“Association publishing activities function more or less on auto-pilot,” an association consultant told me yesterday in Washington, D.C. “If they’ve always done a magazine, they keep doing a magazine. If they’ve always done books, they’ll keep publishing books. They don’t really think about what it does for them.”
I’m startled and, yet, not. Not startled that that is the case, because that’s largely what I see too. But startled that someone admits it, albeit someone like me, outside an association—working for the industry but not in it.
Communicating with members is something associations have to do. Losing money at it is not.
According to the study the U.S. Chamber of Commerce did a few years ago on what makes associations grow, most do not have profitable publishing programs. Most probably don’t even break even. Publishing is a cost. And, given the current advertising market not to mention the economic climate in general that will certainly continue to be the case. In good times and bad, however, good markets and bad, it won’t get any better for association publishing departments.
Why is that?
First, they don’t go into it—or step back to re-examine once they’ve started—what their ROI goals are and what metrics they’re going to use to see whether they’re achieving them. Off-setting costs is obvious and, no, I’m not saying that they will totally self-liquidate costs much less make a profit. Does the magazine help recruit members? Is it the only tangible benefit many members (checkbook members) receive? Does it buttress the organization’s advocacy efforts, i.e., is it sent to government officials, industry standards bodies and the like? Or better yet, is it hand delivered to those audiences when coverage makes it appropriate? Can it be used in classrooms to help recruit the next generation of members? Is it a leave-behind when the executive director calls on CEOs and other decision makers?
Second, to put it bluntly, a lot of the magazines just aren’t very good. They’re done on a shoe string and it shows. Articles are free. Images are free. Paper is thin. Color is bad. Much of the editorial is about the association—who was elected to the board, when the next big conference will take place, what the president thinks. The editor may be a publishing department of one. And because the department functions largely in a vacuum, there is little push to the Website. The magazine does this, the Website does something else, and they don’t work together.
Third, the publications are not seen as strategic assets. They play little or no part in where the association and its membership are going nor how they will get there. Too often, the publication staff does not sit at the table when strategic planning occurs. They react, they report, they don’t lead.
The excuse that large associations can do this because they have the budget for it doesn’t hold water. Smart associations of all sizes find ways to make their publications, print and online, pay.
- They don’t do anything on auto-pilot. Competition is too tight and dollars too scarce to let programs that touch members become complacent. And doesn’t everything touch members?
- They know exactly what they need to accomplish and have both hard and soft metrics in place to keep them on track.
- They publish good products. This does not have to be expensive. Quality is not cheap, of course, but it takes more in terms of good thinking, commitment and great ideas than dollars.
- Communicating with members is always part of strategic planning because good communications is not reactive. Members need to be apprised of what’s going on but the publications need to be ahead of them. Good association publications [http://www.snaponline.org/public/articles/index.cfm?Cat=5] talk about the challenges members face and offer ideas for solutions. This is part of fulfilling the value proposition and what could be more strategic than that?
