I receive communications from all
over the world. The bright outlook for
our future comes from the many discussions centering on engaging members. PRIVP
Monte Audenart said, referencing an article by PDG Subhash Saraf, an RLI Intl
Board Member from India , “This was an excellent article on engaging members, and I and others thank you for it. When we invited others to join Rotary we promised them something of value for their time and money. We promised them that the benefits of belonging would far outweigh the dues.”
Membership is the foundation of success for R.I. and its influential charitable attribute, The Rotary Foundation (TRF) and is becoming the main topic of discussion. Clubs
are beginning to understand that to retain members; they must engage and
deliver value to them. The engaging
process begins by clubs identifying who they should attract. 1999-2000 RI President Carlos Ravizza said, “. . . we must maintain high standards. If
we begin to simply look for dues-paying members as a means of increasing our
budget, it will severely damage our credibility and signal the end of our
organization.” Clubs throughout the
world are coming to realize this. That
alone makes Rotary’s future brighter.
But
let’s get down to business. R.I. is a
business; not a private social club. Based
on membership estimates mentioned in PRID John Smarge’s presentation before the 2011 International Assembly, during the years 2002-2009, clubs worldwide
had recruited and lost 1.1 million members.
That’s a potential gain in R.I. dues of $55 million US. But that’s not all. Using the averages in the 2011-12 Annual
Report, those lost members represent a potential gain in worldwide TRF
contributions of $150 million US; $43 million from North America alone.
Clubs
can’t retain everybody, but put whatever reasonable retention percentage on
these numbers you like and they still represent pretty high numbers. So here are some questions: Were
not R.I. officers and top management supposed to be minding the store as this
combined potential of $210 million US was walking out? Were our directors, supposedly business,
professional, or community leaders, in la la land massaging each other’s egos when they should have been asking critical business questions and insisting that staff deliver professional responses and recommendations for action?
R.I. is now encouraging clubs’
to deliver value to their members; to engage them. Is R.I. encouraging itself to do the same? Clubs are its members. Is R.I. through its Associates delivering value to them? Engaging them? From past actions, it seems that R.I. is more
interested in its member clubs delivering value to it i.e. get me more dues-paying
members; get me a net gain of one or two members per club; get me more Foundation
contributions, etc. Should not R.I. and
its Associates be approaching clubs with questions like, “How can we help you get . . .?”
Play
with the above numbers all you like, it’s apparent that R.I. should be able to
justify major continuous investment in skilled, professional membership support
and accurate, meaningful measures of effectiveness. But previous R.I. management (senior staff, officers, and directors)
should be ashamed that it took people like me and PRID Smarge to expose how
many members were actually walking out of clubs’ doors and place a potential
US$ value on them; proving that improving retention
percentages is key and that it would be worthwhile for R.I. to put its highest priority on membership, as it should have been doing since at least 2003.