Acronym

Being all things to all people isn't the only alternative here though, Scott. An association could complement the core as you outline here with a focused and strategic mix of services for "secondary" customers whose affiliation with the association enhances the organization's overall reputation, knowledge among the member community, etc. We have to quit reframing this as an either-or decision.

Jeffrey, I couldn't disagree more.

I think you define what your core is and you focus on doing it really well. Those secondary customers will drift in and out based on their perceived value of participating with you at any given time or on any given subject.

I certainly don't mean to diminish the importance of these secondary markets from knowledge or financial contribution standpoints. I think if you don't have people drifting in and out of your sphere, then you're either way on the fringe (which is ok) or not doing anything remarkable (much less ok as you'll be losing whatever core you have before long).

The trap I think associations fall into is trying to address these secondary markets on the secondary markets' terms. It's hard enough to define the terms of a primary market, but reaching for that secondary market makes the complexity of defining terms exponentially harder -- or maybe even impossible -- just too many possible variations.

Instead, an association should define its terms and let those who want to play, play -- for as much as they want or as long as they want.

And I'll stick to my guns and say it can't be as black and white as you want to make it out to be, but I do agree with your excellent observation about trying to serve the secondary market on that market's terms.

You've made many great posts over time lamenting associations trying to do too much. I would say that is as much a problem of association leadership as it is any definition of an association's core or its markets. If I have a personal plan to only eat healthful food, have a shopping list with only those items on it, but still buy junk items when at the grocery store, it's my willpower at fault, not the plan.

You wound me with:

"You've made many great posts over time lamenting associations trying to do too much."

I'm trying to quickstart some thoughtful Acronym posts like I used to do, but I find I want to write about the same stuff I've written about before. It's frustrating -- don't I have any original thoughts anymore? (Or run across others' thoughts that I can steal?)

Anyway, as much as anything, I've started to come around to this "define what you do, then do it" hallmark much more strongly after many discussions in the last 18 months with association leaders struggling with social media platforms. People get all skittery when their members start establishing things that are related to the organization. We were.

But you have to get over that. As mine and I think just about any shrink would say: think about the things you control and the things you don't. You can't control your members, so don't try. Monitor it, make it part of the data that informs your decisions, but don't try to control it. Rather, figure out with your members how the organization can best use the tool and do that.

And I think the same principle applies in a macro sense. Define what you are and be that. If others want a different experience, let them go create it with or without your blessing, but certainly without your scorn.

Glad you enjoyed the post on Makin' Ads, Scott. Glad it incited some discussion, too.