Acronym

In addition to workforce profile, I think that identifying member needs (at least annually), and responding nimbly with new and innovative products and services, is the single-best way to stay relevant. Furthermore, associations must constantly assess their available resources (both human and monetary capital), question the status quo and embrace change.

It's not enough to survey current members--although that's crucial too. What you have to do is project where the industry or profession you serve will be 5 or 10 years. Be relevant now but imagine that future state and build everything with that in mind.

Of course I understand the concept behind the importance of relevance, and maybe I'm just word-smithing here, but the word "relevant" bugs me (and I've been hearing it a lot lately). It feels like we're setting the bar too low. As Maddie Grant has said, having the goal of relevance is like living your life with the goal of being "not dead." Maybe Rebecca's comment about future-focused is part of it. Is relevant really enough?

Being relevant is nice - but leading is the path to success. Relevancy is achieved by communication with members; leading is achieved by knowing what lay ahead.

The way to lead is different for everyone, but I believe that associations that put members first are stronger for their effort – in fact that is a cornerstone of a great association. If the first question an association staff member thinks about when they go about their day is “How does this affect our members?” Then, that is a group I want to belong to, because I know if the answer can not be determined easily, then this is something that association will give much consideration before proceeding. The process of answering that question can (and in my view, should) be member driven.

Associations should not wait for an issue to be presented to ask that question. Taking the lead means first being up-to-date on our industry. After all, is that not something the member pays dues for us to do? Consistently having a out-reach to a variety of members representing the diversity of the organization including new members, old members, different categories, protagonists & antagonists shows us the way to lead. Association managers can not afford to live in a bubble - the dues we receive generally come from discretionary budget line items... and those that join our organizations will go away if we fail them.

How do you get ahead of that curve? Only by having a future vision for your industry. Not only where it is heading, buy why; how is it getting there - and perhaps most importantly... is that the right place to go? Having an effective, active and monitored (by the membership) strategic plan is one way to ensure you stay relevant. How you do that is another topic entirely - but if you undertake a strategic initiative like this be sure to involve your membership every step of the way. Most importantly, be accountable to your membership for the progress (or lack of progress) to that plan... and be open to change as the industry changes.

Relevant is not just repeating the buzz of the day, there are thousands of opinions floating around right now about how to survive 'these challenging economic times.'

I am just curious, wouldn't it be more relevant for an association to take the lead on what the new business model will be (should be?) in 24 months? If we as an association don't know that answer - I bet some of our members do... and they are probably just waiting to be asked to share that information.

Jeffrey Cufaude also left a good comment about this topic here. Here's the text of his comment:

"I think I get where you and Maddy are coming from, but relevance is a fairly value-neutral term in my book. It doesn't necessarily imply a low bar. Relevance can mean maintaining the status quo or meeting the needs of the highest-flying early adopters and innovators.

"In fact, looking at things through the reverse can be useful: what is your association doing right now that might be irrelevant and who would find that to be the case? That could help identify some efforts that need revamping or retiring."

People get tripped up on words sometimes, but I think the most damning adjective for anybody or any association to be labeled with is “irrelevant.” So whether one likes the word or not, what separates the organizations that survive and thrive from ones that whither and die is relevancy… That is what it is all about.

I don't agree that the age of the members within an organization is necessarily a sign that the association itself has "gotten off track" regarding the relevance of their programs, products, and services. It may be a sign that the association is "off the radar" when delivering the resources. Individual membership organizations may be great at providing relevant content but if their members are adopting new ways of consuming the content (e-newsletters, rss feeds, social media, etc) and the organization has not shifted their content development and delivery methods to accommodate their members' needs the organization becomes irrelevant.

Yes, there are still people that want to read newspapers, but the reason why newspapers are dying is because they are not shifting their delivery methods to meet the time pressured needs of their audience. Newspapers are realizing that this doesn't mean just setting up a website for their news, but developing the content differently to fit the variety of ways the content could be consumed by readers. The shift is from consumers that had to work hard to adjust their consumption style to what delivery methods were available (ie: newspapers) to content creators working hard to adapt to the multiple consumption methods readers now have available. If an association is still relying on their journal editor alone to develop and deliver content for their members then the organization should expect their members to leave for much "greener" pastures.

What a great discussion! It is interesting in that I have had a sticky on my desk with three words on it for at least 4 years (judging from how much the sticky has faded!). The words are: Relevance, Engagement and Involvement. The latter two are fairly self-explanitory, but Relevance is a bit harder to define. To me, Relevancy is a switch in the mind of each of our members. As long as they feel that what we do is important enough, from a value perspective, to write a dues check each year, the switch will remain in the on position. Once they feel that value has dissipated or they find more value elsewhere the switch goes off and so to our ability to retain them in the fold. So, relevancy is valuedefined and dependent, and value is found through good research so that we can identify what the needs are in each of our segments and deliver what they want and need.

Coming at this from an educator's point of view, relevance or relevant is a word used incessantly. The education system sees it is a rich word that means both current and future based, not just status quo.

Educators and education design planners will often ask if the presentation, the content, the context and the learnings are relevant. Do they have meaning for the audience (the member) that is important for today as well as tomorrow? Is it fresh? Can people connect to it? Do people have an emotional response to it? Does the content, issue, situation apply to your audience or your members? Do they value it? Does it forecast the future? Is it significant?

So applying that to the association world is easy for me. It's more than deciding if the association is not dead as Maddie suggests. It’s a corner stone of the education system and should be a cornerstone of the association world as well.