Building the right systems pays off later
I'm still in the process of processing the swell of ideas and trends discussed at the 2011 Digital Now conference this past weekend. Looking back at my notes, there's one idea that came up a few times:
Good systems (or habits) will pay off down the road.
That's a simplified idea, but here are the two examples in which it came up at the conference:
- The Society of Critical Care Medicine tracks its members' activities with the association and within the industry down to every last detail: meetings they attend, papers they write (both for the association and outside), discussions they join, and so on. SCCM staff are capturing so much information that they have established a predictive-analytics tool that they believe will help them identify future volunteer leaders years before they emerge. Executive Director David Martin, CAE, said this is only possible because SCCM has been collecting data diligently and systematically for a decade (to the point that staff who wouldn't get on board with proper data collection practices were given the boot).
- Fellow Acronym blogger Mark Golden, CAE, moderated a session based on the book The Power of Pull by John Hagel III, John Seely Brown, and Lang Davison. He and his co-presenters explained that one element of a successful "pull system" is the ability to attract and convene new people, ideas, and information "so that serendipitous synergies occur." Mark called it "shaping serendipity."
Coincidentally, on my flight home I read "No More Privacy Paranoia," by Slate's Farhad Manjoo, in which he discusses the clash between privacy protection and the power of systems built to use personal information. Near the end he makes a point about Google that meshes the two ideas above:
"There's something important to note about the spellchecker, Flu Trends, speech recognition, and other Google products based on data. They weren't planned. Google didn't begin saving search queries in order to build the spell-checker; it built the spell-checker because it began saving search queries, and eventually realized that the database could be useful."
So again the lesson here is to create systems or environments that foster the building and sharing of knowledge, which can open up possibilities beyond what you might be able to predict. The problem I see for associations, though, is the ROI question. Asking a board to have faith that good things will happen if it approves a major investment probably won't fly. You'd likely need at least one significant return in mind, in hopes that that might be enough to make an investment that could pay off in other ways later.
Do you have examples of unexpected benefits from good systems or practices at your association? How have you made the case for investment in systems or habits that you know are best practices but don't have clear, direct returns?
| | Permalink |
Comments
I see social CRM as a good example of something that may not seem to have clear, direct return but will pay off in the future. Why bother adding member's Twitter handles to their AMS records when most of your members might not even be on Twitter? Why bother adding Twitter or Facebook as points of origin when doing contact tracking? What if in 5 years these channels don't even exist? Well, what if they do exist? What if in 5 years your members aren't members anymore because they all realized they could get what they needed from a source other than your organization?
Posted by: Maggie McGary | April 14, 2011 10:17 AM
Thanks Maggie. I don't know a lot about social CRM just yet (guess I need to check out that whitepaper you linked to in your blog post yesterday), so I'd be in the same camp as the people that social-CRM advocates would be making their case to. I'm a believer in the power of collecting data (see above), so I wouldn't be too hard to sway. But I'm interested in pushing you past the questions you've posed in your comment. If you needed to sell me on one direct benefit social CRM, what would it be? (This reminds me of a convo on social-media ROI here on Acronym back in 2009.)
Posted by: Joe Rominiecki | April 15, 2011 9:59 AM