Now here's an interesting thought on the question of determining value of chapters ... I reread an interesting posting about social media technologies which quoted a presentation by Janet Hall, CMO of TMNG Global. Janet said research indicates "that the companies actively exploring social media technologies in the B2B marketplace are evaluating the success of their efforts based on a Return on Engagement (ROE) instead of an Return on Investment (ROI)."

Dana Theus summarized the metrics on her blog Member-to-Member.com :
•    levels of participation;
•    quality of interaction;
•    sentiment analysis (including brand awareness/impression); and
•    degree of market influence.

She noted that this is based on an assumption that "where people are interacting with each other about a company and/or it's products and services they are acting in relationship with the company itself. And where customers and market stakeholders are in relationship with a company, the potential for higher customer satisfaction and lower cost-of-sales and support result."

She also noted that efforts on the social media front become successful "when the customers/participants themselves become more involved, providing content and helping to moderate."

So perhaps we should consider ROE in terms of evaluating chapter effectiveness and the level of engagement particularly in content development as a metric for social media engagement.

Are you measuring engagement? How?

Peter and I recently came back from a very exciting session with the Golf Course Superintendents Association of America leadership where we heard from passionate volunteers who, like most our chapter leaders, are determined to have effective chapters but are struggling with how to do that within the challenges of today.

What’s neat about this association and these leaders it they have recently completed a “soul-searching” process to really get to the guts of what makes an effective chapter. They didn’t end up with a laundry list of to do’s – rather they identified the make or break elements of having paid leadership and a relevant road map. These put in the hands of passionate volunteer leaders can make a significant difference in a chapter’s effectiveness. (Interestingly their findings mirror in many ways Mariner’s Dashboard for Chapters.) They added one additional critical element – strong support from national which for them includes staff with “feet in the street.”

Our conversation was focused around the concept of shared resources. In other words, how can small chapters band together to perhaps share an paid exec, jointly support a research effort, co-produce a newsletter, website or conference. GCSAA chapters actually have a number of success stories in this area including:

• 4 Michigan chapters bonded to create a staffed, state-wide office which centralizes administration and advocacy efforts will allowing for local flavor in gatherings.
• 5 chapters in the NY/NJ area formed a foundation for turf research.
• A part-time exec of one chapter was tapped by chapters in two adjoining states to handle their administration.

The reason GCSAA will likely be successful in their efforts has a lot to do with the fact that they are helping chapters focus in on make-or-break elements and leading by example on trends in volunteerism, collaboration and resource-sharing.

And, they are applying metrics including the Net Promoter Score in ways that will assure they make progress. (For more on the NPS, read Tony Rossell's posting or Associapedia.)

Are you helping your chapters focus in?

Heard on the streets (and in conversations with chapter leaders) ... a collection of comments that might be worth a second glance:

• Chapters need to figure out how they fit in the context of the national organization - understand that they are part of something bigger.
  
• Limit the infrastructure to the degree necessary to get the job done.
  
• With the right “who” committed to a shared vision, an organization can move mountains.
• Optimize volunteer leaders – start with a clear definition of chapter function and desired outcomes.
• At what point does practice undermine the volunteers’ sense of meaningful engagement in the decision-making process?
• This [chapter model] makes connection easier so its the right one.
• This format provides a blend of structure, control and flexibility.
• Although we often confuse influence and control, they are two distinct things.

And finally ...

• AA's Tradition Two says that our leaders are but trusted servants; they do not govern.

Understand that an online community is not a substitution for face2face and it won’t solve dysfunctional chapters. These were two messages from today’s ASAE Component Relations Section Council Virtual Lunch on Online Communities. The call featured four veteran online community developers: Maddie Grant and Lindy Dreyer (both of SocialFish and the online community Yapstar, Cynthia D’Amour from the Chapter Leaders Playground, and Lynn Morgan from Social Networking for Association Professionals (SNAP) online community.

We also had the helpful guidance of social media (and make-up maven) guru who doubles as a great chapter manager for Optical Society of America, Kiki L’Italien as moderator.

The great take-aways for me included:

• Fish where the fish are; start by finding out where your members are. If they aren’t anywhere now, time is right to start anywhere.
• Figure out what you want to do – is the purpose is grow the chapters vs. build community within the board. WriteBoard for example is great way to get a board working together.
  
• Be sure to listen first. Lurk where they are for if you don’t know what they are saying you don’t know what to offer them.
• An online community is very similar to our traditional communities in so many ways. You still need a core group of passionate people to get it started and to stoke it.
• Online connectivity will only exacerbate existing basic problems. So if a chapter is struggling, don’t expect a virtual version to solve the problem. Online communities can help though – if used correctly and with training to build energy, facilitate communication and make it easier to connect and engage.
• Even in online space, the rules of volunteering apply. To get people to volunteer online you still need to connect 1:1. You need to make the direct ask.

So – technology can boost chapters but probably not replace them.

PS check out my Twitter feed for more info http://twitter.com/peggyhoffman.

There are many lessons from our elections and one may well be classified as a great aha for national associations and their geographic components.

The October 12 headline read “Obama Camp Relying Heavily on Ground Effort.” The article by Alec MacGillis writing in the Washington Post described the Obama campaign organization as one that might possibly become a model for future campaigns. In any case, it may be a model worth exploring for chapter or local components.

The model builds on Karl Rove’s successful concept for President Bush. It goes one step further by opening more than 700 offices in more than a dozen battleground states, paying several thousand organizers and managing tens of thousands more volunteers.  The emphasis is clearly on the ground effort. With good reason. They have to reach every undecided and first-time voter then can possibly meet.

Look at how they are doing this.

• The structure is built around neighborhood team leaders who control eight to 12 precincts around their own neighborhoods, buttressed by four "coordinators" who help oversee team members, usually numbering in the dozens.
• The neighborhood leaders attend at least one training session and all have clearly defined goals: they know exactly how many votes their territory must produce.
• The training sessions for volunteers and organizers instruct them on how to recruit volunteers as well as how to persuade voters. The primary strategy they learn: motivate others by speaking about their experiences and their reasons for supporting Obama. In other words, share their story.
• The campaign says it encourages volunteers to take initiative to come up with their own ways to recruit others and approach voters. But – and this part of the success of the model – they are hardly freelancers. As MacGillis reported, field organizers and those higher up the ranks closely track volunteers' contact with voters using a central database, to make sure they are meeting weekly goals. In addition, volunteers receive instructions on the basic message of the month to deliver (along with their own stories) and on how to respond to questions about some of the false rumors about Obama's religion and patriotism.

As Minnesota director Jeff Blodgett said in the Washington Post article, "It's decentralized, but that there's a control point around the message and around data and accountability."

So, can our chapters follow a similar model?

What’s the ROI for the national office? Well consider that after decades in which campaigns spent mostly on television ads and direct mail, recognition in the power of person-to-person contact has increased over the past dozen years.

Listserv’s aren’t dead and they are sources of great ideas and stories like this one from Friday, Oct 17’s ASAE & The Center’s Membership Listserv: “Using Facebook Groups to create buzz for an Association Meeting.” Shelly Good-Cook, Sr. Dir. Membership Marketing & Chapter Relations for CTAM: Cable & Telecommunications Association for Marketing shared a success story on how she used Facebook to create buzz for a chapter meeting.

“I had an idea to create a Facebook Group for an event called the CTAM New York Blue Ribbon Breakfast 1) to help spread the word about the event virally to boost registration by reaching people who are not in CTAM's database that I had seen in other Facebook Cable Industry Groups, and 2) to do a case study of viral marketing and the behavior of CTAM's Millenial members who are on Facebook.”

She when on to describe how she named the Group “CTAM New York Secret Gift” hoping to intrigue people enough to check it out. She sent invitations to 100 CTAM people on her Friend List. From there, the message spread virally through Facebook.

As a bonus those who joined the Facebook group and attended the breakfast got a gift donated by a CTAM member. She added a drawing for additional secret gifts for group members since not everyone could attend the event.

Finding the donor was probably easier that you might think, since she found a donor whose demographic and marketing strategy included the viral marketing space and this fit perfectly.

The Group was launched on Tuesday 9/09 at 6pm with 100 invitations. Within 10 minutes 2 people joined; by 10pm, the group had 14 members and the invite list had grown virally to 134. By Day 9, the numbers reached 116 members and 271 total invites. One month after, it’s still growing.

For this chapter – and many others – this translates to added excitement, a new channel which lives on past the event, a new revenue opportunity (sponsorship), opportunity to build your mailing list (20% of CTAM’s friends were not on their list) and a great way to draw in Millenials. For the national, there are added benefits too including two that Shelly noted:

1 – Data mining: the Millenials are more likely to have their alumni info posted under "Networks" than their company information - useful info! And there is other info that can be helpful in getting to know your members better. Same goes for Boomers and Xers.

2 – National exposure: Shelly reports a 22% growth rate for their original CTAM FaceBook group – largely because of the side bar on the group page called Related Groups.

Check out the full posting and all the ASAE Listserv’s. Mining can dig up diamonds!

Just looking over my notes from an awesome lunch & learn on social media led by Lindy Dreyer of Social Fish ... here's a note I starred:

"Build social media into the fabric of what you do..."

As I think of how to help my chapters harness the power of the web, it occurs to me that instead of suggesting these as new ideas, I'll insert them in the plans. My conference plans now includes a task "Launch Twitter page" and "identify Marylanders blogging on the subject and send conference updates."

More thoughts and tips from the session as I finish culling my notes :)

A must read posting (and article in October issue of Associations Now) on the future and associations is over at Acronym. Lisa Junker conducted the interview that is the basis for both with futurist Rohit Talwar, CEO of Fast Future Research and a key player in ASAE's future research. Here's perhaps one of the most important points highlighted in the posting:

Q: What do you think it means for an association to design its future?

Rohit Talwar: We deliberately chose the word “design,” because design is all about making a series of choices, about form, about functionality, and about how you assemble the components. That was very much what we wanted to get the associations thinking about--a design-led approach rather than a formula-led approach.

The nature of design is, you ask yourself a lot of questions on the journey, and you make a lot of choices. So, we wanted [association executives] to think about that and to recognize that this was all about making choices, asking yourselves tough questions about every aspect of what you do and then making choices about how you’re going to respond. That’s why we chose this notion of designing your future rather than implying there was simply a future to be chosen. You could create it, and you have the power to create it.

We are working with several associations and indeed our chapters to seek models for components that will serve members now and in the future. The angst is so often in understanding the process. I think we are too often focused on a formula-led approach.

Thanks Lisa and Rohit for helping focus differently!

In a great conversation today with the Golf Course Superintendents Association of America CEO Mark J. Woodward, CGCS, spoke about the value of their chapters in delivering the member experience. He started out the conversation by acknowledging the key truism “all chapters are different.”

What’s neat about that is from what he shared, they celebrate the diversity. That doesn’t mean they haven’t identified commonalities across the spectrum. In fact they have identified two key areas for effectiveness: paid staff leader and strategic plan. But the effort from the national office is really focused on how they can support the chapters in getting their business done and done so effectively.

One interesting approach that is netting good feedback is to allot a half-day of their board meeting to touch the local chapters and industry execs in the meeting city. Last week, their board met with representatives of various Pennsylvania chapters and held a town hall meeting that drew in some 80 students (who picked up some 20 membership applications!). The goal? To listen to members' thoughts and questions, and provide answers where appropriate.

This reminds me of a favorite quote: God gave us two ears and one mouth for a reason … so we could listen twice as much as we speak.

And as my partner says: “it’s not what you say, but what’s heard that counts.” If you listen, you’ll hear what was heard.

By the way check out GCSAA/GCM blog for an interesting association-based blog and integrated Twitter postings.

Nurses’ demands focus on working conditions, flexibility not dollars – so says a Washington Post article (Saturday, Sept 13, 2008). Why share this article about nursing in a blog about associations?

It was a sentence in paragraph three that caught my eye: “Hospitals increasingly are responding with a new recruitment and retention strategy -- giving nurses like Dimmick much more say in their patients' care.”

When the nursing shortage began to rear its ugly head some five years ago, hospitals responded with huge signing bonuses and perks like sport-utility vehicles and vacations. Quickly they discovered those efforts brought nurses in but didn’t keep them. Turnover was still a big problem. Sound familiar? Attract new members with discounts and affinity programs that save members’ money only to then have to redouble the effort at renewal time.

As the article notes, many nurses want better working conditions more than they do extra money. So hospitals are now focusing there. The article shares how Inova Fairfax Hospital is giving nurses more authority. Others are introducing technology to reduce paperwork, offering more flexible hours, reducing caseloads, and paying for advanced training.

What can associations offer along those lines – the real value?

One additional aha, a nurse Jennifer Dimmick interviewed for the article said “Autonomy is a big thing.  It's important for me to know that what I do matters." This should also sound familiar – many of our member volunteers are saying the same thing to us.

There are obvious implications for us in our overall marketing and perhaps less obvious lessons for our chapter relationship program. What if we gave chapters more authority, greater flexibility, technology that reduced paperwork and administrative burden, and helped cover costs for great educational programming?  Then market to members that you meet their needs on their home turf, nationally and globally. What if …