When you stop looking at members as people who pay dues and start looking at them as people who participate and engage and purchase other products and services, youll find a remarkably clear path to new services, products and benefits that will make th…

Part of this may require rethinking what we “sell” in terms of membership and whether or not it really is as valuable as we think it is.

In a brainstorming session with colleagues earlier this week I noted that it is easier to sell a relatively-high-priced monthly subscription for one valuable thing than it is to sell a relatively-reasonably-priced annual membership for “a portfolio of benefits.”

We are still saddled with the legacy-membership model and mantra, ie, members uber alles. We really need to get beyond that to a 21st century perspective. This becomes even more of an imperative when we consider that the younger demographics, who will increasingly become the life blood of associations, appear much less inclined towards the “blind loyalty” of Boomers, and much more inclinded towards “dropping in-dropping out”of membership and volunteer activities, depending on when they see a personal or career benefit or interest.

Associations, particularly IMOs, may be facing a future where long-term dues-paying member may be replaced by “in-and-out-and-in-and-out” customers, who may or may not pay dues, but still seek the value, community and adovcacy offered by a non-profit relevant to their interests.

Thus, foward-looking associations might be better served by giving more attention and priority to a “voice of the customer” process, rather than either a legacy membership model or the long-tail model. Just who are the desirable customers of the future, and what is it they want and need?

I wish there was interest in an article in this, since it may be a paradigm shift in legacy membership models underlying non-profit associations. It may also be the successor to “Reason to Join”, ie, reason to be an (association) customer.

Just a thought.

Focusing on the BEST market makes it easier to create, serve, and attract them. But as associations we have a “long tail” of our own and as we create those innovative services for our market we will attract the attention of niche customers who may be interested in some things but not others (or some things, but not membership).

The question is, are we letting that tail organically grow, or are we walling our products and programs off within a “membership” fortress? How much of what your association offers is accessible without requiring membership?

And you’re absolutely right about association leaders wanting everyone to be happy. There’s an article in that, definitely …

That said, from a marketing perspective, bringing “everyone else” into the fold has tremendous word-of-mouth potential–especially if your sweet spot is hard to find. The trick is to figure out a way to engage the broader audience without over-committing your resources.

Is your thought process related to Chris Anderson’s speech at Digital Now?
http://blogs.asaecenter.org/Acronym/2008/04/there_is_no_average_member .html

To clarify, despite the dramatic flourish at the end of my post, what I’m really suggesting is that we figure out who we really want as members and go after them. The “ones we don’t” are implied based on that. I’m not suggesting that we actively discourage or reject membership from anyone in our sector. It’s just that when you figure out your true BEST market, it can lead to a real clarity (and energy and creativity) because you no longer feel like everything has to please everyone.