There’s been a lot of attention given recently to changes in membership models as we know them. Several recent experiences suggest the emergence of a new twist in this still unfolding story.
I just returned from an assignment in Canada. The Canadian government is considering a change in the Nonprofit Act that would make taxable all revenue from nonmembers, subservient classes of membership, and/or revenue generated from activities not sufficiently associated with the mission of the organization. It is quite conceivable that tax authorities in the US at the national and state levels might find this an attractive idea to generate new revenue for government expenditures.
If enacted, one likely result of this law in Canada will be that associations will make all interested parties full members and enable them to select a level of dues commensurate with the level of services they desire. Canadian execs recognize that such a strategy would also respond to the role that membership plays as a symbol of participation and support in a community of common interest. Understanding that membership is viewed this way by those most engaged in the work of an association is quite different than viewing membership merely as a pricing strategy for selling access to products and services.
Membership as we know it has always been changing. But, the next set of new options and additional strategies may not necessarily be those predicted. Projections predicated on the assumption that “gen y” and cash starved public authorities will behave the same way as did “gen x” and cash flush bureaucracies of the past are likely to prove inaccurate.
The behavior of human capital in associations is somewhat unpredictable. However, it appears to more resemble less disruptive evolutionary change than discontinuous revolutionary change. While innovations in membership models are important, contemporary wisdom tempered by sensitivity to changing conditions suggests that innovations in membership models will need to be: [a] based on behavioral research; [b] demonstrate a probability of sustainability over time; [c] be reversible or adaptable; and [d] preserve membership as an artifact of something more than momentary participation.
There are other vendors of products and services better positioned to cater to short term, single interest consumers than are voluntary membership organizations. Associations are built for marathons; not sprints. They are designed to pursue high-level, high-value interests that require consistent and organized attention over time. This is their competitive advantage as voluntary communities with self-regeneration and adaptation purposefully built into structure. We think any innovation in membership will want to avoid diminishing that advantage.