Members or Mission - Which Comes First?

At one time I might have let a client Board get away with a reference to their members in their mission statement.  Now, I will rarely let it pass without challenging them.

So if your mission statement refers to doing something for your members, then hear me out before you stop reading and start muttering to yourself how Amundson has lost his mind. After all, members are all-important...right?  Wrong!

An organization could exist without members, but probably not without a core purpose.

Members are very important but try to get them to join an organization with no core purpose or reason for being.  Likely only Seinfeld could accomplish that feat, and while his show purported to be about nothing, it was indeed about something.

I am not speaking of only the carefully crafted mission statement, but also the core purpose that everyone knows and buys into, but has never been articulated into a mission or purpose statement.

An association that has no useful purpose can't continue. At one time, I am sure there was a buggy whip manufacturers' association, but no longer.  What changed?  There was no longer a useful purpose...the need for buggy whips had dropped dramatically.

Therefore, the members are a means to accomplish the core purpose or mission, and not the core purpose itself.

The reason associations have members is that there is value to gather support, both financially or otherwise, for your mission or core purpose.  Long ago, individuals found out that they could accomplish greater economic or societal change if they joined together. The key is that they come together around a purpose, and not simply to hang out together.  In fact, that in itself could be a purpose!

With some clients, I have gone so far as to tell them that with a wealthy backer and a few content leaders on side, I could, within a year, create significant competition for their association.  In fact, we see all kinds of competitors to associations that have no members at all.

Commercial enterprises are now using membership in points and other types of loyalty and marketing programs.  The membership approach is simply a way to achieve greater marketing and sales success.

If the core purpose or mission is not about the members, then who is it about?

For most professions, the answer is the profession.  For industry organizations, the answer is the industry.  For an common interest organization, such as one for science fiction fans, the answer is likely the science fiction genre.

I don't mean to suggest that if you are a voluntary professional association that you need to rush off and start providing member services to non-members whether they choose to join or not. 

The issue is the core purpose or mission. It needs to be about the profession.  You may choose to go after non-members, but it could be with membership in mind or simply as a customer for your user-pay services.   Either way, the rationale should be driven by a broader profession-focused mission.

Making Members the Focus of Your Mission Can Lead You Astray!

There are a few common ways that a member-centric mission or purpose statement can take your organization off course:

1. Membership may include various other categories such as Affiliates, Associates, Suppliers, etc.  What happens in some organizations with member-centric mission statements is that the thinking soon shifts towards the idea that all members need to be "served" by the association and its mission even if they are not part of the core industry or profession that makes up the full or regular membership of the association. (Obviously the other category members must experience value from joining, however it is ancillary to the mission and not central to it.)

2. The association can be convinced that it is accomplishing its member-centric mission even as its membership and market share shrinks.

3. The members have many needs, but not all of them are appropriate for the association to address.  A member-centric mission can lead to expectations that their needs must be addressed because they are members.  A good example of this is the mad scramble to add affinity programs that are completely irrelevant to the organization's purpose.

4. A member-centric mission can lead to thinking that "what is good for the members is good for the sector", rather than the more appropriate "what is good for the sector will be good for the members".

5. A member-centric mission eliminates all creative thinking that looks outside the membership approach to achieving the real sectoral purpose.

6. Mergers, alliances, and other opportunities that will positively impact the sector are unsuccessful or avoided because the "interests of members" take prominence.

These are just some of the dangers.  The member-centric mission or purpose puts the organization into a box that restricts thinking and actions throughout the operation.

Still not convinced?....Take a look at the growing number of mission and purpose statements that have dropped reference to members in favour of the broader sectoral reference (profession, industry, etc.).

If the membership model is the approach used to deliver on the mission, then there is no argument from me that the member must receive real value from the association.  However, that value must be mission-related.

So, to answer my question posed in the title of this article....the mission comes first.

What do you think?  Send us your comments or feedback.

Wayne Amundson is president of Association Xpertise Inc., a consulting firm serving associations and non-profits. He is also a writer and speaker on association and non-profit management and governance, and is editor of The Canadian Association e-zine and co-author of the new “Primer for Directors of Not-for-Profit Corporations” published by the Industry Canada and three non-profit umbrella groups in Canada. 
Phone: 403-374-1822 E-mail: admin@axi.ca  Website: www.axi.ca