We Have Always Done It That Way

To reinvent eroding membership-centric business models, association leaders will need to answer a fundamental question:

What is the strategic relationship between membership and participation?

In answering this question, leaders also will need to confront the even more fundamental truth that dues payments do not create members. Instead, going forward, association membership must be based on a personal commitment to participate, irrespective of dues payments. The approach associations adopt in this area must be open and flexible enough to accommodate both the absolute need to fully engage the payers of dues and the non-dues paying participant’s choice to be active in the association. While the former will pay for membership in order to participate, the latter will use participation as a form of currency to “pay” for membership.

This type of business model innovation is made necessary by what is happening online. The ease and simplicity with which anyone can make immediate and passionate contributions using free and inexpensive Web 2.0 technologies highlights the lack of an equally clear and accessible “architecture of participation” in most associations. A phrase that originated with the Web 2.0 revolution itself, a useful definition of an architecture of participation as it pertains to organizations in our community is “the collaborative design of pathways for meaningful engagement in and substantive contribution to the association’s work.” Designing an architecture of participation is about much more than simply offering opportunities for involvement. It is about innovating our associations for the future.

Association professionals must begin experimenting right away with developing new architectures of participation. Some of those experiments will fail, while others will evolve to become integral elements of new business models built for sustainable growth. To facilitate these processes of experimentation, staff and volunteer leaders can use the following six design principles:

+Keep it simple—In developing wiki technology, creator Ward Cunningham kept asking an important question: what is the simplest thing that could possibly work? In designing a new architecture of participation that will attract your next contributors, you should be asking yourself the same question over and over again. Try to create the simplest possible participation experience for everyone who wants to contribute by looking carefully at the factors that make your current architecture of participation complicated and less satisfying for your stakeholders.

+Tear down the garden walls—It is impossible for any association today to possess all of the ideas, knowledge and talent it needs to succeed. Fortunately, those resources are quite abundant, connected and mobile in the current marketplace, but they will not be attracted to our organizations if we continue to put up obstacles to keep them out. Just like the Web itself, your new architecture of participation must fully embrace open networks as a tenet of a new business model, and sunset the idea of the association as a walled garden.

+Take down the ladder—The ladder is the most enduring symbol of association participation. Contributors spend years, and usually decades, climbing these ladders in pursuit of leadership opportunities with increasing responsibility and authority. But what if your next contributors aren’t interested in climbing your ladder? What if they are comfortable leading horizontally and don’t necessarily want or need vertical authority to accomplish their goals? To address these questions, your new architecture of participation must reconsider traditional structures and roles, and fully engage the self-organizing leadership talents and coordination capabilities your next contributors bring to the table.

+Be modular—If the ladder is no longer the appropriate metaphor for association involvement, what should replace it? Think Legos. To fully engage your next contributors, your association’s new architecture of participation needs to be as modular as Lego bricks, allowing individuals and groups to quickly assemble, disassemble and rebuild “pieces” of different shapes and sizes to create new experiences that easily connect and enable meaningful collaboration with globally-distributed peer networks on a near real time basis.

+Trust first—Associations use a combination of policies, guidelines, requirements and similar mechanisms to enforce “synthetic trust” within their contributor communities. But community on the Web, as well as the trust that bonds the members of those communities, is considerably more organic, and it is this more authentic way of being that associations must embrace going forward. Your new architecture of participation can energize its next contributors by first demonstrating real trust in them, without requiring prior proof of their fidelity to the association.

+Make success a shared responsibility—Associations are still more comfortable with concentrating responsibility for success in the organizational core at a time when most of the energy for future progress lives at or near the “edge” of our organizations. By distributing real responsibility away from the core, associations can challenge their next contributors to direct their efforts toward executing strategy, advancing mission and realizing vision. Your new
architecture of participation can energize contributors by offering them the opportunity to connect their passionate interests and commitments to the long-term growth and success of the association.

The continuing decline of the membership-centric association business model means the end of association membership as we’ve always known it. To flourish in the years ahead, associations will need to shift their focus away from the inertia of transactional relationships and toward dynamic approaches that can unleash the full potential of passionate engagement.

Tags: Innovation, Leadership, Membership, Strategy, Technology, The Way We Involve Others, We've Always Done It That Way by Jeff De Cagna
4 Comments »

There has been a positively raging firestorm of personal attacks in the association blogoclump on the idea of marketing. OK, more like spirited debate of the ideas while maintaining respect for each other individually but that didn’t sound as exciting.

Here is Kevin Holland’s post that sums it up nicely and gives his take.

In any case, I offer up an example of someone who tried something new in marketing their event, measured the results and learned from the process. I give you Kristi Donovan:

David asked me about the crazy idea – and I realize I never did tell the details. We decided to segment our marketing to our target audiences for the conference. I identified three sessions that each of our audiences would be interested in attending, put them on the cover of our brochure along with a statment such as: “We’ve designed the following sessions for chief executives like you!” Then we mailed that cover to our CEOs and COOs. We did it for 4 distinct audiences and then a generic for everyone else. We intended to personalize but that became cost prohibitive. (And maybe we didn’t even need it!)

Is this rocket science? No, not really. But a big, big step forward for us.

What was the result?

I am absolutely thrilled that my cockamamie idea in June that caused me and my coworkers so much stress has apparently resulted in an 85% increase in registration for our meeting over this time last year. Truly phenomenal. Some folks have suggested that may not hold through the rest of the reg period. Frankly, I’m just happy that something in our marketing mix is working. Heck, not just working, but kicking butt. If nothing else, we’ve gotten 85% more people to commit to our meeting earlier than ever.

Can’t beat that. It wasn’t so crazy after all!

Kristi’s posts are an excellent example of how thinking critically about your segments and making a targeted offer can pay off. And they did measure data to track results but it all started with trying something they had never done before.

Like Kristi says, this isn’t rocket science. What is different? She tried it! Breaking out of the ‘always done it that way’ rut and taking action puts her ahead of 90% of the field out there.

Tags: Membership, Strategy, The Way We Involve Others, The Way We Lead by David
4 Comments »

I’ve been thinking about this difficult question for quite some time now, but I’ve been reluctant to write about it out of a genuine concern that the question itself might sound like an unprovoked attack on hard-working association staff and volunteers. This is definitely not my intention. Rather, I’m hoping we can make our colleagues’ lives a bit easier by creating a more favorable climate in which they can always bring their imagination to bear on the work of their organizations.

Albert Einstein suggested that “imagination is more important than knowledge,” and who am I to disagree with him. In a time of paradigm shift, what we think we know is increasingly less useful than what we can learn, imagine and create. In a recent post, Micropersuasion blogger Steve Rubel suggested that “the most important ‘tool’ you can have today in business is insatiable curiosity. The minute you lose it, you’re dead.” I think Steve is right on target and, from my perspective, curiosity and imagination go hand in hand: our curiosity feeds our imagination, and our imagination drives our curiosity.

Which brings me back to my inquiry about the possible imagination deficit in our community. I suppose what I’m really wondering is whether the work environment in associations today cultivates and nurtures the curiosity and imagination of staff and volunteers. One specific source of concern in this regard is the recent emphasis placed on so-called “data-driven strategies,” as advocated by ASAE & The Center’s 7 Measures of Success report. Without a doubt, there is a need to infuse the strategic decision-making process with useful data. But we must also recognize there are limits to what data can tell us, and there is good reason to challenge the notion that backward-looking information will always illuminate the wisest course of action for the future of our organizations. Associations definitely need clear, simple and focused strategy, but it should be “driven” by the value it will create for members, customers and stakeholders. Identifying and implementing that potential value necessarily will involve some combination of what we know, what we can learn, what we can imagine and what we can create together.

The powerful forces of paradigm shift are reshaping our society, and associations are going along for that very bumpy ride. But in the midst of this uncertainty, association professionals and volunteers have an extraordinary opportunity to envision a very different and more vibrant future for the organizations to which they have committed themselves. I challenge you to do just that by remaining curious and using your imagination everyday. If you’re able to do that, then in time the more important question won’t be whether there once was an imagination deficit, but what we did to eliminate it for the benefit of our community.

Tags: Innovation, Leadership, Membership, Professional Development, Staff Issues, Strategy, Technology, The Way We Execute, The Way We Involve Others, The Way We Lead, The Way We Manage, The Way We Think, The Way We Work Together, We've Always Done It That Way by Jeff De Cagna
4 Comments »

“Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.” (Leonardo da Vinci)

We need to make our organizations easier, clearer and simpler for everyone involved. We need to consistently, carefully and firmly identify everything we do that isn’t fundamental to advancing the larger purposes of our existence and get rid of those things as quickly as possible. This is what I mean by “radical simplicity.” In today’s world, less is not only more, much less is much more.

In recent months, I have come to view radical simplicity as a major strategic opportunity for associations that touches all aspects of what we do from governance to products and services to volunteer engagement. In far too many organizations in our community, the complexity we create ourselves interferes with our ability to achieve what we say we care about most, including supporting learning, building vibrant communities and delivering value to those we serve. We live in a complicated world to be sure, and there isn’t much we’re going to do to change that, except to the extent we are able to change both our organizations and ourselves.

“As simple as possible, but no simpler.” (Albert Einstein)

By suggesting we make radical simplicity a priority, I do not mean to imply we should “dumb down” our organizations. On the contrary, our organizations should be the hottest of hothouses, in which we plant the seeds of many new innovations, nurture them and allow them to grow in all kinds of surprising and unexpected directions. There is an important difference between the organic evolution of complexity in our thinking and the creation of synthetic complexity that so often occurs in our organizations. The former is a natural cycle of growth and change that systematically builds our capacity, while the latter involves the unnatural and unnecessary introduction of hierarchical and bureaucratic constraints into places and spaces where, if we took the initiative to cultivate them, trust, reciprocity and the capacity for self-organization could do the job quite well.

Radical simplicity isn’t about avoiding complexity altogether. It is about creating a markedly more intuitive and straightforward interface between our organizations and our members that enables us to make sense of the complexity we need and drastically reduces (if not eliminates altogether) the complexity we don’t.

“What is the simplest thing that could possibly work?” (Ward Cunningham, inventor of the wiki.)

On a very practical level, embracing radical simplicity in our work might make the difference between robust growth and anemic performance in key metrics. At the very minimum, a radically simpler organization should make for happier and more satisfied staff and members. For me, a focus on radical simplicity is itself a form of genuine innovation, and one that definitely can make a meaningful impact along multiple dimensions quickly.

To set your organization down the path of radical simplicity, consider raising the following five questions for discussion:

* What factors create complexity in your association’s work?
* How much of the complexity in your association is self-inflicted?
* How do “tried-and-true” solutions actually increase complexity in your organization?
* Why does your association have difficulty letting go of just about anything?
* What are the elements of a new business model that will allow your association to fully embrace radical simplicity?

To put your strategic thinking into action, consider one final inquiry: what three things about your association can you radically simplify in the next three months? If you can initiate these critical conversations, you will go a long way toward creating the right conditions for enduring success in your association.

Tags: Innovation, Leadership, Membership, Professional Development, Staff Issues, Strategy, Technology, We've Always Done It That Way by Jeff De Cagna
3 Comments »

I’m pretty sure I don’t need to write too much here, but in case you’re wondering why, here are my three simple, one-sentence answers:

1. It can’t be done–can you think of an organization of any kind that does “all things” equally well?
2. It shouldn’t be done–can you think of a good reason to pursue a strategy that sets up everyone in the organization for frustration and failure?
3. It doesn’t work anyway–can you think of a good reason why anyone would want to be member of an association that doesn’t get the first two?

Instead of being everything to everyone, consider being a single thing for most people, and let the others figure out where and how they want to play. I can’t tell you what that “thing” is, because it is going to be different for every organization. There are no ready-made answers. Figuring out what your association’s one thing should be is the whole point of strategy, but we tend to overlook this basic fact while we’re busy administering the thousand-and-one details contained in our multi-year, multi-page, multi-goal, multi-objective, multi-tactic and largely non-strategic strategic plans.

Why are we making it so hard, when we could be making it easier on ourselves and our members? Give up the illusion that being all things to all people is either desirable or achievable, and, instead, focus on the genuine strategic opportunities that will emerge as soon as you begin looking at the world in a new way.

Tags: Innovation, Leadership, Membership, Professional Development, Staff Issues, Strategy, Technology, We've Always Done It That Way by Jeff De Cagna
No Comments »

The rule of thumb in our community is that an association should have an amount in reserves equal to 50% of its budget, just in case the organization’s financial position begins to deteriorate. So, for example, if I am the CEO of a $10 million association, I’m looking to accumulate $5 million in my reserve fund as expeditiously as possible. It makes complete sense, right?

Of course it does, and that’s why I can’t resist mucking things up by proposing a minor edit: let’s make 45% instead. And with the other 5%, let’s invest in the work of innovation for the future. After all, it’s a rule of thumb, not a rule, regulation or law, so we can make it whatever we want it to be. And just imagine the extraordinary impact that 5% of your reserves would have on the pursuit of innovation in the community your association serves!

There are great reasons to pursue this alternative. First and foremost, by investing 5% in innovation, you will be making a powerful statement that you value the creativity, energy and passion of the people who make up your association more than markets or financial instruments. Second, building a deep capacity for innovation creates tangible and intangible benefits for your association that will never come about from even the most successful portfolio of investments, including new ideas, new capabilities, brand equity, member engagement and new revenue streams. And finally, if your innovation efforts produces a winner, the financial upside to your future reserve fund investments could be quite considerable. Surely these attractive opportunities are worth an investment of 5%?

Well, I know what you’re going to say…we don’t like to take risks. You don’t think you’re taking risks in the market? Yes, I know you’re carefully managing your portfolio and doing the other stuff all smart investors do. That really isn’t the point, however. Risk is an element of today’s operating environment and present in every choice that leaders make. No amount of careful planning, smart implementation or wishful thinking will eliminate it altogether, nor do we want to eliminate it. (It would be incredibly boring and routine to run an organization in an environment of zero risk, wouldn’t it?) So, the issue isn’t whether your organization “likes” to take risks, but how much risk you’re willing to accept. And if you’re investing any of your reserves in the market, you’ve already decided that you will tolerate some risk in exchange for a certain level of reward.

Unfortunately, you exercise absolutely no control over the rewards the market will bring you. But you do have levers you can pull when it comes to innovation. By taking a strategic approach to innovation, your organization can invest its 5% in ways that minimize and manage risk by limiting uncertainty and controlling financial exposure, while maximizing whatever upside a given idea may produce. You can’t get away from risk, but you can take steps to make it work for you.

So, I’m thinking that just about every organization around could make do with 45% in reserves instead of 50%. I’m also thinking that the 5% your association invests in innovation will be, in the long run, the best investment it ever made.

Tags: Innovation, Leadership, Membership, Professional Development, Staff Issues, Strategy, Technology, We've Always Done It That Way by Jeff De Cagna
No Comments »

By circumstance, tradition or choice, associations often operate as masters of orthodoxy, the de jure or de facto enforcers of accepted ways of thinking and acting within the industries, professions and fields they serve. Through certification programs, licensing, standards and other mechanisms, associations can create near impenetrable boundaries around what “professionals” in those fields must, should or can know. In some respects, this is an appropriate and vital function, especially in fields in which lives are at stake.

Yet when associations place a higher priority on preserving and protecting what is known above exploring and understanding what is unknown, they may try to thwart the emergence of significant breakthroughs in learning and the creation of new knowledge. Associations operating as masters of orthodoxy may exclude, with or without sinister intent, divergent viewpoints that directly question accepted beliefs and conventional wisdom. But in a time of genuine paradigm shift, when the tools for creating and sharing new ideas and knowledge are in the hands of many–including quite capable creators who are purely amateurs in their fields–associations have no choice but to break down the boundaries they’ve created over many decades and open themselves to ideas that they might otherwise categorically reject, as well as the “dissidents” who propose them.

Heterodoxy is defined as “any opinions or doctrines at variance with the official or orthodox position.” In the 21st Century, associations will need to create new intellectual frameworks and environments that actively and consistently engage the broad spectrum of agreed-upon and profoundly controversial views in their fields. Embracing heterodoxy must become the new association tradition.

Tags: Innovation, Leadership, Membership, Professional Development, Strategy, Technology, We've Always Done It That Way by Jeff De Cagna
No Comments »

It has been said that ethics is the choice to do the right thing even when no one is watching. In other words, ethical people and organizations act that way because they are deeply committed to doing what is proper at all times, not simply when such behavior is expedient. The current turbulent operating environment, in which strategic decisions increasingly are made under conditions of incomplete information, limited time and considerable stress, demands that association leaders take a long, hard look at both their personal and organizational ethics and ask some fundamental questions:

+Do I consider the implications of my actions/my organization’s actions for others?
+Do both my organization and I pursue the ethical path at all times?
+Is my integrity/the integrity of my organization intact?

Although framed as clear choices, these questions defy simple yes or no answers. Their intention is to help association leaders surface the underlying decision-making principles that enable consistent ethical conduct in the short term, as well as the creation of an organizational legacy of honesty, integrity and social responsibility that will endure in the long run. Sadly, there are far too many recent examples from both corporate and social enterprises of the kind of irresponsible, unethical and outright corrupt behavior that undermines the public’s trust and confidence in all institutions, including associations. Associations and their leaders will not get a pass from intense scrutiny of their conduct, and if the failure to act in an ethical and responsible manner erodes support among our constituents for the important work that our organizations perform, the historic role of associations in American society may be irreparably compromised.

Meaningful conversations about ethics and social responsibility are not likely to be at the top of the agenda for many association leaders. We are fortunate, however, that these questions are increasingly a part of our community’s dialogue, not as a matter of choice, but of necessity. But simply talking about these issues won’t be sufficient; decisive action is required. The best association leaders of the 21st Century already understand that a vibrant and sustainable future for associations depends, in part, on our community’s unswerving commitment to and full-throated public advocacy for ethics and social responsibility throughout our society. Anything less would be a retreat from the core beliefs that make our organizations great.

Tags: Leadership, Membership, Strategy, We've Always Done It That Way by Jeff De Cagna
No Comments »

The value of continuous learning is unquestionable. It is how our members become aware about new developments and technologies and acquire different or more advanced skills. Almost all associations offer learning opportunities to members. But very few do much beyond programming courses or packaging content in books. Very few actually help members become effective learners. Yet, research has shown that many of our members aren’t skilled learners and that learning becomes more effective when individuals engage in several coordinated activities:

(1) reflecting on current practice to establish professional direction and goals
(2) identifying the gap between current and desired/needed knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs)
(3) developing a learning plan based on identified gaps
(4) selecting and participating in learning activities that address goals and targeted KSAs
(5) evaluating how/if learning has been integrated into practice and what progress has been made in meeting professional goals

Associations can and should play an important role in providing support and tools in these areas to help members become more effective learners. Programming education just isn’t enough.

Tags: Membership, Professional Development, Strategy, We've Always Done It That Way by Mickie
No Comments »

Many associations have identified the body of knowledge of the fields they represent and used them for specific purposes, such as developing training or certification programs. However, often the body of knowledge is used only for that specific and independent purpose. And, associations may have even identified several different bodies of knowledge for unrelated projects. As a typical example, the professional development division creates a knowledge matrix for tracking its curriculum, the certification division formally identifies a body of knowledge for its certification examination, the publications division compiles a topical index for its books and magazines, and the communications division identifies an index for its Web portal. All are created at different times, using different methods, by different units, for different purposes. These often informal and unplanned knowledge efforts can be valuable to the association and its members, but they could have much more impact if they were coordinated as part of an association’s overall knowledge strategy.

If you haven’t identified the current body of knowledge of the field in which your members work (or a portion of that field), consider:

• How do you determine what knowledge and skills are currently and will be needed by your members in the next 5 years?
• Then, how do you determine what to teach members in your educational programs?
• What do you use as your basis for selecting content for your publications?
• How do you prioritize research efforts to advance the field? (How do you advance a field if you don’t know its current status?)
• What is the foundation of your certification program examination?

It’s time for associations to get strategic and purposeful about how they will advance the knowledge of their members and/or advance the fields in which their members work. Identifying the body of knowledge can be an important first step. It may, but does not have to be an elaborate research project. How sophisticated the approach depends upon the identified uses for that body of knowledge. Certification, for example, does warrant a sophisticated approach ““ usually a formal job analysis. However, if you are trying to identify the gap between what members currently know and what they’ll need to know in 5 years (so that you can be purposeful in getting your members there!), qualitative research of key employers may do the job fine. So, that takes us back to strategy. Associations need to identify what their knowledge goals are first and then identify the strategies and action plans to get there.

Still questioning the value of a knowledge strategy? The Project Management Institute has been purposeful in its knowledge efforts and it has paid off: its Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge book is currently on the BusinessWeek Best Seller List!

Tags: Membership, Professional Development, Strategy, We've Always Done It That Way by Mickie
No Comments »

How much attention do your members pay to you? Many web-oriented companies and services have begun thinking about how much of their customers’ attention they receive rather than how much of their money they get. This is described as attention economics.

Framing your products and services within the concept of gaining attention may help you to to better target your members’ interests and ultimately increase revenue and member satisfaction over the long run.

Some attention questions to ask about your association:

• How much of our members attention do we want?
• How much should we have?
• How much do they give us now?
• What are they paying attention to?
• How well do our current products and services get their attention?

If you focus on getting and retaining your members’ attention, the money will follow.

Tags: Innovation, Membership by David
1 Comment »

Amazon.com sells a membership called Amazon Prime. Membership gets you free 2-day shipping and discounts on overnighting packages. The more you spend with Amazon, the more valuable your membership. It is very easy to understand the value of the membership because it is quite simple. You can even share the member benefits with up to four other people in your household. Nice dynamic!

Why not offer free shipping to your members for all publications and products rather than giving a discount off the price? Discounting your products can be seen as devaluing their worth. Free shipping is an excellent perk that doesn’t make any statement about the worth of the content and encourages more spending. It should also make you more money in the long run since it is roughly a fixed cost and you won’t be discounting your more expensive items.

Tags: Innovation, Membership by David
1 Comment »

Let’s try a thought experiment….

After numerous complaints from members over a three-year period, your board concludes the association’s dues are simply too high. They are so high, in fact, they have become the number one reason why even very good prospects don’t join. After extensive deliberation and discussion of the issue, the board votes to get rid of dues permanently, even though these payments represent at least 20% (and sometimes more) of your association’s revenue each fiscal year.

If confronted with this situation, what would you do differently?

If you don’t know, why? If you do, why aren’t you already doing it?

Tags: Innovation, Leadership, Membership, Professional Development, Staff Issues, Strategy, Technology, We've Always Done It That Way by Jeff De Cagna
2 Comments »

Associations love to copy the work of other individuals and organizations. Best practices are a big thing in our community, probably because the scarcity and constraints culture of associations leads us to conclude that best practices will be easier to implement and more cost effective over time. Unfortunately for us, there is overwhelming evidence that you cannot and will not build a truly great and successful organization simply by copying others. True success and true greatness come from daring to do what others can’t do or won’t try.

Personally, I loathe best practices, but I do recognize that some people like them, so I’ll hold off on further critique for now. But I still would like to challenge those association leaders enamored with best practices to consider the truly radical and counterintuitive notion of not duplicating what others do before first. Instead, be original. Rather than constantly “tweaking” someone else’s existing solutions to your context, open yourself up to fresh, different and even plainly absurd ways of thinking. (In this vein, remember the words of Albert Einstein, “If at first the idea is not absurd, then there is no hope for it.”) Take the time to consider the unique and creative contribution you, your team and your organization can make to addressing both new and long-standing challenges in surprising ways.

Best practices stifle meaningful innovation and embrace status quo thinking. (Oh, did I write that out loud?…;>)) But I know I’m not telling you anything you don’t already know. Leadership isn’t about driving our associations down toward the lowest common denominator. Haven’t we had enough of that? Genuine leadership values and demands authenticity, creativity and originality in the work of every contributor and from the organization as a whole. Seize the opportunity to become a true pioneer, and let the laggards copy you. Before long, they will be eating your dust!

Tags: Innovation, Leadership, Membership, Professional Development, Staff Issues, Strategy, Technology, We've Always Done It That Way by Jeff De Cagna
3 Comments »

When confronted with a problem, human beings instinctively want to solve it. Most of the time, that instinct serves us well, especially when it comes to both routine difficulties and matters of life and death. But more often than we might suspect, there are golden opportunities not to follow our instincts and, instead, let the problems we face “solve us.”

Solve us you ask? It is an insight that I took away from my graduate work with Professor Robert Kegan in the late 1990s. As Professor Kegan says, “Each of us does the best we can coping within the world of our assumptive design.” To put it another way, the assumptions we make everyday about every aspect of our life experience shape the way we make sense of and interact with the world. In effect, our assumptions allow us to design the world in which we want to live, one that is often at odds with the “realities” experienced by others. We cope by resolving this dissonance, which is why we are very intent on solving problems.

But what if we had sufficient awareness to recognize that our problems might not be the actual problem? What if we could see that sometimes the problem is simply an indicator of flawed or, at least, untested assumptions? What if we could step outside of the problem and look at our relationship to it so that we might understand it in a new way? Without a doubt, it is easier to ask these questions than it is to do what they ask. Nevertheless, I believe what I am writing about here is an absolutely critical capability that both staff and volunteer association leaders must develop going forward.

Let’s think briefly about how letting problems solve us might influence our work on strategy. Strategic planning is clear-cut method for solving the problems we have with ambiguity, complexity and uncertainty. In strategic planning, we identify mostly what we know we know today, and we do a little bit of elaboration on it to give it a future feel. Then, we pre-determine the outcomes we want to achieve and work fastidiously toward reaching them. No mess, no fuss. This approach may be clean and neat, but it is neither authentic nor pragmatic, given what we know is true about the current strategic landscape. In contrast, letting the problem solve us challenges our assumptions along multiple dimensions, especially our commitment to knowing all the answers even before the questions are asked. Letting the problem solve us focuses instead on learning as we go, exercising judgment and constantly testing our assumptions. From this process, not only will we achieve different results, but our approach to strategic leadership also will be different.

So, the next time you confront a problem in your work, consider stepping back from trying to solve it immediately. Instead, see if the problem can solve you.

Tags: Innovation, Leadership, Membership, Professional Development, Staff Issues, Strategy, Technology, We've Always Done It That Way by Jeff De Cagna
2 Comments »

I recently met a former flight attendant who knows a great deal about my preferred carrier, United Airlines. (She did not work for United, but for one of its partners.) As a 1K flyer on United, I was interested to hear the story behind the airline’s decision to offer Channel 9, the on-board audio channel that gives passengers the opportunity to listen to communications between the cockpit and air traffic control. As an anxious air traveler, I have come to rely on Channel 9 as a tool for relaxing during my flights. I frequently tell others that listening to the cockpit, while it might sound quite boring, is actually really great because the exchanges between the pilots and ATC are always so polite and professional, and reflect genuine competence. It is such a refreshing change of pace from typical workplace conversations, which often are laden with hidden meanings and political agendas, and sometimes try to cover up incompetence. In contrast, when a pilot is told by an air traffic controller to “descend and maintain 1-5-0″ or 15,000 feet, the response is always, “1-5-0, United 540″ or whatever the specific flight number might be. No arguments, no politics, no crap.

But things apparently were quite different before Channel 9. In the aftermath of President Reagan’s firing of air traffic controllers in 1981, there was significant vitriol between pilots and air traffic controllers at United. From what my acquaintance told me, I gather that yelling and cursing were commonplace in communications between planes and ATC. In fact, by the late 1990s, when Washington, DC’s National Airport was renamed for President Reagan, pilots calling ATC using “Reagan” would simply be ignored by the tower, creating a remarkably unsafe situation.

United management tried many approaches to ameliorate these problems without success. Finally, there was a brainstorm, and a decision was made: all of these conversations would be made available to passengers! The airline secured the necessary approvals and the whole game changed. Now, the air traffic controllers and pilots had a choice: clean up their act or face the wrath of the flying public. Obviously, they chose the former, because if they hadn’t, United certainly would not exist today. (Not that it’s out of the woods by any means…)

This story compels me to ask association leaders a question: what would your members hear in your HQ office or boardroom if they could listen in to their own association-specific Channel 9? Would they admire the professionalism and competence of your staff or board, or would they simply wonder what the hell is going on? Quite obviously, transparency has been a very powerful tool for shifting both thinking and action at United, and it can be for your association as well.

Tags: Leadership, Membership, Strategy, We've Always Done It That Way by Jeff De Cagna
4 Comments »

So the story goes: Sony held a focus group to determine if they should make their new boom box yellow or black. They invited in their target demographic (teenagers) to ask their opinion. The focus group was unanimously in favor of yellow– as it was “hip”, “edgy”,”cool”. As a thank you gift for participating, all were offered a new boom box. There was a table covered with yellow and black boom boxes. Everyone took a black one. So, Sony made their new boom box black.

While I’ve not been able to find out if this is urban legend or truth, it has stuck with me for years and illustrates a good point: customers don’t always know and/or articulate what they really want or need. Yet, how often do associations base decisions solely or primarily on survey or focus group results? We ask members to choose topics for the next conference from a long list of possible topics, we ask if they would value some vague concept of a program we are considering, we ask if they would buy a certain product a year from now, and we ask what would increase the value of membership. But sometimes our questions are loaded and members tell us what they think we want to hear or they just don’t tell us anything at all. Sometimes our questions are are just too vague for meaningful responses. Sometimes members just don’t know what they want. Sometimes they don’t know how to communicate their needs to us.

It is important to recognize the inherent flaws in the research methodologies we often use to gather the data on which we base decisions. We need to figure out ways to gather more authentic data from members — through better questions in our research, but also through:

1. observations of their actions,
2. listening to their conversations, and
3. engaging in meaningful conversations with them.

Tags: Membership, Strategy, We've Always Done It That Way by Mickie
2 Comments »

How often do association executives or volunteer leaders say that they can’t raise the member dues because their members can’t afford it or won’t pay it? How many times each year do those same members spend an amount equal or greater than that dues payment for something else? A conference registration? A certification? A suit? A purse? A set of golf clubs or a round of golf? Tickets to a theatre series? A weekend getaway? You get the idea.

I once sat through a painful house of delegates meeting (of an association that was in a dire financial situation) in which delegate after delegate pronounced that the association just could not raise dues because the members could not afford it and would drop membership. They spent the full meeting discussing why the membership couldn’t afford it, what billing options could be instituted, what programs could be cut instead, etc. Not once did I hear the suggestion that perhaps the organization could consider ways to increase its value for the dollar. Not once. And, consider that the same organization offered a training program that cost almost double the cost of membership that had for the past 3 years and was continuing to sell out at every offering across the U.S.

More often than not, it is NOT about the actual dollar amount. It is about the perceived value of what members are getting for it. If there’s little to no real value in membership, then any fee is too high.

So, instead of worrying so much about the impact of raising dues by a few dollars, focus on increasing the value of membership so that members won’t even blink at that dues invoice because not renewing isn’t even a consideration.

Tags: Membership, We've Always Done It That Way by Mickie
No Comments »

Let’s be clear about something really important: the members don’t really own the association. The overwhelming majority of associations are structured as non-profit organizations and there can be neither individual nor group ownership of such entities. Non-profit organizations exist for the public good, and not for personal or private aggrandizement.

I think all association professionals should keep this in mind the next time they are asked to defer their day-to-day experience, marketplace insight and strategic judgment to the myopic decision-making of volunteers who, more and more, lack the time, energy and attention to properly attend to the business of their organizations. I am deeply concerned that if we continue to buy into the old saw that it is “the members’ association,” we will be complicit in driving our organizations down the pathways of extinction.

I’m not suggesting that the members don’t have a say or a critical role to play in what occurs within the organizations to which they belong. Not at all. The active involvement of members is crucial to long-term success. But just as important is the active and direct involvement of staff, partners and other stakeholders on a co-equal basis. Associations are not manufacturers of widgets, but creators of knowledge, experiences and context. These typically intangible resources cannot be effectively cultivated and nurtured in command-and-control hierarchies in which some lead and others follow. Instead, they demand highly diverse and collaborative environments in which leadership and followership are shared by all in equal measure.

No one owns the association, but everyone involved in its work takes ownership of its success or failure everyday. Our community is long overdue in recognizing this fundamental fact.

Tags: Leadership, Membership, Staff Issues, Strategy, We've Always Done It That Way by Jeff De Cagna
3 Comments »

In the March 2006 issue of Harvard Business Review, a short article described how the Inn at Little Washington’s restaurant takes a measure of each guest table’s mood on a scale of 1-10, with 7 or below indicating displeasure or unhappiness. The mood score is recorded in the computer and the goal is to get that measure to at least a 9 by the end of the meal. The strategies might include complimentary champagne, extra desserts, a tableside visit from one of the owners, or even a kitchen tour. A personal favorite: if a wife looks annoyed that the husband is paying a little too much attention to a well-endowed waitress, a waiter takes over.

Consider what the member experience might look like if associations similiarly targeted member mood during each interaction. Have you ever had secret shoppers assess how your staff are treating members on the phone, at busy conference registration tables, or elsewhere? If you haven’t, consider it. You might just be shocked at how often the member mood is depressed rather than elevated during these interactions. Too often, calling members are repeatedly transferred, unable to find a real person to talk to, or told no to their simple requests. About the only measure of mood associations take of members is through customer satisfaction surveys and conference evaluations. But isn’t that a little too little too late? Wouldn’t it be more effective to enter every interaction aiming to elevate the member mood?

How often do your members leave the interaction feeling GREAT about the experience? Consider how you might be able to apply the measure of mood concept to your organization.

Tags: Membership, We've Always Done It That Way by Mickie
No Comments »

As membership-based organizations, associations by definition must create themselves in a way that allows them to satisfy a large number of stakeholders. Within their membership alone they are guaranteed to find a broad range of preferences and priorities, and that range only expands when you consider other stakeholders (business partners, staff, policy communities, the public, etc.). Obviously there is value in creating a variety of experiences, products, services, etc. so that your differing stakeholders can extract different types of value.

For example, AARP produces a very successful magazine. A few years back they experimented with two versions of the magazine, including a new one focused on a specific generation””the newest retirees, the “Baby Boomers.” As they evaluated the success of the new venture, however, the results were disappointing, and they cancelled the new magazine. But they did not go back to one magazine for all of their membership. They started producing three slightly different versions of their magazine based on age groupings rather than generations: one for members in their fifties, one for members in their sixties, and one for members seventy and above. This approach has been more successful.

So shifting in response to diversity among stakeholders can be a good thing, but it also has its dark side, and associations too often fail to see this. At a high level, the dark side is obvious and captured in platitudes we hear all the time. You can’t be everything to everyone. Trying to go in too many directions at once makes it impossible to move forward. We all know that there is a limit to our ability to please all the different perspectives, interests, or motivations among stakeholders.

But we still try to do it. The problem is our devotion to our members. We take a good platitude (providing member value will make your association successful) and take it to an extreme that ignores the platitudes we mentioned above about being everything to everyone. We start, innocently enough, by doing research about the various needs and interests of our members and stakeholders. The more sophisticated we get with our research, the larger the variety of interests we discover. We use that knowledge to tweak our services or processes and we get good results (retention up! satisfaction up!). So we keep doing it.

Unfortunately, over time, it provides us with too many choices, and we begin to see clearly how many people will be unhappy unless we choose to meet their needs. So we choose to diversify even further. In the end, we lose the capacity to make choices, because we don’t want to make any stakeholder unhappy. It happens over time. No one makes the explicit decision that making choices is bad, but that is what happens. We add new programs without taking anything away. We respond to every member demand. We abandon a strategy if a focus group objects to it. We just end up there.

You have to choose. You have to take some people’s interests and desires and give them a higher priority than others. You have to make some people unhappy with your decisions, because if you don’t, then you are making weak decisions, and success requires strength. You have to choose some courses of action, knowing that you are ruling out a host of other options. You don’t have to be blind to what others want, and we don’t encourage you to ignore stakeholder groups and their varied interests and opinions. But you do have to choose.

Tags: Leadership, Membership, Strategy, The Way We Think by Jamie
3 Comments »

I recently attended a conference where there was a rather robust conversation about creating local affiliate organizations for the national association that had organized the conference. This was my first time attending this conference and my background in associations was not well-known among the participants. I saw this as an opportunity to advance my thoughts on what we have traditionally called “chapter development.” Let me share them for you here:

1 Don’t start a chapter.
2. Create an “unchapter” instead.
3. Do that by thinking about everything you would do to create a chapter.
4. And then do the opposite.

I can’t find a good reason why we refer to local affiliate organizations as chapters, so there is no good reason to keep doing it. Call them communities, networks, clusters or something completely different. Whatever floats your boat. Just don’t call them chapters!

I see no reason why our local affiliates need to duplicate the burdensome bureaucracy and chair filling of our national organizations, so let’s not do that either. No officers and no board. Let’s have a small coordinating council instead that can make sure people are kept up to date about what’s happening. Streamline administration and communication.

And, in that spirit, I see no reason why our group needs to have a formal web site. Just put up a blog with all of the content the members might need. Much easier for volunteers to handle, much easier for the members to use and much more current in terms of sharing information.

I see no reason why these groups must have monthly in-person programs or lunches. Let each group choose its own approach. Some may want quarterly programming or only virtual programming or even no formal programming at all. I see no problem with any of those approaches so long as it works for the members. Not every group needs to fit the cookie-cutter image of the traditional chapter and nor should every group do the exact same things. The groups should differentiate, and then coordinate, cooperate and compete with each other as necessary.

I see no reason why our groups need to follow any mandate or requirement from the national organization other than staying true to vision, mission and strategy and remaining within the boundaries of legal, ethical and financial propriety. They should do their own things and do them as well as anybody else, including the national organization. Forget about the parent-child relationship. Think of it as cousins instead…

Associations need to dump the traditional model of “chapter development” in favor of a fundamentally new way of bringing people together at the local and regional levels. I’m sure the naysayers out there will point out everything they think is wrong with what I’ve suggested. Good. I look forward to that debate!

Tags: Innovation, Leadership, Membership, Strategy, We've Always Done It That Way by Jeff De Cagna
1 Comment »

Many associations collect demographic data from their members when they join or renew their membership. Sometimes this can be as simple as a few check boxes to more involved multi-page surveys. When dues invoices could only be sent via postal mail, it made sense to piggy back a data collection tool with it to save money on postage and take advantage of the member’s attention.

However, just because it works well in snail mail doesn’t mean you should do it online. For example, the cost-saving benefit goes away when you invoice for dues via e-mail or accept a new member via your web site. Another challenge is that conducting an online survey of a member before they can renew is much more invasive of an interruption than including a paper form in the mail. Making online payment challenging by requiring extraneous forms to be completed reduces the benefits of paying online to your members, which will raise your costs when they choose to go with traditional methods such as calling you or mailing in forms that need to be processed.

When a member has made the decision to invest more money in the association by purchasing a product or paying dues online, get out of their way and make it as easy as possible for them to complete the transaction.

Tags: Membership, We've Always Done It That Way by David
3 Comments »

How many organizations have you joined in order to get a 5% discount? Not too many, I would guess. However, this kind of benefit is often a huge focus of associations in their membership marketing materials and the affinity partnerships that they develop. If you look back at the origins of most associations, they had no benefits like this at the start. It was association for the sake of associating and wanting to make a difference. We need to make sure we continue to offer meaning behind our memberships.

I recently heard a member of an association state that he wanted the image of his association to make him proud to be a member of both the organization and the profession it represents. Now that is a reason to join! How proud does your organization make your members?

Tags: Membership, We've Always Done It That Way by David
No Comments »

Am I the only one who thinks the notion of the “checkbook member,” i.e., the member who writes a check once a year so he or she can receive a magazine or other materials, is an unmitigated travesty that should not be tolerated in the association community? (Boy, that felt good to get off my chest. I do offer a sincere apology, however, if you now have to be irritated just so that I can feel better! Such is the nature of this particular beast, I’m afraid…)

Frankly, I find the whole phenomenon of the checkbook member–not to mention the matter-of-fact way so many association professionals speak of it–to be a genuine embarrassment for organizations in our community. In a time when tens of thousands of software developers are volunteering to create open source applications and so many of our organizations are struggling to find qualified contributors to our work, I regard the idea that we should call someone a member simply because he pays dues every year to be anathema.

So, let’s do a little math. Let’s say my organization has 20,000 members, of which perhaps merely 10% are involved in association activities. To my way of thinking, I actually have a membership of 2,000 and a subscriber base of 18,000 people. Why should I include in a membership count people who demonstrate no interest in making a meaningful contribution to the organization’s success? To enhance my clout in public policy? To satisfy my board’s desire to see the raw membership numbers increase every year? To burnish my resume? Membership should not be defined by the act of making payment, no matter what form that payment might take. Associations are supposed to be about authentic relationships. A financial transaction is not a relationship, no matter how much we might like it to be. A relationship can form only between people who are interested in it seeing it form and who are willing to work hard to sustain and strengthen it over time.

From a business model perspective, the end of the checkbook member would be a real plus. If they could reclassify their checkbook members as subscribers, I bet many associations today would dramatically increase their revenues very quickly. Freed from having to underprice valuable offers in the name of “good member service,” associations could charge subscribers whatever the market would bear. In fact, I think getting rid of the checkbook member would actually be a very positive development for the soul of the association membership function. Once the difference between members and customers (or members and subscribers) is absolutely crystal clear, it will challenge all of us to figure out what we really value and exactly how much we value it. That can only be a good thing.

I understand that what I’m suggesting here flies directly in the face of the association orthodoxy. Good. We are long overdue to be vigorously questioning the highly questionable assumptions that still drive thinking in our organizations. (Hence, this blog.) I, for one, say, “No more checkbook members!” Who will join me in this heresy?

Tags: Membership, Strategy, We've Always Done It That Way by Jeff De Cagna
5 Comments »

There is growing interest in associations around blogging, podcasting and social media tools. FINALLY! It’s about time we woke up and smelled the Marble Mocha Macchiato. We are long overdue to recognize these technologies are like manna from heaven for associations, and to begin capitalizing on them in our work.

Social media are all about participation, about getting people involved in creating and sharing content and engaging in conversations that are important to them. Indeed, the whole direction of the Web is moving toward the deeper engagement of the end user in more authentic and generative ways. In this spirit, blogging, podcasting, wikis, Flickr, del.icio.us and other social media tools offer associations the opportunity to establish entirely new relationships with their current and prospective members. By introducing greater richness and dimension to the discourse we have with our most crucial stakeholders, we can quite possibly renovate the eroding structures of traditional association membership and volunteer leadership for the better.

But only if we can get out of our own way. Going forward, associations will need to do more than pay lip service to the passion, energy and creativity of their members and staff. Going forward, associations will need to reconsider the long-term value of the current incentives that motivate members to invest their discretionary time and attention in the organization. Associations, by definition, are highly bureaucratic organizations. And, in the words of strategy and innovation author Gary Hamel, “the problem is, there’s little room in bureaucratic organizations for passion, ingenuity and self-direction.” Social media are the antithesis of bureaucracy. Social media are pure creation.

We have been given a gift, like manna from heaven. Let us not squander it.

Tags: Innovation, Membership, Technology, We've Always Done It That Way by Jeff De Cagna
1 Comment »

Put yourself in this scenario: As part of a strategic effort to better position members in the marketplace, your association prioritizes development of a toolkit to guide members in promoting themselves and their expertise. An author is commissioned and months later she presents the document. You have it copy-edited. You have it beautifully designed. It’s ready to go to print. Proudly, you send the electronic proof to the individuals involved in the toolkit’s conceptualization. The unexpected feedback: it’s way off mark and will likely end up in member trash cans.

What went wrong? The document is written so well, it’s comprehensive, it’s beautiful, it’s on deadline. All excellent…except that the final product does not meet its intended purpose. The author’s specialized expertise steered the content too far in one direction.

We could talk about how this happened and how to prevent future occurrences, but that’s an issue for another time. My question now is “What would you do?” 1. Proceed. It is, after all, a well-written document with some useful information and you had planned to distribute it at the upcoming conference. 2. Have the author quickly add a few of the concepts originally discussed so that it’s a little bit closer to that intended and still meets your deadline. 3. Postpone distribution and go back to the drawing board to create the originally planned and strategically conceptualized product.

Would you be willing to start over? Or would you be tempted to deliver a mediocre product on deadline? When does getting it done become more important than getting it done right?

By the way, in real life, the association followed path 2 and I’m sure the landfills are fuller for it.

Tags: Membership, We've Always Done It That Way by Mickie
No Comments »

We sometimes hear leaders in associations from both the staff side and the volunteer side debating the pros and cons of being “member driven” versus “staff driven.” We have yet to hear a compelling argument that rules definitively in favor of one over the other. It seems to vary by context, with the bottom line containing an unsurprising mix of responsibilities for driving divided between staff and members.

The debate over staff versus member driven, however, is really just a reframing of the more basic question: who is in charge? And while we agree that there is no singular or simple answer to that question at the macro level (the macro answer is “it depends”), this should not provide association leaders with an excuse for avoiding this question within their own, specific, micro-level situations.

To be successful, association leaders must clarify and pinpoint a specific answer to that question within their own context, and that is not just at the Board meetings, where the staff versus member paradigm would expect the topic to come up. Confusion about who is in charge appears elsewhere in the association’s business as well:

Staff
Association leaders often espouse “flat” organizations, valuing input from everyone, even suggesting “consensus” decision making. At the same time, however, they structure their organizations hierarchically, where reporting relationships define authority in a clear and vertical fashion. You must confront this contradiction so staff will understand when they have input and when they do not. There is room for broad input, but do not hide the fact that a very few actually have the decision making power on major questions. You need not concentrate all control in the hands of the managers, but be truthful and clear about areas where control is not shared, and everyone will work more effectively.

Related Organizations
When associations create related organizations (often driven by benefits of a different tax status), they too often create independent Boards and structures of organizations that they intend to be literally “subsidiaries” of the association. It is easy to focus on the purpose of the new organization, its mission, and empowering the new Board that is set up to lead effectively, and in doing so avoid the “who’s in charge” question entirely. The two Boards then operate for years, even decades, without confronting huge contradictions in expectations and purpose. Each Board feels it is in charge, yet it never confronts the issue head on.

It takes courage to confront these “who is in charge” conversations, but remember: while the conversations may be difficult, they won’t kill you, and the longer you put off having them, the more difficult they will be.

Tags: Leadership, Membership, Staff Issues, The Way We Involve Others, We've Always Done It That Way by Jamie
2 Comments »

Generational differences receive a lot of attention these days, particularly in the association community, but too often in comments about these differences fall into the “sky is falling” category:

“¢ All the baby boomers are retiring!
“¢ Generation X are not “joiners!”
“¢ Millennials only want to play video games!

As researchers begin to identify trends in attitudes and behavior that vary from generation to generation, association executives struggle with how to apply that information to the actual running of their business. I actually heard an association executive suggest that the best strategy to deal with generation X is to simply wait them out. Millennials, he suggested, are joiners, so we just need to wait for them to take over the leadership positions in the association!

Get a hold of yourself, Chicken Little. The first step in dealing with generational shifts is to look beyond the stereotypes that have been generated over the last few years. Some of them are quite accurate, but some of them do not tell the whole story. For example, you may have noticed that there are fewer Generation X members entering your volunteer “pipeline.” While they may have different attitudes about “joining” and volunteering than their predecessors, the Baby Boomers, the fact is this drop in numbers is to be expected. Generation X was the baby “bust” after the boom. The Department of Labor predicts a net decline in the middle management workforce in this country by 10% between 2000 and 2010.

Sometimes, of course, the stereotypes are accurate: yes, generations are different. Knowledge of those differences, however, can only help you manage your association more effectively if it is paired with a critical organizational discipline that is too often neglected: the discipline of conversation. How do you manage the ongoing conversation with your members to uncover the relevance of generational differences? You know that there are generational differences, but it is only through a careful and respectful conversation with your membership that you will uncover the relevance. If younger members aren’t volunteering as much, don’t rely on an article to tell you why””ask them yourself. All that background information you got on Generation X will help guide the conversation, but the conclusions about what to do differently will only emerge from the conversation itself.

Have you actually examined your own organization’s capacity for conversations? How do you engage your staff in conversations about strategy and implementation? What is the quality of conversation during performance reviews? To what standard do you hold your Board in their conversations? And at the most basic level, how do you conduct meetings? Are people focused on the topic and listening to one another?

Take the answers to these questions and apply them to generational differences. Try intentionally starting some new conversations across different generations, and see where it leads. Remember, the goal is not to find the static answers; the goal is to find dynamic strategies for ongoing renewal.

Tags: Leadership, Membership, Staff Issues, Strategy, The Way We Work Together, We've Always Done It That Way by Jamie
1 Comment »

Many associations profess that their focus is on fostering community among their members for the purpose of facilitating knowledge sharing and other professionally enhancing activities. ASAE even came out with a report recommending building community driven membership benefits.

Yet, many of these same associations limit or even discourage their staff from participating in similar activities. Some do not encourage staff to use time in the office to engage in online communities or skimp on professional development. Others specifically block access to “Ëœunauthorized’ web sites and limit the ability to use tools such as instant messaging. How can they reasonably expect their staff to develop effective and powerful community-based experiences for their members when they do not encourage their staff to engage in such activities themselves?

Association executives must encourage their staff and leadership to experiment with and model the behaviors and actions they want to elicit from their membership. Any association that does not do that will ultimately fail in their community efforts because they honestly won’t be able recognize it.

Tags: Membership, Technology, We've Always Done It That Way by David
No Comments »