Does your governance arrangement with affiliates or chapters
need updating?
Printer Friendly Version
I started wondering about this at my very first
national board meeting. I was attending the meeting in my capacity
as a staff member of a provincial organization and the provincial
representative on the national board. Ten minutes into the meeting
I noticed participants were acting like they were representatives
at a federal-provincial meeting of first ministers. In fact, provincial
representatives sat behind their flags. Territorial turf, control
issues, and representation similar to a political body was running
rampant. This left me puzzled. What about the member? Does such
posturing really serve their interests?
To be successful, national associations and their provincial
affiliates require most members to be satisfied - an extremely
high level of cooperation and the sharing of common goals and
resources are necessary for that goal to be achieved. The good
news is that the national board I referred to above downsized
from about 52 to 24, made some governance representation changes,
now engages in shared planning sessions, and has applied some
innovative ways of utilizing their staff resources from coast
to coast. There are solutions to most situations. The first step
is to understand and define the problem or opportunity.
The Governance Representation Model
Are national and provincial/local chapter relationships hindered
by the type of governance representation model used? If there
is a high degree of concern by affiliates about relationships
and the model, it is likely the model and related practices need
to be examined. In the above story, governance adjustments and
changes to other practices turned the affiliated organizations
around. They were able to redirect the energy spent fighting each
other and apply it to issues of ultimate benefit to their members.
To explore this question in more depth, it is first necessary
to understand some of the models and arrangements that exist.
Some examples:
A. National Driven
The national association forms chapters to support mission
related activities. In this situation, dues are collected at
the national level and dues rebates are provided through approved
budgets to support chapter activities. Most services are developed
and delivered at the national level and members join at the
national level. Chapters usually have a limited presence on
the national board.
B. Chapter Driven
Chapters form a national association to help with coordination
and communications. The chapters retain dominant control and
power on the national board. In this situation dues are collected
at the local level and funds are allocated to national on some
formula/budget basis. Most services are developed and delivered
at the local level and members join at the chapter level.
C. Others
In some cases members are organized at the local, provincial
and national level. Members do not have to belong to all of
the groups. In this situation there is often no overlap in governing
structures. All services are developed and delivered by each
group and members join each group directly. There is little
coordination amongst each of the groups and at times they may
be engaged in competing activities.
Other arrangements may involve provincial and local chapters
belonging directly to the national group. Another is where local
chapters join a provincial body and the provincial body joins
the national body. In this arrangement it is possible for the
span of control to go either way. There are other hybrid arrangements
that exist. One that seems to be growing out of dissatisfaction
with situations A and B is the movement towards a corporate
model.
As you can see, relationships can be different and governance
representation may change as an organization matures. Other factors
such as finances, technology, and changing member needs and wants
come in to play. It is possible that association affiliates might
be working with an older governance representation arrangement
which may not be consistent with current requirements.
Most of the governance representation arrangements (such as roles
and responsibilities of the parties) are spelled out in a formal
affiliation agreement. In many cases, by-laws cover governance
elements of the relationship, such as how individuals get on the
board. Another example is where the provincial/local chapter model
consists of unincorporated groups – in these cases the by-laws
usually spell out requirements for direction and control through
the establishment of regulations.
I have had the opportunity to view documentation on a number
of affiliation arrangements for a variety of national and local
organizations. In addition, insight from CAE students in discussions
and assignments suggest there is some level of frustration with
current governance representation models. Arrangements and relationships
between national and provincial/local groups are becoming extremely
complex due to rapidly changing situations and this is adding
to the frustration of changes in technology and member needs.
Affiliate Relationship Frustrations
What is the source of the frustration? There are many. Governance,
planning, duplication of service and communications appear to
be the dominant factors. There are many better practices available
that can deal with these factors. In some cases, the governance
factor may require more than improvement in orientation and education.
It may require changes in representation and the governance model.
Why is there a problem with representation?
It is not unusual to have a national board member vote against
funding a good national level proposal that would enhance member
services for all members throughout the country because they do
not want member fees in their jurisdiction to rise. Why is this
happening? Governance arrangements, where provincial/local chapters
exist, often call for each jurisdiction to have some type of representation
on the national board. In many situations the national board is
made up solely of chapter representatives or chapter presidents.
Chapter representatives, mainly presidents who sit on national
boards, are often wearing two hats when they should only be wearing
one at a national meeting.
In many cases, chapter representatives on a national board have
a heavy volunteer commitment as they are usually serving as the
current chapter president. Representatives serving as directors
on the national board must do their due diligence and act in the
best interest of the association at the national board meeting.
This is part of the duties and responsibilities of directors.
Directors are often confused as to the role they should play.
Adding to the confusion is when the representatives go back to
the chapters and report. They may or may not give a fair or good
report of the national board meeting and the issues. Communications
are not always the greatest, resulting in "we" and "they"
situations.
It is not unusual to hear a chapter director complain about national
performing tasks they are supposed to be doing. While the chapter
president may know what is going on, there is a lot of uncertainty
on the chapter board. Other directors are not as connected. In
situations where there is limited or no staff to provide continuity,
the relationship situation can get worse. One association examined
its relationship problem and arranged to send all chapter directors
minutes and orientation packages which helped directors understand
the roles of all parties, plans and other critical decision making
information. Chapters and national started providing orientation
sessions on a regular basis. Improved understanding and communications
helped these affiliates realize they were all working towards
the same goals.
As associations mature they realize what they really need are
qualified directors on the board that have an at-large or unique
perspective needed for the challenges and opportunities at hand,
who wear only one hat in terms of focus and responsibility. Where
directors come from becomes less important. After all, if five
percent of your members are from six chapters, does each one really
need a director on the board? Some associations have moved to
regional representation initiatives. Perhaps it is possible to
get chapter input through some other organizational structure.
Some associations have established a Chapter Council. All chapter
presidents sit on the council and in turn they may appoint one
or two representatives to sit on the national board. Chapter presidents
are finding that the council is more focused and valuable in meeting
chapter needs.
There are stages in association growth where members may receive
or access equal services from chapters and national. It should
be noted that the need for chapter or national services by a member
may change based on different needs as an individual or organization
develops. For example, a seasoned individual or organization may
be looking to national for more international connections and
knowledge. An organization just starting out may be looking for
local connections and knowledge.
Sometimes boards forget they are part of the ten percent of the
membership that are keeners who volunteer and participate on a
regular basis. When they speak for the membership they have to
remember that they are not the average member. The average member
is more concerned about services than representation. Average
members didn't join the association to discuss structure or governance
arrangements. They just want seamless service on demand by whoever
can best provide it at a reasonable price. This needs to be understood
when considering representation models.
Technology
Technology is having an impact on the way services are being
developed and accessed. New ways of networking, gathering strategic
information and benchmarking for best practices are taking place
electronically.
This no doubt will have an impact on attendance for some types
of associations and their chapters. Do I go to the luncheon meeting
and hear the presentation and meet some new people or do I search
the web on the topic and get information the speaker has on the
topic from their website?
I recently reviewed an article that included results from a survey
of chapters. A key point taken from the article is the fact that
both attendance and the number of chapters are decreasing. Members
are finding are new ways of conducting business and personal development.
For some associations, this trend needs closer examination. At
the same time some associations have not fully explored the potential
and value that chapters can provide.
As associations embrace the centres of excellence and the shared
services concept, planning of services will no longer be done
in isolation by affiliates. Technology has enabled associations
to break distance barriers, allows affiliates to develop common
plans, and gives everyone an opportunity to take advantage of
economies of scale and meet member needs on a timely basis.
What if we don't change our governance representation and try
to improve the affiliate relationship? I recently witnessed the
disappearance of a national professional group. The local groups
did not want to adjust control arrangements to reflect new realities.
The organization is now in a maintenance mode as opposed to a
growth mode. They are not growing in terms of value and the local
groups may eventually disappear as well.
I have often thought the average member's bottom line on representation
would call for the national board and committees to be composed
of those who have the interest and qualifications, and bring unique
perspectives and "big picture strategic thinking" to
help the organization succeed no matter where they are from. There
should be least a dozen directors on a national board. The average
member has no tolerance for poor affiliate relationships and therefore
relationships must be rated at better than average. After all,
associations are public benefit organizations not political ones.
If you think there is room for improvement in your governance
affiliation arrangement and want to tackle one of the biggest
challenges in association management, start defining the problem
or opportunity now.
This column features innovation and practical solutions applied
to challenges, trends, issue and opportunities for the association
community. Column editor Jim Pealow, MBA, CMA, CAE is a consultant
and the Association Management Education Program Lead Instructor/Coach
for CSAE. He can be reached at jim@amces.com.
|
