the cost of gasoline and food, while simultaneously griping that they can't afford the gas guzzling SUVs they so desperately want to complement their desired image.

Famlies are cutting back on food in order to pay for gas. Many are struggling to find ways to keep their children clothed in the latest fashion trends, allowing expenses for daycare and medicines to go unpaid.

These things are troublesome to many on many levels, both personally and professionally. But this blog is about associations and I'll turn my attention back to them.

What I find most troubling, professionally, is the lack of a sense of urgency among associations in general. With few exceptions, I see associations reacting, if they react at all, from a dangerously provincial and highly selfish perspective.

Too many associations are forgetting what they are good at: unifying people with common interests to pursue the common good. Rather than rallying around a need, whether that need involves the profession they serve or the industry they represent, associations today too often are either ignoring their potential role in finding broad solutions or are focused on their own survival, ignoring their own important constituents.

I do not suggest that all associations should always focus on their own social consciousnesses. Rather, I suggest that there are times when associations should understand that they are social institutions with social responsibilities.

Despite the fact that an association of flashlight manufacturers has no ongoing and fundamental obligation to provide light to those who find themselves in the dark, it does have an obligation to respond to certain crises. When the association is the only organization that has the structural capacity to provide relief to tornado victims who have lost their homes and have no power, responding to that need is, in my view, a moral imperative. Never mind that responding will be good PR. Responding will be good, period.

What I'm getting at, albeit slowly, is that I'm disappointed to see that some associations are responding badly to their own plights in this economy. Some of the same associations that would chastise businesses for cutting advertising budgets in hard times because advertising is precisely what they need are cutting expenditures for staff when what they need more than anything else is a staff that is hard at work guiding the association through the dangerous and potentially deadly thickets of economic malaise. Rather than pulling everyone together to fight a common threat, they are circling the wagons and sending the weakest out into the firestorm to fend for themselves.

Associations, like the people who belong to them, should be ashamed of themselves if they don't recognize and exercise their abilities to intervene when crises become so fierce as to endanger lives and cultures. Believe me, I'm generally not one to support associations raising funds to support the "cause" of Crohn's disease because the organization's president's son-in-law has the disease. If the president wants to support that cause, fine. If she wants to ask her friends to do the same, more power to her. But one individual's bad fortune isn't sufficient to justify an association of chemists to give one medical condition its undivided attention. But if the society in which that association of chemists finds itself is at a breaking point because of disease or hunger or some other catastrophic social ill, I'm in favor of the organization parlaying its capacity to fight that social ill into a solution. That association of chemists should not insist that it has no business solving a social ill simply because it wasn't formed to do that. That would be rather like a football player refusing to apply a tourniquet to an accident victim's wound because that's not his job.

OK, I'm temporarily off my soapbox. But I hope your association will respond to social needs when they are severe, regardless of the association's mission. We're all human, after all, or at least we should be.

Association Meetings: Dinosaurs?

We've heard it all before. The advent of video conferencing was going to be the downfall of association meetings. But it didn't happen. Then, webinars were going to cause the demise of association meetings. But that didn't happen, either. So, when someone suggests that technological advances that take advantage of the Internet are going to put a crimp on association meetings, we tend to dismiss it as another bad prediction.

But this time, we may be watching the development of the perfect storm. Airlines are hurting, with some going out of business and others stretched so thin there's concern about whether they are spending enough on maintenance. Fuel prices are climbing sky-high, making it exceptionally expensive to travel, whether by plane, car, boat, or train. The populace of the world, and especially the U.S., is finally becoming conscious of our carbon footprints...and we're rightfully embarrassed at our abuse of the environment. The U.S. Transportation Security Administration makes life unnecessarily miserable for travelers, but virtually no one feels any safer as a result of TSA efforts. And, technology is going beyond "hey, this is neat," to "hey, this is phenomenol!"

I do not think travel is a thing of the past. But I do think association meetings are going to undergo some exceptional changes in the very near future. And association executives, meeting planners, and volunteer leaders better be ready to adapt quickly or they will find that they, like the meetings they are so used to, are dinosaurs.

Here's what I think lies ahead...and not far ahead:

1. Technology companies will push, hard, to make "remote meeting technology" pervasive in every office.
   
2. If you don't have a video camera mounted on your computer, you will very, very soon. And there will be video cameras throughout your offices and even on the trade show floors of the hotels and convention centers where your meetings are held today.
   
3. Internet-enabled networkable sensors will become cheap enough that they will be almost everywhere...so it will be easy to control all sorts of devices remotely. Those cameras I mentioned...they, too, will be controllable by internet-enabled networkable sensors.
   
4. What once was, at best, clunky and unsatisfyingly jerky video and sound, will become "almost live" so that viewers with an Internet connection will be able to see and hear what's going on in a room 2,000 miles away as clearly...or more clearly...than the people in that room.
   
5. Meeting planners, association executives, and the people who have been attending their events will find themselves in a whole new world. Knowing how to negotiate for sleeping rooms and how to select food and beverage packages that will satisfy will no longer be so important.
   
6. Skills in successfully integrating multiple technologies so that event participants from around the globe can have an "almost live" experience will be required.
   
7. Physical meetings will become much smaller and much, much more expensive per "live" participant...but meetings will become far greater in their reach by drawing in participants from a huge pool that has never been terribly active in "live" meetings before.
   
8. The team that executes a meeting will no longer have to be in the same place. Ten presenters might be in ten locations...the registration group may be in another location...the trade show managers may be in four buildings on three continents.
   
9. For "live" meetings, the audience might be fifteen people sitting in front of a speaker, but the speaker might be communicating with ten thousand people who are listening and watching from afar.
   
10. The fundamental skills required of association executives and meeting planners will evolve and will involve identifying and executing the best and most appropriate teaching methods for a disparate audience.

Now is the time for those of us who plan to stay in this discipline to "re-tool" ourselves so that we remain relevant in what promises to be a completely different world than the one we've known. Time will tell whether I'm right about this...but if I were a betting man, I'd say my chances of winning some serious money are very, very good!

Mission Critical

Associations that do not pay attention to their mission statements risk losing the support that led to the drafting of those mission statements. It's important for an association to regularly remind its members about what the organization's mission is.

The energy and enthusiasm and vocal support of the association that resulted in the mission statement tends to drift and fade unless it is regularly highlighted.

Here are some samples of the mission statements of some of our client associations. They are simple, straightforward, and easy to understand.

ETA
ETA's mission is to strengthen the commercial embroidery business through member education, business support, representation, networking, research, and consumer outreach.

MSPA
The leadership goal of MSPA is to increase the value, acceptance, and use of mystery shopping, as well as to enhance overall professionalism in the industry.

TDA
Leading the Future of Dietetics

TSMSS
The mission of TSMSS is to promote certification and professional growth through networking, within the healthcare industry.

Members of these associations do not have to wonder what the organizations are all about. The mission statements are clear and concise. If your association's mission statement is weak, hidden, or confusing, the time to adjust it is now, before the energy that helped build the organization dissipates.

Hotel F&B Costs...Trust, but Verify and Watch Your Back

You've negotiated a good sleeping room rate on a very nice property for your annual meeting. Members will be delighted at the place! Everything is looking terrific and your board of directors is pleased.

They are pleased, that is, until you present a food and beverage (F&B) budget for the event that looks for all the world like you've decided on a menu of Russian Beluga caviar, top shelf vodka, and truffles laced with shards of pure gold.

Then, they begin to wonder about your sanity and your negotiating skills. All you did, though, was get a good room rate and assume the hotel would be fair to you when it comes to F&B costs. But your assumption of fairness on the hotel's part, not to mention your failure to control your expense liabilities, has put you in a very, very disturbing situation.

That's the scenario you could face if you fail to include in your contract negotiations with the hotel some very specific parameters about the costs of F&B. Without caps in cost escalation from existing menus, maximum contractual per-person stipulations, or some other means of controlling F&B costs, you are at the mercy of the property. You don't have to serve Beluga caviar and top shelf vodka; you simply have to order a sandwich and a glass of iced tea and you could find yourself in very hot water if the hotel decides it's reasonable to charge $45 for the sandwich and $7 for the tea. Without contractual limits, you have no recourse; you're stuck.

So, how does one avoid the embarrassing and potentially career-altering scenario presented above? Here are some tips that will help:

• Insist that the hotel make written commitments (written because hotel staff are notorious for disappearing before your event and their replacements cannot rely on your "word" that their predessors made them) to you that will limit your F&B outlay;
• Incorporate into your contract some very specific numbers that restrict outrageous escalations in prices, such as: Per-person prices for base-level full breakfast shall not exceed $14, inclusive; per-person prices for base-level plated luncheon shall not exceed $21, inclusive; per-person prices for base-level plated dinner shall not exceed $31, inclusive (where inclusive means inclusive of tax, service charge, and gratuity) [of course, you must define "base level"];
• Limit liability by incorporating an F&B commitment, in dollars, that you must meet, while simultaneously controlling per-meal costs, such as: group's F&B minimum commitment to the hotel shall be $17,500 (based on the aggregate expenditures on meals whose costs shall be based on an average cost per person of $13 for breakfast, $19 for lunch, and $29 for dinner) and, once achieved, group shall have no further commitment to hotel for F&B costs; and/or
• Include a contractual provision that gives you the latitude to order "off menu" so that you can present a meal and ask for an item-by-item cost (so you can adjust the per-person cost to adapt to your financial capacities).

There are many, many ways to ensure that you and your board are not unpleasantly surprised at the cost of an event. You should know, before the contract is signed, what your F&B costs (and other hotel-related costs) will be, based on your estimated attendance. It's good professional practice to develop an event budget (whether "official" or not) before beginning the process of looking for venues for meetings. Your meeting specs should, ideally, indicate an expected price range for each meal, so that hotels know what's expected of them...and to give them fair warning that you'll expect their contracts to be adjusted accordingly.

You should have a spreadsheet that presents your final expected numbers before you start selecting menus. If not, you've not finished your preparatory work.

Finally, don't expect the hotel staff to look out after your best interests. That's not their job. Their job is to look out after the hotel owners' best interests. Your job is to look out after your association's best interests. A food and beverage budget that suggests you're planning to order Beluga caviar and top shelf vodka looks like you're looking out after the wrong interests.

The Micromanaging Board and the Consolidator of Executive Power

Almost nothing is more annoying to the association executive responsible for managing the day-to-day affairs of an association than a volunteer who believes it is the volunteer's role to manage the association. And nothing is more annoying to that volunteer than for the association executive to fail to understand that the volunteer was elected for just that purpose!

When those two perspectives emerge in an association environment, it's time for everyone to step back and reflect on why they are in their roles and what those roles truly mean. More importantly, it's important for the executive and the volunteer to listen to the other...to try to learn something.

The confusion and perturbation that arises when staff and volunteer see one another as belonging to "the opposition" are destructive and disquieting. They get in the way of getting the organization's work done. They make working and volunteering for the association unhappy and distressing. When egos and misunderstandings get out of the way, though, everyone can be happier and more productive. But it takes effort.

One of the easiest ways to understand the roles of association executives and elected volunteers is to compare them to their "equivalents" in the corporate world.

The chief staff executive of an association is equivalent to the CEO of a corporation. In both cases, the board of directors hires the individual (or, quite wisely, the management firm) who, then, is given boundaries of authority and objectives to reach. The differences in the manner in which board members are compensated are where the comparisons begin to break down...but they shouldn't. Nonprofit board members are "paid" primarily in recognition and a sense of contribution to the "cause." In addition, they may have a few perquisites, but generally speaking they simply get acknowledgement and the appreciation of their peers. Corporate board members generally get paid in hard cash. They, too, may get a sense of accomplishment, but there's no question that money speaks on corporate boards.

If members of association boards were satisfied with their "pay," there might be fewer instances of micromanagement. Many association board members, though, seem to believe that the differences between them and corporate board members are monumental. They sometimes seem to believe they should be more involved in the day-to-day operation of the association than the corporate board member should be in the day-to-day operation of the corporation. That may be understandable, considering the fact that for-profit boards tend to pay rather enormous salaries to their chief executives, while association boards tend to want their executives to get the bulk of their compensation in intellectual fulfillment. (That last comment was made simply to prove that I am human.)

"If only they understood," complain association executives about their boards, "they'd realize that their micromanagement is doing more harm than good!" Association board members tend to have a counter view, saying "I was elected to oversee the operation of this organization and I must be involved to fulfill my responsibility!"

Both perspectives are flawed. The association executive fails to fully grasp the legitimacy, in concept, of the volunteer leader's attitude. From the association executive's point of view, the volunteer should simply chart the course and get out of the way. That's not true of an association environment any more than it is of a corporate environment. In fact, recent high-profile cases of boards failing to fulfill their fiduciary duties to shareholders point to the need for more oversight by corporate boards.

The volunteer does not quite understand the difference between governance and management and the distinction between oversight and meddling. From the volunteer's perspective, fiduciary duties require the volunteer's authorization for actions by staff and they require the volunteer to make the decisions which staff is then to implement. Again, that's not true in either a corporate or an association environment.

The association executive who is frustrated by someone he or she sees as an intrusive volunteer is missing something. The volunteer who is frustrated by an executive who the volunteer sees as uncooperative and unwilling to acknowledge the volunteer's primacy is missing something, too.

They are missing a complete understanding of their roles and the motives of the other person involved in the situation. An association executive's role is to implement board policy, but it is also to provide advice and counsel to the board. The executive director of an association is also required to share information with the board, to ensure that the board is fully informed. The volunteer's role is to develop policy, but also to monitor the executive's performance to ensure that the policy is being implemented. The volunteer is required to give feedback to the executive, to ensure that the executive knows how he or she is perceived. Sometimes the "issues" are simply matters of trust. Open discussions about what the issues are can go a long way toward resolving the problem.

1. The key in both corporate and association environments is that both require:
   clear definitions of boundaries within which the executive has latitude to act;
2. clear definitions of the types of actions/decisions that must have board review and approval;
3. clear understanding by the board and the executive of what reporting is needed, how frequently, and to whom; and
4. regular performance assessments, in both directions, discussed openly between the board and the executive.

Whenever there are concerns about micromanagement by the board or unnecessary consolidation of power by the executive, the time is immediately right for a candid conversation. Both groups must make it a point to try to learn what is bothering the other and both must make a commitment to correct the problem.

Finally, such situations are never comfortable, but there's no reason to hide them under the rug, either. It happens in the best of associations. In the really good associations, these situations get resolved quickly and completely.

The Power of Associations, for Good or Bad

At heart, I'm an optimist. I believe that humanity can come together to achieve things that are beyond any individual's power.

In my view, associations represent the ultimate potential of the human experience. They represent the possibilities that humanity brings to the planet; the promises that, as a species, we can collectively fulfill. Associations embody opportunities for people who share common interests to achieve common goals. At their very highest level, associations can enable the efforts of groups to coalesce into exceptionally powerful forces for the advancement of virtually every aspect of our existence. That's pretty heady stuff. It's the sort of thing that makes it easy to understand why working with and through associations can get in one's blood and can become a powerful motivator in one's own life.

But, I'm no pollyanna, either.

Just as they can give legs to the best visions and ideas and motives among us, associations can epitomize the worst characteristics of humanity. When the members and leaders of associations permit it to happen, association structures and processes can trample over the "right" thing to financially and/or politically enrich individuals and groups in ways that cause untold damage to others.

Laws in the United States that work to prevent collusion, restraint of trade, price-fixing, and any number of other breaches of trust and good will by associations were not passed in anticipation of bad deeds. They were passed because legislators and regulators and the public learned, first hand, because they are instruments of humanity, that associations can be tools of greed, abuse of power, and all manner of other crimes and moral failings.

It is because I recognize that associations, like governments, can be instruments of abuse, neglect, blackmail, economic conniving, and social injustice, among other things, that I am a believer in every association taking steps to ensure that its good name and resources are not hijacked for malevolent purposes.

The first defense against abuse is simple: leaders and members alike need to understand and accept the organization's reason for being and its values. Let's take, for example, the Mid-Texas Association of Cattle Prod Manufacturers (a fictitious organization...I hope). Its purposes, as outlined in its bylaws, are "to advance the safe and appropriate use of cattle prods and to protect the industry's economic interests." By itself, that would allow the Association to try to drive competing products out of business by any means possible. Let's say, though, that the Association had expressed its values as: 1) fair competition, 2) honesty in all business dealings, 3) adherence to the law, and 4) creativity. Those values would preclude firebombing competitors' worksites, "dumping" products below costs, and lying about the number of people who had been injured in cattle prod accidents.

The bottom line is this: like most human endeavors, associations are generally honest, law-abiding, endeavors that engage in activities that have value. But it's very important for members and leaders alike to be "watchdogs" to ensure that the beneficent roots of the organization are maintained over time.

A simple code of ethics which lays out the values of the organization and specifically precludes certain self-serving behaviors can go a long way toward preventing problems. Of course, that code of ethics cannot simply be created and left to gather dust on the shelf It must be regularly reviewed and broadcast to the membership as a guiding principle of the association.

Nurture the best in associations and the best is what you'll get. Never allow an association's capacity to nurture the wrong leaders take hold, though, lest all the good deeds an organization might do go undone.

A Good Concept for all Associations: Operating Surveys

Operating ratio surveys and reports tend to be considered only for trade associations. That makes sense, because Quick Ratio, Current Ratio, Average Debt Collection Period, Debt to Asset Ratio, and various liquidity ratios, etc. typically have little or no relevance to individuals in professional societies.

But, operating practice surveys, or something like them, can be extremely valuable to members of professional societies, as well, when couched in terms and reported in ways that are relevant to members' enviroments. Let's look at some hypothetical examples.

The members of the hypoethetical Global Association for Vertebrate Pest Elimination (GAVPE), an association of vertebrate pest control specialists (people who help control rats and possums and squirrels in the attic, etc.) might find it extremely valuable to know the average number of attic pests found after a homeowner reports an infestation. The same people might find it extremely helpful to know the average number of days from first efforts at control until control is achieved. The most expedient and the most efficient way for them to know these numbers is for large numbers of other professionals to share them in such as way that they can be aggregated and expressed in some meaningful form. GAVPE is the ideal vehicle to orchestrate the collection and reporting of those numbers. Members of GAVPE can then look to the Association for information, such as (remember, this is hypothetical):

• The average number of days from control initiation to control achievement is 10.2
• The average number of rats in a typical infestation is 3.2

That information is not just "nice to know" stuff...it's the sort of thing a homeowner who's confronted with a rat infestation would want the GAVPE member to tell him. It's information that helps convey upon the GAVPE member a sense of professionalism and gives the homeowner a reason to put his faith in the member.

Another hypothetical example may help further express the value of operating practice surveys. The Association of Freelance Administrative Support Professionals (AFASP) might serve its members' needs very well by conducting a survey asking, among other things, the length of time of the average "first contact" freelance assignment. The average time of that assignment can help the freelancer establish a base service commitment. So, for example, if the average from the AFASP study reveals that the average assignment is 16 hours, the member who has not yet established a contract minimum might decide to set a minimum at 75% of the average "first contact" assignment, or 12 hours. Again, this in not just "nice to know" information, it's information that the member can use in a practical way in his or her role as a professional.

The previous sentence, ultimately, is the value of associations. They can give members, whether businesses or individuals, practical tools to be better at what they do. Operating ratios for businesses and operating practices for businesses or individuals are features of membership that can deliver tangible benefits.

Branding Your Association

The topic of branding is one of those that, for awhile, seemed like it would be another flash-in-the-pan idea that, like many marketing concepts, would be destined for the ash bin of distant memories. Branding, though, is a concept that equates with survival. Whether you consider your association's marketing initiatives to be components of your branding efforts or not, the fact is that is exactly what they are.

That having been said, here are some ideas you can use to help ensure that your association's brand is maintained, nurtured, and made to thrive.

Excel in at least one area: Even if your association is small and poor, devote your limited resources to an area of performance at which you can excel. Your objective is to be better in this area than any of your competitors. If your association is a state professional society of healthcare administrators, for example, you might excel at getting the best and the brightest of your members to write "best practices" articles on healthcare administration in your state's regulatory environment. Work to get your members "pumped up" about writing for you. That area of excellence can then be transferred to other areas. In our example, the area in which the association excels is not its "best practices" articles; it's the ability to get members on board as working contributors. That can be used exceptionally well in many, many areas.

Be realistic about your goals: The state professional society I mentioned above has no realistic chance of becoming the nation's premier society of healthcare administrators, so it should not waste its energy trying. Set stretch goals...goals that are difficult, but attainable...but don't set yourself up for failure. The state society's goals might better focus on something more achievable...like becoming a primary resource to state regulators and legislators for expertise in healthcare administration.

Stay the course: Once you decide how you will present your organization to its audiences, stay with it. Stick with your plan. This principle says something important about your marketing plan: don't be too quick to adopt it. Spend plenty of time making your plan, testing your plan, and executing your plan, because it's going to be with you for awhile. Make minor adjustments when necessary, but don't make the mistake of "marketing makeover" on a routine basis. That torpedoes your brand. This is a particularly dangerous zone for associations, with their constantly changing boards and committees. As a staff member, you must make it your mission to keep volunteer leaders on track. As a volunteer leader, you must help and you must avoid the temptation to "make your mark" by leaving a new logo.

Hire people who reflect your brand: The Enabled Youth Association's brand might be impacted in an unexpected way if the receptionist were an elderly man with a lisp, just as a teenager with a nose ring serving as executive director would look odd for Geezers for a United Nation. I'm not suggesting that associations must always hire their demographic, but they should pay attention to how their audiences will react to their representatives and whether their representatives convey the right image. Now, whoever you hire, be sure to train them to present your brand the way you want and expect it to be presented.

Hold title to one really big idea: Wal-Mart rolls back prices; we know that because they tell us every time we see a commercial or an ad. Your association should own an idea that says something impressive about the organization. "The Association of Art Restorers ensures that the history of the world will always be clear in its art."

Put resources behind your big idea: If you've chosen your "big idea" well, you'll be willing to invest time, money, and manpower to it. This is one area in which your brand takes flight; it begins to create an image of the organization in the minds of your audience.

Promote your association and its brand. All. The. Time. Include your logo and, if you have one, your tag line, on everthing. Your literature. Your website. Your business cards. Your collateral material. Your Email. Give your staff shirts with your logo embroidered on them. Encourage your members to put your logo on their websites, letterhead, etc. (Yes, give them guidance on how to use it and how not to use it.)



Obviously, there's much more to branding your association than these few paragraphs can present. One thing is clear, though, and that is that you must pay careful attention to your brand. Don't let your brand emerge out of neglect, because that's a brand over which you have no control.

Fiduciary Responsibilities of Members of Boards of Directors

Almost anyone who has been elected or appointed to an association's board of directors has been told that they have "fiduciary responsibilities" to the organization and its members. Too often, that phrase is misunderstood and is interpreted solely as a responsibility to protect the organization's money.

Fiduciary responsibilities are much broader than simply protecting an organization's money. Instead, they span two fundamental duties of a director: the duty of loyalty and the duty of care. First, it is important to understand the role of a fiduciary. A fiduciary, also known as a trustee, is a person or entity with a responsibility to another person or entity, the latter known as the principal or beneficiary. A fiduciary is expected to be utterly loyal to the person or entity to whom they owe the duty. The fiduciary must subordinate personal interests before the duty, and must not profit from the position as fiduciary, without the consent of the principal.

In the case of associations, the members of the Board of Directors are the fiduciaries and the members of the association are the principals or beneficiaries. A summary of the duties of a fiduciary are as follows:

Duty of Loyalty
Under a fiduciary's duty of loyalty, the association's interests must be treated as paramount. The fiduciary's business and personal interests must be subordinate to those of the association and its members.

In associations, it is common for conflicts of interest to be present among members, including board members. Fiduciaries are not necessarily precluded from having conflicts of interest, but when they exist, they must be properly handled. For example, fiduciaries must disclose any conflicts of interest and must, when necessary, recuse themselves both from discussing issues and from voting on or influencing decisions with respect to that conflict.

Fiduciaries are expect to exercise “good faith” in their dealings and decision-making on behalf of the principal and must operate with honesty and integrity, keep confidences, and support board actions publicly.

Duty of Care
Under a fiduciary's duty of care, he or she must be diligent in the performance of fiduciary functions and must, therefore, attend and participate in Board meetings, receive and read reports, and make informed decisions. The duty of care carries with it a responsibility for the fiduciary to understand the association’s activities. That includes having a familiarity with the association's business/financial status. To have the proper familiarity, the fiduciary must review financial statements and must approve an annual budget.

Simply ensuring that there is money in the bank is not fulfilling one's fiduciary responsibilities as a director on an association board. The director must be an active participant in looking out after the affairs of the organization and must represent the interests of the organization's members. He or she must be able and willing to sacrifice his or her own interests to assure that the interests of the members at large are protected.

In a sense, a director's fiduciary responsibilities are akin to those of a parent: protecting the organizational "child" by knowing what and how it is doing and by putting the needs of the "child" first.

Association Directors and Officers Liability Insurance

First, let me say that, with this post, I'm not offering legal advice, nor am I holding myself out as an expert in insurance. I'm simply sharing my opinions and the information I have gained during my career in association management. Now that we've gotten that out of the way, here's the heart of the matter.

Virtually anyone in the business world understands that general liability insurance is an absolute necessity for almost any organization, even those that do not have a physical plant. Associations and other not-for-profit organizations, though, sometimes wonder whether directors & officers (D&O) liability coverage is necessary, particularly when it is expensive. What follows is my perspective, and my advice to the officers and directors of almost any not-for-profit organization or association.

The moment a person assumes a position as a board member of a not-for-profit organization, he or she assumes a level of responsibility for the organization ("duty of care") and becomes exposed to claims that he or she is not running and managing it properly. While the decision to buy or not to buy D&O coverage depends, in part, on the likelihood is that one of the organization's board members will be the target of such a claim, it should also be based on the premise that an uncovered claim could decimate the organization.

Claims against an organization generally would fall into two categories: bodily injury (physical harm) and non-bodily injury (non-physical harm, such discrimination, termination, collusion, or restraint of trade). The majority of claims are for bodily injury. An association's general liability insurance typically would cover board members, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, for claims arising out of bodily injury and property damage.

D&O liability insurance only covers non-bodily injury claims. As suggested above, non-bodily claims include employment-related claims, mismanagement of funds, collusion, restraint of trade, libel, and other such claims (it's important to note that libel and other such claims would not be covered, under a typical policy, if it were intentional or done with malice).

Concerns about non-bodily injury lawsuits would be one argument to have D&O insurance. Although there are relatively few reported cases of D&O claims, it is sufficiently common to justify, in my opinion, having coverage. Even claims that have been filed and then either settled out of court or dropped can be expensive, so D&O coverage can offer a level of protection that can ease directors' minds.
Fundamentally, there are two types of lawsuits in which a claim might be brought against member of a board of directors: derivative lawsuits and direct or third-party lawsuits.

Derivative lawsuits are claims against a board member on behalf of the corporation. A typical claim here would be mismanagement of assets. In many states, only a few people have "standing" or the right to bring such claims. They are: 1) board member(s) suing other board member(s) 2) members of an organization suing a board, and 3) the state Attorney General.

Because of these restrictive rules, derivative claims are relatively uncommon. Claims of these types are not made for awards to an individual, but rather to make the corporation "whole."

Direct or third-party lawsuits are brought by an employee or by a person not connected with the corporation who asserts a claim against it or its board on account of some non-bodily injury. These might include restraint of trade for preventing a company from getting access to association benefits, or a claim of defamation

Employment practices such as termination and discrimination are the largest exposure in these types of claims. If you have a small, friendly staff, and feel unlikely to have employment claims resulting in a lawsuit, you might not think it necessary to carry D&O insurance. However, when employees feel they have been wronged and are angry, they may file a claim even if it is baseless. At that point, you would need to hire lawyers. Your D&O then becomes a legal defense policy.

D&O insurance is essentially legal defense insurance in most cases. The vast majority of the cases brought against a board are thrown out, but the organization must pay legal fees if a claim is filed.

According to some people, the "deep pocket" theory is relevant in this context. This theory asserts that only people with money are likely to be sued and that lawyers may file a suit based on an artificial claim against "deep pocket" board members with the hope of securing a settlement for their client. Organizations that have a board made up of "ordinary" people who aren't known to have vast amounts of money may then be comfortable without D&O insurance. I wouldn't advise it, but that's what some organizations decide to do.

Assuming an organization decides to pursue D&O coverage, it should look carefully at the policies offered. Questions should be asked and answered about who, specifically, is covered, what exclusions are in place and under what conditions, etc. If employment-related claims are excluded, for example, an association that has its own staff may well decide the coverage is insufficient. An association that engages an association management company would not have the same concerns, of course, because the liabilities for employment-related issues fall to the management company, in most cases.

Insurance Underwriter
When selecting an underwriter, I suggest the association find out what the rating of the company is and that the association never sign on with a company whose rating is less than "A.". A.M. Best & Co. and Standard & Poor are two of the larger companies who provide underwriter ratings. I suggest you also determine whether the company has a reasonable record of claims payments; ask your broker or agent to show you how it is viewed by the rating organizations.

The New Age of Association Education

The era of talking heads is over, at least for a little while. Associations are beginning to understand that adults do not learn as quickly nor as well from listening to speeches, no matter how articulate or intelligent the speaker. While I am convinced that no one has the "right" answer about what constitutes the best learning environment, I think it's safe to say that a mix of the following will be more effective, more enjoyable, and more successful than simply presenting a talking head to the audience:

• Group conversations, in which the audience breaks into small groups during which they discuss the issues, answer questions posed to them about the topic at hand, and are rewarded for contributing to the dialogue;
• Audience members as teachers, in which all or several (depending on the size of the group) members of the audience are asked to take on the "talking head" role, but with a twist--they can engage the group in conversation, as well;
• Experiential learning, in which the participants actually do what they are expected to learn, following guidance either of an instructor or a teaching team;
• Multi-media exposure to concepts, wherein the concepts being taught are delivered verbally, visually, and through other senses such as touch, taste, and smell;
• Online learning, incorporating a variety of teaching and learning techniques, delivered via computer, typically over the Internet;
• Self-instruction, whereby the individual learner is given specific objectives, clear metrics to measure progress, a timeline, and a variety of information resources and then told to come back to report on progress at various intervals; and
• Peer feedback, whereby knowledgeable and trained peers give feedback to the learner about the material to be learned.

Several of these processes go by other names. Several of them have evolved into hybrids that purport to be more effective than any of the processes from which they sprang. Regardless, the important thing is that associations that continue to depend on the "talking head" mode of delivery for education will find that, at least for now, their members likely will be dissatisfied with it, if that is the exclusive mode of delivery.

My best advice is this: use a mix of modes of delivering your educational content. Surprise your members with new ideas, new formats, and jarring concepts! Get them excited as much about how they will learn as what they will learn!

Small Associations Can Perform "Big"

Small associations often lament the fact that they do not have the resources to perform as well as their larger brethren. While it is indeed true that larger associations with big budgets and large numbers of dedicated staff members may have an easier time of "performing" than smaller, leaner organizations, small associations can behave like the big guys. It's a matter of how they use their resources. Let's consider some areas in which effective resource allocation can pay huge dividends for associations:

• Create and use free blogs (examples: www.blogger.com/; www.wordpress.com/)
  
• Use cheap web hosting companies with templates (examples: www.hostcentric.com/; www.networksolutions.com/;
  
• Use inexpensive online membership services instead of expensive ones like iMIS, (example: www.memberclicks.com/)
  
• Create and use free wikis (example: www.pbwiki.com/)
  
• Get staff/volunteers excited about learning new skills so they can do things to make the association "look big" (e.g., do an online "webinar" by simply creating a PowerPoint, saving it as a web page, then uploading to your website...and give "trainees" the URL so you can walk through it with them, while chatting with them on a pay-it-yourself conference call [for example, http://www.freeconferencecall.com/])
  
• Invest in inexpensive resources (or pursue free resources) to enable you to create audio and video podcasts (e.g., www.garageband.com/podcast
  
• Invest in inexpensive resources to enable you to have CAN-SPAM compliant opt-in blast email capabilities and avoid overloading Outlook (e.g., listbox.com)

It's important to understand that each of these (and hundreds of other) prospective solutions to "looking small" require regular investments of time, whether volunteer or staff or both. Before jumping too deep into looking like a "big association," you must look at what, realistically, you can expect your volunteers or staff to do. Even something that only takes 30 minutes a week is going to start wearing thin on volunteers who work 10-12 hour days, six days a week! Spread the load, and be careful to ensure that you document the processes as you go, in case you need to quickly shift to another volunteer.

Similarly, be careful about what you ask your staff to do, whether a full-time staff dedicated to your association (a "captive" staff) or an Association Management Company (AMC). A captive staff for a small association wears many, many, many hats and one more new project from the Board may send them over the edge! Ask for their input before launching on a new set of initiatives.

AMCs typically have several clients and must, for the sake of efficiency and good resource management, limit the number of solutions used for any given challenge. So, it may not be reasonable to expect your AMC to learn yet another software product that does the same thing as another one they're using...you need to let your AMC give you some guidance on how it can address your needs. By all means, though, insist that it addresses them, one way or another, and with a sharp eye on your budget!

Whether you use only volunteers, your own staff, an AMC, or a combination thereof, think of and explore ways to deliver real value to your members without draining your resources. Your association can look big, no matter its size!