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