I’m remembering one of the things that I dislike passionately about associations – the constant dues haggling. Here are just a few of scenarios:
- A member complains that their dues are too high and wants a discount.
- A potential member says he has a handful of people to bring into the association and wants to cut a deal for reduced dues.
- A volunteer leader is trying to develop a more international attendance for a meeting and wants to help non-US prospects join through discounted dues.
On the surface, I think a couple of attitudes drive these requests: the notion of the non-profit as charity and the belief that member growth is always beneficial.
I’m taking a stab at the charity issue. I simply don’t know why folks think non-profits have no regard for their own financial health. Perhaps it’s that term non-profit. What I do know is that it is very hard to get folks to understand that decisions must be put through a financial test and that giving something away works toward an association’s long-term vitality.
The more insidious attitude is that any type of membership growth is good for the association. The problem is that offering discounts on membership is purely a short-term solution. Yes, it may bring in members now, but what does it then say about the overall value of the membership? And here’s the more interesting question: are the members seeking a discount the right type of members for the association? Wouldn’t you rather have a member who wants to pay full price because they believe in the value rather than a member who constantly looks to cut their spending?
The common response is that if you give the member a taste now of all the association has to offer, they’ll undoubtedly come back for more next year. I believe this is not only a vicious myth, but the antithesis of creating a passionate experience. The relationship has been marred from the beginning where the association has essentially stated that we really don’t believe in the value of our own offerings.
Here is my proposition: that associations (and I’m putting my own right at the front of this line) stop looking for just any member to join and start looking for the right member to join. And the first way they can show that they are the right member is to be willing to pay in full for their membership.
Or is that asking for too much?
Chris --
I call the "the broad, vs. the deep."
Some organizations want to achieve critical mass, and look to build their membership numbers by whatever means they need to. What they seem to care most about is having a lot of people. With a lot of people, they can then afford to issue "deals" to some of the members. They also believe in the "strength in numbers" myth.
Other organizations don't care so much about how many members they have. What they care most about is that the members are deeply engaged in the organization, see value in their memberships, and contribute in a variety of ways *because* they see, and receive value.
The many (or the "broad") are usually energy suckers of the highest magnitude. They want a lot, and take a lot, but rarely give much back.
The few (or the "deep")usually ask for little more than they knew they'd get when they joined, and they give back far more. They'd rarely be likely to ask for a discount on their membership fees, for example.
In my own work, I've always known that I was meant to work with the "deep," and not the "broad." Some people have a knack with working with them, but I simply don't. I'd rather have fewer deeply involved members than many energy sucking members. Sounds like you're there, too. :)
What you propose is perfect. And, trust me, it's not asking too much at all.
S
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
Like