| Plexus Consulting Group | Articles by Plexus Authors | ||
|
Does Your Organization Have Soul? |
|||
|
Author
|
|
In this day of management by the numbers it may seem like heresy for a manager or management consultant to be overly concerned with the "soft" side of a business, and all the more outrageous to talk about the "soul" of an organization. Yet this proved to be a pivotal point for the American Association on Mental Retardation
(AAMR) in its recent strategic planning exercise. The AAMR is a 125 year old nonprofit association with 8,500 members made up of doctors, nurses, direct care providers, members of religious and civic organizations, government officials, self advocates, and family members of people who have mental retardation. The AAMR has seen its membership and the dues revenues from that membership gradually decline over the past two decades as rival organizations have sprung up and as people and organizations generally have cut back on the number of associations to which they belong. The AAMR’s leadership is also aware of an alarming demographic trend that shows an abrupt drop-off in membership among the younger age groups. They recognized that this signals a potentially severe problem for the AAMR in the coming decade as older members begin to retire. Apart from these concerns however, membership services programs have been stable, membership attrition has been low, staff morale high, and member satisfaction appeared to be high as well. The AAMR undertakes a thorough strategic planning exercise every three years to ensure the Association and its programs are still on track. This year the process began by sending out a written survey to members and non-members of the Association to find out their professional needs and concerns as well as how the AAMR, its staff and its services were perceived and valued. The survey results were compiled and fed into two focus group sessions and into one-on-one interviews with thirteen key opinion leaders. The purpose of these focus groups and one-on-one interviews was to obtain a qualitative analysis of the survey results along with suggestions on alternative courses of action. The combined results of this quantitative and qualitative research were then compiled and given to the AAMR’s strategic planning committee. The survey findings were the equivalent of a "straight-A" report card. The response rate was 22 percent, which is unusually high for this sort of written survey--the sign of a high level of interest. And the results themselves were very positive. All things considered, 88 percent of its members rated the quality of services offered by AAMR as "Good" or higher, 74 percent were "Very Satisfied" or "Satisfied" overall with AAMR, and 73 percent felt the value they receive matches or exceeds the cost of AAMR dues. What most association executives wouldn’t give to have such results for their association! But some results were cause for concern. The survey confirmed the alarming demographic trends in the AAMR’s membership, as noted above. And it pointed out that the association was too heavily weighted in favor of a centralized, national structure when in fact there is a great membership service need at the state and local levels. It also revealed that many of the Association’s divisions, which are organized according to professional discipline, were weak and their expertise was underutilized. The focus group sessions and one-on-one interviews also raised questions relating to the Association’s identity. Should it be dedicated to the needs of the professionals who serve those with mental retardation or should it be directed to those themselves who have mental retardation? In fact, even the appropriateness of the term "mental retardation" was questioned. What should this all-important consumer group be called? Previously when the AAMR had undergone a strategic planning session their facilitator had encouraged them to think of their membership as "customers"—as many associations do. The board shouldn’t become too sentimental talking about their organization’s "soul." Service businesses live or die according to how well they serve the needs of their customers. The same is true for associations. As the saying goes, if you don’t meet your customers’ needs, someone else will. The AAMR board took this advice to heart. Their members were "customers" and the association’s job was to serve them. This made sense, but it did not work. First there are at least 14 different types of backgrounds represented within the membership; the bulk of the membership falling into six different categories.(See table #2) If the Association is to serve the needs of its members this presents a serious problem in resource allocation. How could one association possibly serve the needs of such a divergent group without spreading its resources too thin? If the members are indeed customers of the association’s products and services, then the survey findings showed there was a lot of work to be done. Only two publications, out of five, were voted by the majority of members as being of "high importance" to them. And there were similar weak showings for the Association’s education and training programs and other benefits and services. How could customers be satisfied with scores like these? Another significant finding was that the AAMR is not considered the primary professional association for most of its members! For most associations this sort of finding would be a danger signal. At the very least, it would be an indication of an unstable membership base. Yet the AAMR’s membership is unusually loyal, as associations go, with an average membership length of nearly 12 years. What was going on here? The last strategic planning session resulted in a stalemate of sorts. The board, as hard as they tried, could not come to resolution on how they could better serve their "customers." This is due in no small part because they could discern no clear direction from among the customers themselves. Had AAMR’s management continued to analyze their needs from a customer-based perspective it would have been hard to fault them. Technically this is what all businesses and associations should be doing. But the AAMR discovered the key to unlocking many of the strategic questions facing their organization lay in the answer to one question. The one in which members were asked to rank the "Main" reason for belonging—where was the organization’s "soul?".(See table #3) As shown in these figures, relatively few members were actually interested in the Association’s education and training programs and even fewer in the Association’s products and services. Even networking with peers received a relatively low response rate. Focusing on serving member needs in these areas then would have led them into a dead end. The figures above showed that the AAMR’s members were interested simply in the issues surrounding mental retardation and wanted to support an organization that is active in these issues. In other words, the AAMR was not a professional association serving the needs of its members or customers so much as an "issues" organization, more similar to a political coalition or organization serving a social purpose or cause. Whatever the member’s background, be they doctors, nurses, religious, or government administrators, they all ultimately were there because of a common interest. The focus then should not have been on them but on what has drawn them together. This reorientation of focus allowed the board to see everything in a new light, and the results were dramatic. With the realization that the AAMR was an "issues" organization the board had come full circle back to the origins of why the Association came to exist in the first place. The board realized in short where the "soul" of their organization lay, and that realization was like uncorking a bottle of pent-up creativity and consensus. Consequently, the AAMR redefined its mission: "The American Association on Intellectual Disabilities (AAID) promotes global development and dissemination of progressive policies, sound research, effective practices and universal human rights for people with intellectual disabilities" And not incidentally, as you will note, they voted to rename their association to make it more attuned to their membership needs and sensitive to the self-image of the principal audience the Association is intended to serve. |
|
Reprinted by Permission