Hard conversations that need to be had
I consider myself fortunate in that my job requires me to have hundreds of conversations with different associations, technology vendors and consultants each year. Increasingly, I’m struck by the conversations we are not having. It’s no secret that for most, if not all, associations the real contact with constituents happens on the web. But if you look at most associations technology strategies, they center on association managements systems. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that AMSs aren’t important, clearly they are. But just what is an “association management system” anyway? I’m not sure I have the answer, but I know I do know that how people “associate” has changed drastically in the last few years and the systems that manage our associations have remained pretty much the same for the last, uhh, a long, long time. It’s time to talk about that!
I recently had a conversation with the COO of a relatively large association that went something like this:
COO: We can’t seem to get a technology strategy that works for our organization.
Me: Tell me a little about your organization.
COO: Well, we have a staff of 160, our budget is just over 40 million and we have about 25,000 members.
Me: Who developed your existing strategy?
COO: Our IT manager.
Me: (Silence)
COO: Reggie? Reggie?
Me: Does the IT manager take part in senior staff meetings, attend board meetings, talk much with the CEO?
COO: No, the IT manager reports to the CFO who represents IT views and needs.
The rest of our conversation can’t be printed here. But here is my question. How can any organization of any size not have someone with an understanding of technology involved in the organization’s strategic conversations? We need to talk about that!
I was recently invited to participate in a board meeting of an association who was thinking about decreasing the emphasis of its website and particularly its wiki and blog areas. You see, the wiki and blogs were becoming more and more successful. Members were starting to spend more time there than reading the magazine, or visiting advertiser supported “traditional” web pages. Links were showing up in the blog that took people away from their site, to sites that sometimes didn’t necessarily reflect the association’s point of view. The wiki was fast becoming the place where members went for “relevant” information. Finally, one of the board members said “the problem is that these new technologies don’t fit the association’s business model”. The CEO leaned over and quietly asked me what my take was on the discussion. My answer to him and to all of us: “What’s wrong here, the successful blog and wiki, or the association business model?” We need to talk about that!
| | Permalink |
Comments
Reggie, you hit the nail on the head. The world is changing quickly due in part to the rapid advances in technology. We can do one of two things, stick our heads in the sand and hope that it goes away or embrace it and see where it leads us. It's both frightening and exciting that we are heading into uncharted territory and there are no generally accepted practices that we can rely on for guidance.
In your story the association views the wiki and blogs as the problem not the opportunity. I'd love to see their member stats (specifically as they relate to satisfaction and retention) prior to the introduction of the participatory aspects of their website and compare them to now. I'd also love to see what the backlash would be if they took these tools away. While I can appreciate their perspective and sentiment, their conclusion really does defy logic. I guess many are still living in the world where what associations provide really is unique and couldn't be provided as effectively elsewhere.
Loosely associated, quick-rising organic, groups can (and have) leverage free or low cost social networking and web 2.0 tools to create dynamic communities almost overnight without creating nearly the barriers to entry that exist in many associations today. Are they any less effective or valuable? Not if they are providing the knowledge, networking and sense of belonging that the members want. Stuff (magazines, advertising, etc.) is great, but is it what your/my/our members want?
I guess it really does depend on the lens that you are using to view the situation, regardless, shift happens. It can happen because of you (or your association) or in spite of you. Ultimately there is a choice to be made.
Hopefully this will be a wake-up call for all associations.
Posted by: Dave Sabol | January 29, 2008 6:24 PM
Great post. Seth Godin's post today covers a similar line of thinking. Worth a read:
http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2008/01/tribal-manageme.html
Posted by: Mickie Rops | January 30, 2008 9:08 AM
Great Post! Your final statement really rang true. I would only add that this association is fortunate that members are using their wiki and blog. Social media sites and on-line communities are proliferating and will put even more pressure on traditional association business models. Thanks for the wake-up call!
Posted by: Greg Fine | January 30, 2008 11:39 AM
Reggie, you have summarized something that is very common in the org that I work for. You are my hero of the day for summarizing it so well. I blogged about you today at: http://1centnpt.blogspot.com/2008/01/technology-in-strategic-plan-reggie.html
Posted by: 1CentNPT | January 30, 2008 1:01 PM
So true, Reggie. This is what we're tackling over at NTEN (we've launched a special Leadership Series of webinars to educate the leaders at organizations about how to integrate technology planning, and we also just released our second report about how the non-profit sector handles IT in their organizations).
In some ways, what you described reveals the upside-down paradigm many organizations - especially associations - are still implementing, despite the changing landscape of operations due to technology.
Thanks for your efforts to flip things around!
Posted by: Annaliese | January 31, 2008 4:08 PM
I agree whole heartedly. I'd like to comment on the question, "How can any organization of any size not have someone with an understanding of technology involved in the organization's strategic conversations?".
As the head of IT in my organization, a couple companion questions are, How can I build relationships with the organization's leaders so that I am invited to the table? How can I get them to perceive that IT really does add value beyond fixing blackberries and answering helpdesk distress calls?
In otherwords, what can I do to rectify the situation posed by the original question? I think organizations simply don't realize what value IT really brings to the table. It's up to us to build relationships and communicate our successes to help other see how we add value.....at least unitl I retire.
Posted by: Mike Robey | February 7, 2008 11:01 AM