Archive for April, 2008
April 23, 2008
The Foolishness of Crowds
Posted by Kevin | (2) Comments | Print This Article
So, social media lets people organize without organizations.
While it’s nice to wrap buzzwords like “social media” around things, this is nothing new; some of us have been dealing with “ad hoc” groups in our industry segments since long before anyone had heard of “blogging” let alone tried to create a whole new genre around it. Websites, listserves, message boards: none of it is quite snazzy enough to count as Web 2.0, but it’s all been pretty easy, cheap, and in some cases quite effective, for a long time now.
There are a couple things about these self-organized groups that pose both challenges for themselves, and for the associations they compete with:
PEOPLE ARE OFTEN WRONG ABOUT A WHOLE LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS, AND LOVE SHARING THEIR ERRONEOUS ASSUMPTIONS AND JUDGMENTS WITH THEIR PEERS AS IF THEY WERE FACTS.
We’re often forwarded posts from one niche website in our industry (essentially a listserve that costs $50 a month) that have confused us because we are not sure whether to laugh or let our jaws drop. People share ideas and concepts that are outright wrong, in some cases beyond-the-borderline illegal, as if it is gospel.
Myths propagate themselves and pick up steam. Since these people are all essentially peers, working in the same industry, with access to the same communications tool (just click “send”), there is no way for credibility to be assigned. When others speak up and say “hey you’re wrong and what you’re advocating could cost people hundreds of thousands of dollars,” the dissent — if it is noticed at all — becomes a matter of disagreement, as opposed to one person being right, and one person being wrong.
On the one hand, it is frustrating to see members of an industry or profession you serve and love be led astray by (probably) well-meaning yet ill-informed (or, most likely, simply inexperienced) practitioners.
On the other hand, it is nice to be considered the place where people go for the RIGHT answers, and there is competitive advantage to be mined there. It has certainly worked well for us.
PEOPLE HAVE BIG EGOS, AND WILL TRY TO TURN THEIR “DISORGANIZED ORGANIZATIONS” INTO “REAL” ORGANIZATIONS FOR THE PURPOSES OF THEIR OWN AGENDA.
Though I haven’t read the book mentioned by Ben and Jeff, I got a kick out of this quote from the book which Ben placed on his blog:
“The jury is still out on whether any of the current interest in reforming the US health care system will change anything, but if I had to pick between MoveOn and groups like the self-organized strangers in Dallas for having the more profound effect, I’d bet on the ad hoc groups.”
Why do I find this amusing? Because MoveOn started out as — a little email group! They were circulating a petition to try and get Congress to censure Clinton rather than impeach him. (They failed, by the way.) And it turned into — apparently a big old-fashioned evil “organization” beset by these little social media networks.
Personally, I think it’s great that people can band together using the Internet to advocate for something, whether it’s a “Passenger’s Bill of Rights” or a speed bump on their local road. More power to them. I don’t view any of these groups as a threat to associations. If there are people loosely getting together on a single issue that intersects with your interest, then, uh — join them and get to know them and work with them or against them as you see fit. Don’t really see how they are all that much different from the little advocacy groups that have been springing up since time immemorial. They’re easier to form and so there will be more of them, but dealing with them is not exactly rocket science.
If people in your profession are using Facebook or LinkedIn or whatever all those sites are to “get together” then how is it a threat to your society? You can play catchup with a similar network of your own, or else you can sponsor their happy hour and buy them all a drink. (The latter is probably a lot easier and will have a bigger pay-off.)
The problem, of course, is that people have egos and agendas and big aggrandized visions, so many of them will try to turn their little one-issue groups into something bigger that can attract corporate funding. Some of them will succeed, most will fail, and the ones that succeed, if they are in your industry or profession, will become competitors for your association.
To which, I’m afraid I must say — so what? Competition is good! Deal with them as you do any other competitors. Learn from them, steal from them, crush them, work with them if you must — though on the whole my preference is for simply keeping them in your peripheral vision while you focus on serving your market best by creating new or better things they can’t get anywhere else. As I like to say, “We’re here to learn, we’re here to grow, and we’re here to win.”
What you should not do is gnash your teeth about this new “competition” and how it will affect your association. Yes, they may use new tools — but of course, YOU CAN USE THEM, TOO. Other than that, perhaps to the chagrin of some young and eager minds, and as I learned myself when I too was young and eager — there is indeed nothing new under the sun.
April 21, 2008
Bills Get Paid, Letters Get “Filed”
Posted by Kevin | (5) Comments | Print This Article
Over coffee with Vinay Kumar today, he reminded me of an issue I’ve mentioned on the ASAE listserves a couple times but I don’t think I’ve posted about it here.
The question that usually comes up is, “Should we send a letter out with our membership invoices (renewal statements or whatever you want to call them) that explain the benefits that the member gets?”
This is another thing that many associations do. (It’s almost as if we are embarrassed to be asking for money.) We used to do it in my organization as well and it still comes up occasionally. When we stopped doing it several years ago, the rate at which we received renewals increased rapidly. We send membership statements that look like bills, including nothing but the return envelope, and get the renewals back very quickly. This year our retention for our December 31 renewals hit 60% — in September. (They ended up over 90%.)
My theory for this is: “Invoices go in the ‘to be paid’ pile, letters go in the ‘to be read’ pile.” As usual I have no scientific data to support this other than my own experience.
Personally, when I get a bill it goes right into our check request process for my later review and signature. If there’s a letter with it, I usually just throw it away.
Sometimes, however, it seems like a really interesting letter, so it (along with the enclosed bill) goes into the pile of things “to be read” on my desk. Then, once a month or so, I get irritated at the amount of paper on my desk and throw it all away, assuming that if there’s anything important, I’ve probably given a copy of it to someone else.
The moral of the story: If you must send a letter with your renewal statement, don’t make it very interesting.
(And as always — TEST to discover what works best for your organization.)
April 17, 2008
More Stupid Email Tricks
Posted by Kevin | (3) Comments | Print This Article
Remember my post a couple weeks ago on Desperation Marketing? I hate to repeat myself, but I’m getting these emails so frequently I’ve decided to just start calling people out. And maybe, just maybe, offer some advice to improve their campaigns.
The latest was from PRSA, which I used to belong to, and which sent me an email with the subject line, “PRSA Would Like to Welcome You Back!”
As I’ve already made pretty clear in my earlier post, I couldn’t care less what PRSA would like. This is not a subject line that inspires reading, let alone whipping out my checkbook.
But, for the sake of this post, I went ahead and read it. Turns out, the awful subject line wasn’t the only thing wrong with it. They somehow managed to 1) reduce opens with a bad subject line, while also 2) repelling the people who actually opened it. Here’s why:
1) The email is not from an actual person, it is from “PRSA Member Services” (with the warm and fuzzy email address of “emailupdates@prsa.org”). While I might feasibly, possibly care about what Jane Smith thinks, I definitely don’t care what some faceless organizational department thinks.
2) The email begins, “To: Kevin W. Holland”. It’s nice that you know my name and middle initial, but so does every other computer database in the world. This is not an inviting lead.
3) The first sentence beneath the quote-unquote “greeting” is, “The Public Relations Society of America would like to reinstate your membership.” Setting aside the fact that they appear to only care about themselves, “reinstate” is such a cold and clinical word. It immediately suggests “separation” between the sender and the recipient.
4) They then graciously offer to waive their “reinstatement” fee. ‘Nuff said.
5) The remainder of the email is a list of generic-sounding benefits. Stay informed, accelerate your career, launch effective campaigns, expand your network, blah blah blah.
6) The closing line: “We look forward to welcoming you back to PRSA!” Because, of course, it’s all about the association.
The sad fact is that association executives write in to ASAE listserves all the time saying things like, “We tried email marketing, and it doesn’t work.” Of course, what they “tried” is an email like this one. When you do something wrong, it frequently doesn’t work.
Here is an email that *might* have gotten me to “reinstate.” This is just off the top of my head, of course.
Subject: Sorry to bother you, but …
From: Jane Jones, PRSA
Body:Hey Kevin,
Sorry to bother you, but I was looking through our member rosters in Virginia and noticed that you hadn’t renewed your PRSA membership in the last couple years. I know how busy you must be and how we all have to justify our annual dues expenses given all the associations in our field. But I just wanted to check and see if you had taken a look recently at some of the new things we’re offering.
For example, our online database PRC Search gives you direct online access to thousands of award-winning PR campaigns. It’s like a brainstorming session with the best minds in PR, 24/7, whenever you need some quick inspiration or are thinking, “I wonder if anyone has tried THIS …”
Of course, if you want more real-time Q&As with experts from all over the country, our professional sections and chapters put you in touch with more than 20,000 members, many of whom have “been there, done that” and are more than happy to share what they’ve learned (saving you from learning the hard way).
And our daily, monthly and quarterly publications keep you in touch with the latest and most innovative practices and tactics in the field. Only members get them!
I think you’ll find the new PRSA a boon to your career, whether you’re happy where you are or seeking new opportunities. In fact, I’m so sure you’ll think you made the right decision that I’ll be happy to waive the usual $35 fee we charge returning members, if you are ready to give us another try.
Just give me a call at XXX-XXX-XXXX and we can take care of this for you right away. (If you’d rather sign up online, just go to www.xxxx.org and use the tracking code “RETURN” to save the 35 bucks. But, I’d love to talk to you!)
If you have any questions, shoot me a reply or give me a call. I’m sure you’ll find PRSA offers a huge return on a small investment, and I look forward to helping you continue to grow your career!
Yours,
Jane
April 17, 2008
More on New Rules for Association Growth
Posted by Kevin | (0) Comments | Print This Article
Tony Rossell offers some additional insights on my earlier post. The quote from the HBR article is of special interest. The tendency of associations to focus on “big programs” and “major initiatives” (and whether or not they are worth the effort) needs further exploring.
April 11, 2008
The Rise of Old Media?
Posted by Kevin | (0) Comments | Print This Article
Print outperforms digital, with a recent surge in direct mail usage and spending. (Found via a comment on this similar post on Bob Bly’s blog, wherein he asks a question of “those pompous pseudo-intellectual new media advocates.” God bless cranky copywriters!)
April 11, 2008
Random Thoughts on New Rules for Association Growth
Posted by Kevin | (5) Comments | Print This Article
In preparation for a brainstorming session with colleagues, I gathered my thoughts on the “new rules” for future association growth, and for what little it’s worth, here are a few of them, in a very rough form.
We have a market, not a product.
Expand our share of the market we serve, and resist the urge to seek new markets, which can be time-consuming and costly. Develop new products that meet the needs of our core market and retire products that don’t. Wash, rinse, repeat.
We can’t build on a foundation we don’t own.
Grants, sponsorships, “affinity programs” – these all have a role to play, but in and of themselves will not lead to sustainable, exponential growth because they depend on the whims of others. Build products and services that we own, that either don’t exist anywhere else or are better than anywhere else.
Dues are ancillary revenues.
The concept of “membership” has already changed and associations need to catch up. Membership used to be the realm of associations and American Express. Now it’s niche websites, professional service firms, “social media,” pay-as-you-go, pay-per-view, time-shifting, short attention span theater. We need to adapt. Just as we should not view members as merely people we can sell stuff to, we should not view customers merely as potential members. Recognize and celebrate both the member and the customer and explore new ways to engage both.
It’s not enough to collect data, we must connect data.
We are nothing more than the sum of the knowledge that we have about our members and customers. We must have a systematic way to draw connections between behavioral patterns, to understand motivations for participation in particular programs, to build on existing products with new products the market will want, to create new services beyond random “a-ha” moments.
Think fast, act faster.
As annoying as the Web 2.0 concept of “Everything Is Beta” is, it is actually the most important thing this latest bubble has taught us. Once a new product or service is identified, move as quickly as possible to implement it. This doesn’t mean you rush half-assed things to market and it doesn’t mean you drop half a million dollars on a whim. It means you start small, test it, learn from it, change it, test it, learn from it, change it, test it. There is no longer any time to wait for something to be “just right” before you launch it and there is no longer any reason to restrict “testing” to a small self-identified sample such as a committee when you can learn more from larger portions of your market. (Obviously there are exceptions here – I’m not talking about safety standards, etc.)