home > publications & resources

For some association executives and volunteers, rethinking governance is based on gut instinct. For others it stems from an acute awareness that things aren't running as smoothly as they used to. And for others, it's triggered by a rude awakening that comes in the form of declining membership and decreased revenues.

For a variety of reasons, associations are dramatically restructuring governance. According to Glenn Tecker, president and CEO of Tecker Consultants, Trenton, New Jersey, there are two types of signs that it's time to rethink association structure and governance. The first type is tangible: a decrease in membership, a financial crisis, a decline in participation in association activities, the advent of a new competitor, or the migration of members to other organizations. The second type of sign is intangible. Says Tecker, "It's an impression that the organization is losing its energy and attractiveness....Some of that will be anecdotal evidence, such as comments you get from people, or comments you used to get but aren't getting any longer."

Associations that have been through the governance restructuring process have discovered several benefits. Common results of a well-implemented initiative are the opportunity to increase efficiency and become more responsive to member needs, the ability to make volunteer service more meaningful, and the ability to respond more fully to environmental changes.

Streamlining to increase efficiency

If it's business as usual at your association, it may be time to rethink how your association is governed and why. The very act of questioning the status quo often provides insight and enables an association to maintain its relevance to members in an ever-changing environment.

For the Indiana CPA Society, Indianapolis, it was simply a sense that things weren't working as well as they had at one time, plus a desire to increase efficiency, that led the board to complete a self-evaluation. The exercise resulted in changing the association from a bureaucracy to what its president and chief executive officer, Gary Bolinger, CAE, calls an "adhocracy." Explains Bolinger, "If we've got an issue, we find some people--whether it be staff, volunteers, or a combination thereof--and we run with it. We try to make a decision as quickly as possible." He cites an example: "Last year we established a project team to embark on a specific legislative agenda. Team members were appointed in May of last year, and by May of this year, the legislative initiative...was over. So we don't have a government relations committee anymore."

Association consultant Harrison Coerver, Jr., president, Harrison Coerver & Associates, Dennis, Massachusetts, applauds this just-in-time method of association management. According to Coerver, when decisions can't be made quickly, it's often an indication that the board is not on top of trends and is not doing a good job of anticipation. If that's the case, it's time to rethink governance.

For the CPA Society, speeding up the decision-making process required reducing the number of standing committees--from 27 to 4. The society now uses project teams, which are assembled based on the areas of interest and expertise of members and staff. The teams tackle narrowly defined tasks that are often of short duration.

The Country Music Association, Nashville, also brought down its governance size. Previously CMA had 14 standing committees and 18 task forces and subcommittees. The association now has eight standing committees and five task forces--also the result of a board self-evaluation completed in July 2000. According to Ed Benson, executive director, the board identified the "need to be able to react more spontaneously on things that can't wait for the next board meeting." Filling that need required a reduction in governance groups.

Revamping to increase responsiveness

Another advantage of rethinking governance is that the association can identify ways to be more responsive to member needs. To provide a way for members to remain involved even though the number of committees was decreased, the CPA Society created a leadership cabinet composed of 1.5 percent of the society's membership (approximately 100 people). This group is charged with identifying important issues and trends within the profession and sharing this information with management and directors. Members of the cabinet are appointed by the board and represent a cross-section of the membership. Because the cabinet is demographically representative of the membership, it is able to identify--and respond to--emerging member needs.

The cabinet meets twice yearly for a day and a half. The group engages in breakout sessions designed to foster dialogue and hears presentations on issues of importance to CPAs. "It's getting tremendous evaluations from participants," says Bolinger. "We actually have created a waiting list for this particular group, which I don't recall having with any committee over the past several years."

Reinventing to increase meaning

As volunteer leaders face increased demands on their time, they are less willing to spend time in unproductive meetings where they redo committee work, hear lengthy updates, or rubber-stamp decisions that have already been made. Today's leaders want to be challenged with more than administrative work.

Although the time issue is often cited by members as a reason for not serving on association boards or committees, Coerver encourages association executives to read between the lines. "You really have to listen," he emphasizes, "because they're not saying they don't have time. Everybody in America has time for things that they find interesting, challenging, and useful. So we have to ask ourselves, to what extent are we really challenging our board? Is it interesting, meaningful kinds of work that we're giving them? That's what people have time for."

Glenn Tecker agrees. "The nature of what the leaders spend their time talking about has to be substantively related to real issues that have meaning to their industry or profession. The way in which they address those issues has to be an enjoyable experience."

During its self-evaluation, the board members of the Country Music Association realized they needed to make better use of their time. As a result, the association's board meetings were reformatted and are now divided into three major sections: key committee meetings; a period for the board to examine strategic issues; and a business portion during which the board takes action. New to the mix is bringing in outside resource people and speakers to talk about the critical issues facing the country music industry. Not only does this help focus the board on creating and fulfilling a strategic vision, it also provides personal value to board members. Notes Benson, "The idea is to use the time when they are together to focus on strategic governance and major issues and not spend a lot of time hearing updates and reports and doing routine business."

To keep board members updated between meetings and create additional value for board members, CMA created a password-protected Web site for them. Says Benson, "They use it to stay up to date with what's going on, to communicate with one another, and to get notices about meetings. E-mail bulletins are also sent between meetings, minimizing the need for updates at board meetings."

Not only are associations reevaluating what they are asking volunteers to do, some groups are also examining the length of time they are asking members to serve in various positions. Says Bolinger, "People have a hard time thinking ahead three months, let alone three years." This observation led the society to make a subtle change in board service. Board terms, which used to be three years, are now two years, with an opportunity to be reelected for one year. The change is recent enough that Bolinger hasn't had time to assess response to it. But the change minimizes up-front member commitment, and volunteers who find they can't complete a three-year tour of duty can make a graceful exit.

Restructuring to respond to change

Five years ago, during a strategic planning retreat, the board of directors of the Illinois Health Care Association (IHCA), Springfield, identified assisted-living facilities as a possible new membership market. At the time, the organization represented nursing facilities, skilled pediatric facilities, and community programs and facilities for developmentally disabled people. The board agreed that before they would extend membership to assisted-living facilities, this group would have to be licensed by the State of Illinois to enable the association to more consistently service this potential membership segment.

Because of its earlier strategic thinking, when Illinois began licensing assisted-living facilities this year, the association was poised and ready to extend membership to this market segment. However, doing so required IHCA to find a way to merge the needs of those in the new membership category with those of the facilities already represented.

Bill Kempiners, IHCA executive director, asked a task force of staff members to figure out how to integrate this new category of membership into the association. Recalls Kempiners, "We started from the premise that we did not want to take away from the services we provided for existing members, but at the same time, we had to recognize that society is changing and we had to change with it."

The task force concluded that the association could not refine its services without redoing the governance structure. "As a result," says Kempiners, "we either had to enlarge our 26-member board or find a different way to provide representation and governance." The association chose the latter. "We came up with a multilevel plan," says Kempiners. The board was reduced from 26 members to 11, and constituency sections, which report to the board, were created. Like the Indiana CPA Society's leadership cabinet, the constituency sections are charged with bringing issues to the board that need attention. Unlike the cabinet, the sections are not demographically representative; instead, they are based on geography and interest.

Don't just plan it--broadcast it

Regardless of the reasons behind, or results of, rethinking governance, executives interviewed for this article agree that a successful restructuring requires a Herculean communication effort. Often, communicating the details of a restructure initiative takes more time and energy than actually implementing the initiative.

"I'm a very firm believer that in any change effort you've got to have a pretty thoughtful communication plan in place," says Bolinger. After his organization's plan was established, the communication process began with an invitation-only meeting of the society's past presidents. Unbelievably, 30 of the 35 past presidents showed up. Feedback from this formidable group regarding the impending change included comments like, "It's about time," and "I wish I would have thought of that."

After winning the support of past leadership, the society moved on to the leadership of its 27 standing committees and 10 chapters because, notes Bolinger, "basically, we were giving them a pink slip." Although there was more resistance at this level, there also seemed to be relief that the society was choosing to set its own course rather than waiting for the winds of change to determine its path.

A presentation software program came in handy for Bolinger and his change team. After meeting with the committees and chapters, reports Bolinger, "we got in our car with our PowerPoint [presentation], our data, and our recommendations and traveled all over the state and invited members to come. We said, 'This is what we're doing, what do you think?'"

Val Donnelly, executive director of the Rhode Island Dental Association, Warwick, also used presentation software to outline her association's restructure plan, which included reducing the size of its house of delegates, decreasing the number of house meetings, and lowering the number of councils and committees. In addition, she notes that the chairman of the restructure committee was chosen not only for his ability to lead, but also for his ability to articulate to the board and the house of delegates what the committee was recommending and why.

As chairman of the governance structure task force for the American Dental Association (ADA), Chicago, Leo Finley, Jr., Riverdale, Illinois, plans to capitalize on the value of communication as well. While the association has visited the governance issue several times during the past 20 years, none of the resulting recommendations for change have been approved by the association's governing body. Rather than working quietly behind closed doors, the task force is openly asking for input from various constituencies. The task force developed a list of items for consideration and distributed it for comment to the ADA's board of trustees and officers; members and alternate members of last year's house of delegates; current council and commission members; state and local dental society presidents and executive directors; and other communities of interest.

The open communication is a deliberate effort to build support for the task force's efforts. Finley believes that people support what they help create, and he notes, "We hope this time, because we are inviting as much input as possible, that the membership will feel ownership for what evolves from this process. This is not something being created by the board or the task force alone. We want the membership to feel comfortable with any changes."

Comfortable or not, rethinking association structure and governance not only can result in greater efficiency and responsiveness, but it can also revitalize an association. "I feel really good that we have more people actively engaged in the organization," says Bolinger, of the Indiana CPA Society. Ed Benson, of the Country Music Association, adds, "The concern we had about making volunteer service more meaningful resulted in increased interest in participation on the part of top industry leaders."

The irony is that, by decreasing the number of available positions, some associations have actually heightened participation levels by creating more significant work for fewer volunteers to accomplish. And when an association is able to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of its governance structure and create meaningful work for volunteers at the same time, a brighter future for the organization surely lies ahead.

Mary M. Byers, CAE, is a professional speaker, writer, and strategic planning facilitator based in Chatham, Illinois.

Top ^
To ASSOCIATION MANAGEMENT
To ASAE home