Being Valuable Isn’t Enough (Strategy Lessons From Mix Tapes)
Fellow Gen Xer David Gammel had a brief chat the other day
on Twitter reminiscing about making "mix tapes." For you younger folks, this
was a process where we would go through our record or CD collection, pick some
of our favorite songs and then record them, one song at a time, onto a cassette
tape. We had to manually add a few seconds in between the songs and we had to
try to fit the right number of songs so they all made it onto the 45-minute
side of a cassette without cutting that last song off. It was hard work (and,
while we're at it, we had to walk to school uphill in the snow…both ways…and
get off my lawn!).
Today I can share playlists over the internet, or I just put
them in a list on itunes and click "Burn CD."Done. If I share ten songs from
ten different albums, I still might only have paid $10 total for them, as
opposed to the $150 I would have spent back in the 80s to buy ten CDs.
So the question is, does it mean any less now that it's
cheaper and easier?
Um, yes.
It still means something, particularly if you're choosing
songs that have special meaning to the person with whom you are sharing them.
But it simply can't mean what it used to mean, because we all can create
playlists ourselves very easily. It’s just not the same labor of love it used
to be.
Now apply this idea to membership dues. As I said in this
video from the ASAE meeting in Toronto, Clay Shirky got me thinking about
membership dues in his talk. In my recap post, I mentioned his notion of
creating a "platform" for delivering what members really need in order to
justify membership dues.
Here's the rub. Most associations created their platform
back in the days of mix tapes, when it was hard work to get good content, network
effectively, build and sustain business relationships, nurture and develop
a community of peers, etc. The association got my dues dollars because I valued
those things and it was hard to get those things without belonging to the
association.
Today, we still value those things very highly, and the
association still delivers them to us. Unfortunately, it's a bit deceptive,
because I can now get those things from more and more sources in ways that are
easier and easier to do without the help of a centralized authority. You, the
association, are still focused on providing me things that I find
valuable. That seems reasonable, right? But it's hard for you to see that it
has somehow become (relatively) less valuable based on other options I now
have.
We worked so hard to create a good platform that was valuable to our members, that sometimes we end up thinking of ourselves as builders of that platform, rather than suppliers of value. It's not about THE platform; it's about A platform. If you built a (literal) platform that let everyone see over a fence, and then the fence fell down, you would need to shift. You still offer a good view that people enjoy, but you'd better start providing some new or enhanced value to make up for the relative "deflation" of your value that happened when the fence came down. Simply being valuable isn't enough.
So don't get so wrapped up in your platform that you don't notice the state of the fences. Expect to make major shifts in your platform to ensure your value is continuously worth your dues, rather than being surprised or annoyed that you have to change. You can still make mix tapes (okay, CDs) for your friends, but your friendships should still be your focus.
3 Comments
David Gammel
I love it when I suggest to someone else that they blog about something and then they do!
Great post and analogy.
Cecilia Satovich
Wow, nice analogy! I totally agree, and would only add that each association needs to consider their strategy carefully.
To stay within your analogy, consider that “best of” CDs and tapes were like ready-made corporate mixes. We bought into them at the time b/c they were a)convenient b)cheaper than doing it ourselves, and c)authoritative/branded.
I’ve seen several that place too high a premium on low membership dues and event structure that feel like a nickle and dime strategy. IMHO the associations that have gotten it right are those where membership means something… that add value by using the “best of” strategy above.
Maddie Grant
Awesome post. But doesn’t it work both ways? Meaning, you can provide $150 worth of value while charging $10 for dues but letting people pick and choose how they spend the other $140? The point is still that you need to provide the full value – but that people want to have more say in how they get it and share it. More stairs to your platform, more bridges to other platforms.
Does that make sense? It’s 5 pm on Friday… 🙂