Advancing Engagement + Recruitment: Moving Membership

Marketing to Membership is a Mistake – Particularly in a Pandemic

Maureen K. Heim and Trish Hudson, MPsSc - Melos Institute

Much attention has been given lately of how best to communicate with members, especially now that social distancing has limited the opportunities to connect with them. Our dependence on the written word to reach them has not changed substantially though its impact on their lives has. Drafting communications that compel members to engage has always been important, but finding the time has also been the obstacle. At the Melos Institute, we’ve been questioning the efficacy of traditional marketing practices in association communications to determine whether adjusting the approach would positively impact member renewals. The findings offer great promise on how current communications can be easily adjusted to get better results.

What We Discovered

Renewal notices, using traditional marketing practices and typically written to convince members with a host of reasons why they should renew, looked and sounded like most everything else members’ received from competitors and for-profit companies. Further, the language (focus, tone, and tenor) was written from the association’s perspective; forcing members to interpret the inherent value for themselves. In Ruthless Consistency, Michael Canic, President of Making Strategy Happen, suggests that this approach is certain to undermine the success of a project.

We believed the traditional transaction-focused “salesoriented” language, while well-intentioned, was the underlying key factor. It was treating members like customers. We felt that an alternative had to communicate to members on two dimensions: (1) ways members could immediately benefit from the association, and (2) ways members could benefit from one another.

What We Did

We transformed the language (words, tone, and tenor) from transaction-focused to relation-centered. Additionally, we developed a renewal blueprint to ensure messages and guidance across notices remained relevant, seamless, and consistent. While space here limits sharing the details, the relation-centered/community-centric language, written from the members’ perspective, incorporated three concepts: (1) reinforced the distinctive relationships and access that members have with the association as well as fellow members;

(2) showed how the association operates as a conduit to members’ success and that of their field of endeavor; and

(3) suggested specific actions they could take resulting in immediate benefit.

Result

The pieces not only generated better responses but also left members (and staff) feeling differently about the association. The transformed language changed the way volunteer leaders and staff viewed members and how they could be of support.

Out of curiosity, we incorporated relation-centered language into a digital promotion for one association’s educational roundtable (pre-pandemic) which normally attracted 12-15 members. The adjusted relation-centered language attracted nearly 50 registrations in less than a day and nearly that many in subsequent days.

Lesson

We may have been told to believe that associations are businesses and employing traditional marketing practices is the way to go. We discovered that:

• Traditional marketing strategies unintentionally make members behave more like customers assessing the value of the transaction over the value of the investment (time and money) to gain unparalleled access and support.

• Associations are much more than businesses selling stuff. They exist as a conduit, providing information, knowledge, tools, and connections to advance members’ lives.

We believe that relation-centered communications produces better outcomes. For those interested in delivering meaningful and purposeful experiences to members (while also generating necessary revenue), shifting your communications from transaction-oriented to relation-centered is worthy of your consideration. You’ll marvel, as we did, at the impact.

Does it Stay or Does it Go? Programmatic Evaluation in a Time of Shift

Lowell Appelbaum, Vista Cova

A key tenant of a healthy organization is a system of regular programmatic evaluation to determine which efforts are bringing return, which need to be sunset, and where programmatic invention/investment is needed.

In this moment of daily-shift, in order to survive and thrive, associations are being forced into rapid resource evaluation conversations that demand programmatic prioritization.

As organizations refocus to create these new value outputs, which existing products or services are being put on hold/eliminated to create the space to do so? As our virtual work life becomes ever more normalized, what were initially emergency measures are becoming new realities. Associations are looking at their P&L sheets, creating new projections, and having difficult conversations around everything from when to trigger event insurance to staff pay reductions/furloughs/releases. As a next step in this adjustment, organizational governance is being asked the difficult question of where to pull back. Their association can’t do everything. The formats in which the organization has traditionally provided value and operated have shifted, and the needs the organization is trying to meet look radically different than weeks ago. In a time where so much has changed, bringing forward programmatic decisions that are one-off, go/no go decisions are causing feelings of fear and loss. Knowing these rapiddecision points are going to continue to emerge, a revised system and language of evaluation that can serve as a foundation for discussions among the Board can help distance the feelings associated with having to simply stop doing those things which have been normative for so long. This can help our leaders refocus on future-oriented choices of greater impact.

Measures of Programmatic Impact

Board members need a simple snapshot of return for each output of the organization if they are going to evaluate what should be kept, invested in, or sunset. While generating a full Program Impact Matrix is ideal, in times of duress, a simple listing with three columns for each program may help.

Fiscal Return – Without funds there is no organization. Which line items provide the means by which the association can create necessary mission-focused outputs? In thinking about where those lines of revenue come from, what modifications need to be made to ensure they evolve to fit the current environment? Mission Return – Not every output the organization produces has the same impact on mission. Which are mission critical? Which are mission aligned? Which are mission minimal – having outlived their time or no longer serve a greater audience? Momentary Return – This moment in time has highlighted organizational output areas that have either taken on greater relevance or have been quickly created to serve the needs of an isolated, digitally connected constituency. Which of these are current context relevant? Which provide value only until a sense of next-normalcy is realized?

Language of Evaluation

The decision of where to align resources is not just in funding – it is also in staff time, volunteer time, and communications space. Rather than a go/ no-go decision for a program, consider this five-level system.

Invest – These programs are best serving the needs of the membership and the organization right now. They may be new efforts, never-before tried, or modifications to existing programs. The gradient of investment should include potential long-term value and return of the solution under consideration. Maintain – These efforts are continuing to bring value and return to the organization as currently structured. Modify – These outputs and efforts have potential to serve the organization well in this moment, but not in their current form. It is worth an investment of resources to increase their potential value and return with specific guidance on what to invest and what is expected from the investment. Pause – This is perhaps the most powerful tool. Instead of elimination, leadership can choose to put a program on hold for a time period and return to it for evaluation at a future time. At the future time, an objective decision about the value of the program can be made with information collected during the pause period. Sunset – Capacity isn’t infinite – organizational strength is found in saying yes to the right things, and in recognizing and acting upon those that have ceased to provide meaningful value and return.

In the end, at this moment every association is faced with having to make rapid, critical decisions of resource and value. Establishing a system of value contrast, incorporate a language of commitment gradients - each of these tools will help your governance not only lead through crisis, but author the hopeful future our members need.