Making the Decision

Some people join associations, and some people don't. But why? It's a puzzle that association executives have longed to solve—and a survey of more than 16,000 association members, nonmembers, and former members may have the answers they've been looking for.

James Dalton and Monica Dignam

Why do some people join associations while others don’t? The massive response to an ASAE & The Center study provides new, and often unexpected, insights.

The decision to join an association is more accurately a decision to affiliate. The term "join" implies jumping in, like a party in a pool. "Affiliate" means more than that; it incorporates the notion of shared identity. When people affiliate, they let the world around them know that they share an important quality with a group. It's not so much a purchase as it is an exchange that starts with identity but eventually evolves into a shared commitment to some common purpose.

ASAE & The Center's new book The Decision to Join provides the information we need to look at why members decide to affiliate with others in a common cause. What—in the grand scheme of things—sets apart those who choose to be part of an association at some point in their careers from those who never choose to do so? And is there some way to appeal to those in the nonjoiner camp—and possibly convince them to switch sides?

A Powerful Study

For the Decision to Join study, 18 individual membership organizations pooled their resources to create a diverse population of people who are, were, or could be but never chose to become members of an association. The intent was to replicate a similar survey conducted by ASAE in the 1980s. But fundamental differences between that research study and this current one limit the opportunity to compare findings. The original study had less than 1,000 responses, which was enough for significance as a whole but not large enough to study different decision-making patterns in smaller segments, such as entry-level professionals versus senior-level managers. With 16,944 responses, the 2007 survey opened the door to a vast amount of segmenting.

A subtle difference separates these two studies in a far more significant way: The original survey did not examine respondents' affiliations with associations other than the one that provided their names. The effect that this omission had on the suitability of the 1981 data is responsible for a misnomer in the use of the term "nonmember." Think of it this way: When respondents from a sponsoring association's nonmember population identify themselves as a current member of some other association, they are not really an association nonmember because they have, in fact, demonstrated their belief in the value of association membership through their decision to join one. That they are a member of Society A rather than Society B is a footnote in the larger scheme of understanding the decision to join.

The 2007 study, in contrast, was able to aggregate respondents into a normative database that includes current members of any association, former members of an association who are not currently members of any, and a rare but important population of those who have never joined any association. With this information, a study of the decision to join can account for the respondents' full range of association experience.

Attitudes Toward Associations

When asked about their attitude toward associations in general, 37 percent of current association members give it the highest rating on a five-point scale. Nearly the same percentage of former members and those who have never been members of any association each gave that same "very favorable" rating; the total was 10 percentage points lower than those of current members (27.3 percent and 28.7 percent, respectively). All three populations were nearly identical in terms of the percent that indicate a "very unfavorable" attitude. If this were politics, voter attitudes toward associations would be said to carry strong favorable ratings with very low negatives—excellent field position to have, because negatives are barriers that must be removed before positive messages have a chance of getting through.

When the questioning moves to the more discerning matter of whether or not respondents believe associations are capable of addressing the practical needs of individual members, the percentage giving the most positive rating drops substantially for current members. Only 28.4 percent of current members gave a five to this question, while 21.8 percent of former members and 25.3 percent of "never members" did so.

While differences among the three populations on this question may seem modest, they are statistically significant and raise two noteworthy points. That an association is "capable of addressing the practical needs of members" is one of the fundamental assumptions that underlies the decision to join. The fact that never members are fairly close to current members on this means the marketing challenge of moving them into the fold should be something associations can overcome. It further substantiates the favorable position associations seem to have.

However, former members are as far from never members as never members are from current members. This introduces a theme that is reinforced throughout the survey findings: One disappointing association experience casts a negative shadow over future invitations to join. In other words, a former member of one association who has not joined another is, by virtue of that experience, harder for any association to recruit.

Priorities, Needs, and Challenges

All three segments—current members, former members, and never members—shared important similarities. Networking, technical information, and professional development are among the most important association functions to all segments studied, and these three populations reflect that shared perception, showing no significant differences in the high ratings they give these factors as important in the decision to join. But the groups differ significantly with regard to other association functions:

• Former members indicate lower importance for "timely information about their field or profession" than do current or never members, both of whom share a similar and much higher estimation.
• Former members assign a higher level of importance to "creating and disseminating standards of practice," and this is the only function that they rate higher than the others do.
• Current members think government affairs and public affairs are more important than either of the other groups, with never members distinguishing themselves in the much lower importance rating they give this function.
• Certification is the only function that current members rate lower than the other two groups.

When asked to rate the importance of generic environmental challenges that many professions face—such as "inadequate recognition of the value delivered by the profession or discipline to the larger society," "an expanding body of knowledge," and "inadequate supply of capable professionals"—and the effectiveness of associations in dealing with those top challenges, respondents' answers provided interesting insights:

• Never members are less concerned with the public's recognition of a profession.
• Former members are less concerned about keeping up with an expanding body of knowledge.
• Never members are less concerned with a challenging regulatory environment or with issues having to do with pending legislation. They are more concerned about achieving high-quality outcomes and with an inadequate supply of capable professionals.

These facts seem to imply that individuals who have never been a member of any association may be more concerned with factors that affect their immediate surroundings or experience and less concerned with challenges affecting the good of the order.

Several other differences are worth noting but warrant little commentary, either because they speak for themselves or are not explained by other findings:

• Never members are less apt to be found in the private sector, as opposed to academic, nonprofit, or government employment.
• Never members are more likely to be found in entry-level positions (this is also a function of age).
• Former members are more likely to be females and are more likely to be employed by organizations that don't pay dues.

The Decision to Join and You

While the information presented above is only a small portion of the full results of the Decision to Join study, we hope it will be helpful for your association as you plan for member recruitment and retention.

The decision to affiliate is about identity—a new member deciding that he or she has certain qualities in common with your association. It does not hinge solely on a cost-benefit calculation. Rather, the choice to affiliate reflects an appreciation that goes beyond self-oriented assessment to include an assessment of value generated for a community of interests. Individuals get value and, for no additional cost, generate value for those who share a common bond. In effect, this realization expands the spectrum of benefits, and everyone offering the decision to join must understand this balance of personal and "good- of-the-order" benefits that fundamentally influence affiliation and participation.

James Dalton is president of Strategic Counsel, Derwood, Maryland. Monica Dignam is vice president of industry research for ASAE & The Center. This article was adapted from their book The Decision to Join, which will be available at ASAE & The Center's Annual Meeting, August 11-14 in Chicago, as well as through www.asaecenter.org. Emails: jgdalton@aol.com, mdignam@asaecenter.org

home | calendar | publications | directories