The Board identified eleven“non-negotiables” to keep in mind during this conversation:
1. All services chapters provide to their members must be targeted toward the full-time, working speaker.
2. All Chapter Board Officers Members (minimum of 5-7) must be NSA members.
3. A member of the Chapter must also be a member of NSA or the International Federation for Professional Speakers (IFFPS).
4. All Chapters will promote NSA National events.
5. No Chapter events will be held within one week before or after a scheduled National meeting (Conference or Convention).
6. Publish and follow appropriate financial policies
7. Reconcile bank statements to accounts monthly and hold an annual review/audit of its books
8. Must have an independent bank account with a minimum two signers
9. Follow an anti-trust compliance statement
10. Follow a conflict of interest statement
11. A Chapter President Succession Plan must be in place.
#2 makes for confusion… 57 what? “Board Officers Members are what?” I read it aloud to see if that would help.. didn’t. Does it mean “All Chapter Members serving as Officers or on the Board of Directors must be NSA members?
#6 Financial policies? please give an example. Publish these policies where?
#9 Is that available on the NSA website?
#10 Is that available on the NSA website
#11 Please post an example of a Chapter President Succession Plan… it sounds so elaborate when lots of time we’re just hoping someone asked will say yes.
I appreciate the interests of NSA and am very supportive. It seems, however, that a published list of non-negotiables just invites attempts to negotiate. I’m not trying to be a troublemaker here, but I really believe if NSA wanted some of these things to happen they would offer some kind of incentive for chapters to do it.
Let me throw out a couple examples: #4 & 5. What incentive is there for chapters to support NSA workshops (oops conferences)? Aside from good will, none. They are wonderful programs that greatly benefit those who attend, but the chapter gets nothing out of it. On top of that, if you look at conference attendance only a very small percentage on NSA members nationwide are participating. This is NOT because someone’s in Utah or Michigan a week earlier or later putting on a local chapter program. This low national attendance percentage being a current reality, how is a ban on all regularly scheduled monthly chapter programs (that may hypothetically happen to fall a week before the workshop) a value add proposition for the chapters or more importantly for the chapters’ members?
For the record, I do promote all NSA national events to my chapter members and to some extent I’m asking this in a devil’s advocate role. None the less, if we really want chapters to pimp national events more, there should be an upside for the chapters. It may be a 10% kickback on all chapter member conference registration fees. It could also be a $1000 reward (underwritten by a sponsor) paid to the chapter with the most conference participants. Perhaps a 10% discount on the chapter president’s event registration for each chapter member s/he gets to sign up. Maybe it’s a non-monetary incentive. They are often just as compelling.
I mainly bring this up to convey the idea that now and in the future we must establish behavioral systems and processes that encourage desired outcomes and discourage undesired outcomes. Written lists and policy statements aren’t enough. Carrot-based incentives seem to be much more effective in volunteer organizations than are their distant stick-based cousins.
Susan, some of the documents referenced above are part of the annual chapter re-affiliation agreement packet.
Keep Smilin’
Marty
I assume statement #2 really should be ‘7′ not ‘57′.
Is that correct?
In statement #11, is that requirement satisfied by
having a President-Elect, or Vice President identified
to proceed the current President?
Yes, thank you, that should say 7 not 57 board members for #2.
Regarding #1, how , exactly, does anyone check (or even want to) that someone is a “full-time working speaker” (i.e., $50K per year from speaking)?
Avoiding conflicts with National events seems to make sense, but a week before and after seems unnecessary and unwise to me. The conventions and conferences are extremely valuable, and while we probably don’t want to compete with them by holding our own events at the same time (we go to great lengths to avoid that in our chapter), shouldn’t our choice be based on the free market system here. The quality and value of the conferences are good for the money, then people will come. If not, we will stay home. I understand that two NSA events close together would force people to choose which to do that month, but don’t people have to choose every month between NSA activities and other options?
What is meant by “sucession plan?” Like Susan, it seems to me that that is the reason for the president-elect and other executive committee jobs.
Regarding the “two-signers” requirement, if this is implying two signers per check, then that is too burdensome and unnecessary. We have two signatures on the ACCOUNT, including the treasurer and secretary, which may be all this is requiring. Also, we have a system of checks and balances in place which serves the same purpose as having two signers per check and would satisfy any auditor. The person writing the checks does not receive or open the bank statements from the bank, so the check signer does not have an opportunity to fudge or hide anything. Also, our administrator balances the books every month and we conduct an internal audit each year.
How would a 57 member board work? Interesting non negotiable!
The benefits would most likely be you would never have a quorum and then could never meet as a board?
John
Regarding #1 again, it would be helpful to have some examples of programming and services that DO and DO NOT target the full-time, working speaker (no chapter names, of course). I think this would help meet this “non-negotiable” and help assure consistency and quality.
Let’s focus on culture building. Every policy, standard, and institutionalized practice in time shapes an organization’s culture. If the Spirit of Cavett is the culture we want, then everything we do should support that.
We are all autonomous speakers who work together to build a bigger pie for everyone. We all choose to be bound by an agreed upon code of ethics, but we do not try to tell one another how they must operate their business. Instead, we offer suggestions and best practices that are compelling enough (because of the benefit they will create) that we adopt the process.
If this works so well for our own businesses I recommend we keep it that way for our chapters as well. We agree upon a limited list of ideals that form an organizational credo. Beyond that, we allow chapters to continue operating independently. When national want’s the chapters to do something (not have a meeting that prevents members from attending Winter Conference, for example), find a way of presenting the idea with enough internal value that the chapters will voluntarily comply (because of the benefit it generates).
At the request of some who have read my earlier post, let me flesh this example out a little more to illustrate my point: NSA gets $495 for each member who attends a conference. A chapter gets $20-40 for each member who attends a local meeting. National could easily make it worth a chapters while to cancel their meeting and encourage people to attend instead by following these two simple steps:
1-Give the chapter $40 for every chapter member who attends a conference. This encourages chapters to promote the event and get everyone who can possibly afford it to go. I don’t mind paying my admin a 10% bonus for booking me with someone because I’m getting 90% I otherwise might not have had. Same is true for chapters. This removes the financial incentive for a chapter to hold their own meeting.
2-Offer a $40 live webinar (with a 50/50 chapter revenue split) of 2 power-packed hours of the conference. Chapters can show this at their monthly meeting that would have conflicted with the conference or cancel their meeting outright and allow their members to log in and participate live from home. Either way, the chapter is still able to provide great content to their members (who could not have attended the conference) and they still get the same $20 profit per head they would have gotten from a regular meeting. Wow, this becomes a no-brainer for me as a chapter president or program chair. I get the same money but don’t have to do the work to put on a meeting. For NSA it’s also great advertising of what a member could get next time around from attending the WHOLE conference.
Both parties get what they want and nobody feels forced into doing something they didn’t want to do. Everyone feels like we are in fact making a bigger pie.
Keep Smilin’
Marty
Immediate Past President
NSA Mt West
I have been a CSP member of NSA since 1984 and have been the Executive Secretary of the Carolinas Chapter for over 22 years. There are many things that concern me in the white paper:
1. The chapter is the HEART of NSA and our chapter has a rich history. NSA/Carolinas have always followed NSA rules and never experienced many of the concerns presented in the paper. In our 26 year history, we have had six former NSA presidents and currently have 32% of our members who are CSPs or CPAEs. Why are we this strong? Because we raised the bar, for the chapter, to provide benefits for NSA and NSA/C members who have a career in the professional speaking, training and consulting business We do allow guests to attend our meetings at a higher registration rate but membership is reserved for the serious speaker.
2. I am amazed to see that only 75.8% of chapter members are NSA members. Bill Brooks, CSP, CPAE used to say, “The AMA will not let you in if you aren’t already a doctor” so why would our association want to open up “membership” for people who are not fully committed to a full time career in the speaking business? All of these creative memberships, from chapters, which does nothing more than enhance income, has taken these chapters away from the focus of Cavett’s mission – which is to provide members benefits at a local level. If we continue to move away from that focus, we become nothing more than a social club.
3. NSA needs to allow successful chapters to function with the things that work best for their demographics,and their members’ needs. If NSA membership is the key to entry into a chapter, we enhance the mother ship from the very beginning. I find it very difficult to believe that NSA will be able to “provide adminstration invoicing, gathering of dues as well as providing chapters current membership information.” If the chapter leaders are doing their jobs, they should be up to date on all these administrative tasks. Yes, our chapter has an executive secretary to centralize all activities for the board members and it is a compensated position. I am that person. Thus, I know the amount of work it takes to keep up with members, their requests, and field of questions from prospective members daily. Can NSA provide that to our chapter’s expected level of efficiency? I don’t think so.
4. It appears we are seriously planning to alter the entire relationship between chapters and NSA. For some members, this action may encourage them to start meeting on their own and dropping NSA membership. Why not? If NSA membership is taken this lightly by the chapters, why bother to be involved in NSA at all? People may just start their own “clubs.”
5. I encourage NSA and it’s current chapter leadership to re-assess these new directions and go back to the basics. To wit, if you can’t have chapters that run only with NSA members, then let the chapters fold and become more involved with the NSA meetings and offerings held throughout the year. The chapters who are successful need not be brought down for those that are bending the rules to make it appear they are really a “functioning” chapter.
Laura Hamilton, CSP
I think that offering financial incentives back to the chapters for promoting national events is a bit over-reaching. It’s referral for profit not for the real value someone can gain by attending. I think going in that direction is going against the spirit of cavett.
Personally, I do not believe profit sharing WITHIN an association is referral for profit nor do I believe it goes against the Spirit of Cavett. Do we believe NSA is going against the Spirit of Cavett by charging for conventions and conferences. Of course not. We (meaning NSA) make money from these events that is used to promote, grow & operate NSA, but this is NOT the reason we recommend them to our fellow speakers.
NSA and her chapters must be seen as inseparable in mission. They are parts of the same organization. NSA chapters are an essential part of the Spirit of Cavett–run by volunteers who are committed to the value NSA offers professional speakers. The chapter is where the culture of NSA (that is the Spirit of Cavett) connects and unites speakers on a monthly basis.
I promote NSA membership and attendance at national events without any expectation of financial gain–because it can add value for the speaker I’m promoting it to. Many of my speaker friends and I refer one another to clients for the exact same reasons. Many chapters, including my own, already promote national programs for this same reason.
The suggestion of disallowing chapter programs within a week of a national event, however, is the manifestation of a zero sum belief. Some propose this ban on chapter programs because they believe it will increase national event attendance. All I’m suggesting is that if the goal is getting more people to Nashville, rather than FORCING all chapters to cancel a program to affect this end, we should find a win-win COOPERATIVE solution that will actually work,
Some members can make it to Nashville and others cannot. Whether there is a chapter meeting or not, there are many who just can’t make it. This is a fact. What we want to do is to identify the X% who could make it, but otherwise would not. These are the ones a chapter can help us find and register. The only competing value at the chapter level is they are charged with providing value to the members who just can’t make it, too.
It is not that the chapter wants to be paid for searching out and registering those who could attend. It is that chapters operate on a much tighter budget than NSA corporate or any of our own businesses. With limited volunteer hours and other resources, they realistically will not get around to doing this unless something encourages them to do it. We know this because it’s not being done now.
A revenue share, especially in conjunction with a webinar program (demonstrating the quality & value of the conference) for those who truly can’t make it this time provides a stimulus for the chapter volunteers to do something different than what they’ve always done. There is no conflict of interest in the profit sharing piece, because NSA and her chapters have the same interest.
The volunteer chapter leaders are not benefiting financially. But NSA (corporate and chapters) are both benefiting: financially and in terms of a larger percentage of members who are receiving the most value they possibly can from their membership. We are creating a bigger pie and extending the reach of the national event all at the same time.
Keep Smilin’
Marty
Marty Val Hill
NSA Mt West Immediate Past President
Chapter Leadership Council (CLC) Member
As I read the responses it occurs to me that NSA might have a great opportunity to support chapters simply by providing any chapter member with a discount to national events. It would give both NSA members and non-NSA members a great incentive (and benefit) to join and support a local chapter.
I can understand the ban on the week before but not the week after. I have always enjoyed chapter meetings that fell shortly after a national convention because it gave everyone that attended the national event a chance to compare notes; share new ideas; and discuss take-aways. Unfortunately, the excitement that members bring back wanes quickly and catching that excitement is important at the chapter level. Having chapter meetings within 1 week following a national event is not only helpful but also encourages and helps raise awareness of the benefits of attending a national event.
Lastly, the idea of programming being “targeted toward the full-time, working speaker” – I would really like to see some guidelines as to what that means: topics, presenters, etc. Our chapter has always done this (I believe) but still, we rarely have CSP’s and CPAE’s of our chapter attend. We need their expertise and mentorship, however there is no incentive for them to take the higher ground as Cavett Robert would have done – so they stay at home.