Can Associations Successfully Create a Culture of Collaboration and Innovation?

Weeding through my email this morning I happened to notice a familiar name in one of the dozens of listserv digests that I routinely delete each morning. The NTEN digest featured a post by Allyson Kapin on "Tips to Create a Culture of Collaboration and Innovation." Allyson Kapin is super smart and "culture of collaboration and innovation" is something that is at the top of my mind recently as a result of ASAE's Innovation Talks day, which has stretched into Innovation Talks months in my world. I've been super busy over the past few months, preparing for my association's annual meeting and launching a new online community and, to be honest, am pretty burnt out on basically everything. I was glad to read her post and feel the old "yes!" feeling--she makes some really good points, and also sheds some light on why associations, in my opinion, are pretty much hard-wired to not succeed at collaboration and innovation.

Oh yeah--in my excitement I'm forgetting to actually share the link to her post: here. Go read it then come back to discuss.

Or if you don't feel like reading the full post now, here's a summary of her main points, and why I feel that associations on the whole fail when it comes to collaboration and innovation:

• Trust Your Staff. Allyson points out that one of the best ways to create a more collaborative environment is to stop relying on consultants so much and start listening more to your own team. She's totally right. But unfortunately, most associations are built on a model of relying heavily on consultants, especially when it comes to implementing new ideas. While that's great for association consultants, it's not great if you're a smart association staff person. Want to foster a culture of employees who are enthusiastic about coming to work, willing to do their jobs plus the extra work involved in trying new, innovative things? Don't farm out the cool new stuff to consultants.
• Don't Shut People Down. Allyson talks about brainstorming and letting everyone having a voice in those conversations. At most associations, the only people who have a seat at any brainstorming table are the senior staff. Think about it--when your association is doing strategic planning or pretty much any strategizing, who's at that table? If everyone on staff does not have a voice in that process, you're missing out, and your association will never be truly collaborative or innovative because some of the best, freshest voices will never get a chance to be heard.
• Host Weekly Interdepartmental Meetings. Allyson points out that, in a culture of collaboration and innovation, teams must be integrated, meaning that people in fundraising, advocacy, marketing, PR, Programs, and Tech should be working together to develop campaigns that are integrated across multiple channels. Is that how your association works, or does each department work in its own silo and want to claim ownership/credit for its own ideas? There is no room for silos in collaboration or innovation. Are you regularly interacting with other teams and working together towards common goals? If you work and meet in a bunch of silos, you're not.
• Seize Opportunities. Allyson points out that it's important to seize opportunities when they arise, particularly when it comes to leveraging current events that relate to the issues your organization works on. She warns not to get stuck in rigid processes and long approval chains. Sadly, associations are pretty much synonymous with rigid processes and long approval chains. Innovation is not possible in an environment dictated by processes, hierarchy, and approval chains.
• Share Successes With The Community. Allyson highlights the importance of sharing successes and failures with the whole staff so everyone can learn from--and be part of--the process. How is information shared at your association? Is the whole staff in the loop on what's going on, or does the senior team meet weekly to keep a pulse on what's going on while the rest of the staff do their jobs in a black hole of not being privy to the big picture and key successes and/or failures? If it's the latter, innovation can never happen because the people doing the work are kept out in the dark with regard to the big picture and key events/dynamics that are the building blocks of innovation.
• Commit to Culture Change and Failing Fast. I'm just going to quote Allyson directly because this one is key:

"While creating a culture of collaboration and innovation within a very traditional and rigid organizational structure can be challenging it can definitely be achieved. But, make no mistake it requires a major culture change within the entire organization that must be led from the top. Senior management must focus on breaking down the silos in the organization to have more of an open culture and leadership."

Is your association's senior team on board with breaking down the organization's very structure and starting from scratch? And embracing a culture of open-ness? How about involving the whole staff in the process? And failure--how is your organization set up to handle failure? Are there processes in place to recognize when past successes are no longer successes? And/or to measure new successes and failures?

So am I being overly pessamistic or, based on these key points, does it seem to you associations on the whole are pretty much doomed to NOT do any of these things and, therefore, not be able to create a culture of collaboration and innovation?

Thankful

Lest I let the opportunity for the cliched "What am I thankful for" blog post roll by, I am muddling through my post-ASHA convention and now sick stupor to try to write a coherent post about what I'm thankful for. Since lists are easier than prose, I'll make it easier on all of us and go with a list of five things I'm thankful for this year:

1. My health. Yes, I did just say that I'm sick right now and I am, but at least I'll be better in a day or two. This past year has definitely proven that the older you get, the more precious good health becomes. So many friends have been affected by cancer this year, either battling it themselves or losing loved ones to it. Cancer is pure evil, as are the other ailments various friends have had to suffer through this year. Lupus is the main one that comes to mind, as I watch my friend Stephanie Kennedy battle it daily via Twitter and Facebook. So here's to enjoying good health every minute you have it.
2. My family. Somehow my teenaged children were more entertaining than they were obnoxious this year, so that's good. And I still have a year left until I have to deal with being the parent of a kid who can drive. And who wouldn't be thankful for an adorable husband like Patrick McGary, who cooks, cleans AND is always willing to talk about association stuff?
3. Pinterest. Ok, not as profound as health and family, but seriously, have you seen Pinterest yet? So fun. Since this blog is about social media, I have to throw in something social media-related, and Pinterest is by far my favorite new thing in that realm.
4. Friends. Having just returned from a visit with two of my favorite friends who unfortunately I only get to see every few years, I'm extra thankful for friends both near and far, "real life" and online. Yes, I do have great friends who I have yet to meet in real life but still consider them to be friends. But this year in addition to the visit I just mentioned with my Cali friends, I've traveled to England to visit a great friend, gotten to spend time with my sister who lives too far away, and am gearing up for girls weekend with my best friends from college next weekend. I've made new local friends and tried to be better about actually spending time with them offline. And of course, I've also spent WAY too much time hanging out with real-yet-virtual friends in private Facebook groups and other places...but hey, I'm trying to be offline more.
5. This blog and you. While writing in a private journal is fun, I admit there's something to be said for writing stuff that people actually read. I am deeply thankful for the people who read this blog, and who share the stuff I write. I am particularly thankful for Kiki L'Italien who regularly shares my posts on her weekly Delcor Social Media Sweetspot show--she makes me feel super famous and important.
6. I know I said this was going to be a list of five things, but one thing I'm seriously thankful for is the fact that Blogger FINALLY added the ability to have links open in a new window!! This will make no sense to you unless you use the Blogger platform, but as someone who's been using it for over five years now and begging for them to add this feature, I am SOOO thankful they finally added it.

Ok, I'll leave it at that--I hope you have an awesome Thanksgiving if you're in the US and an awesome regular Thursday if you're not.

New York Times and Other Excitement

Remember my last post about Klout and privacy issues? Thanks to the fact that my friend Tonia Ries is a  rockstar, the story got picked up by the New York Times, so I will now be able to go down in history--much to my mother's chagrin--as the mom who helped her 13 year old lie to get on Facebook.

At any rate, today I'm off to the ASHA Convention in San Diego, the time of year where I get to actually meet face-to-face with the people with whom I interact on Twitter or otherwise online throughout the year in my capacity as community manager. While I wouldn't mind a shorter flight (I hate flying), I'm sure once I'm there I won't be complaining. About the weather, at least ;).

See you all on the flip side next week.

Why I Don't (Totally) Blame Klout for Privacy Issues

A few weeks ago a friend noticed, when she logged into Klout, that her son was listed as one of the people she influences. She figured it was because her son had recently commented on one of her Facebook posts since her posts are set to public. Curious, I went over to Klout to see who they were listing as people I influence and, lo and behold, there was my son. My 13 year-old son. I clicked on the thumbnail and up popped a Klout profile for him, complete with a score of 26.

I have erased his last name in the interest of privacy (it's not McGary, btw, potential stalkers) but there you have it, what Klout claims they never did: create profiles for unregistered Facebook users. That is exactly what this was--a profile for an unregistered Facebook user, complete with a link to his Facebook profile. Which a friend who I had check it was able to access--I'm guessing because his privacy on Facebook is set to "friends of friends."

Presumably as a result of bloggers bringing the privacy/creating profiles for Facebook users issue to Klout's attention, his profile was short-lived; the following day, Klout updated it's privacy features and, while the thumbnail of his photo--still with a score of 26--remained on my profile as a person I influence, when I clicked on it, instead of opening a profile, it just linked to an "invite your Facebook friends to Klout" app in Facebook. Since then Klout has further clarified the Facebook/Twitter profile thing by adding an "invite friends" tab with separate links to "Twitter friends" and "Facebook friends."

Now don't get me wrong--I still think Klout is BS. Especially with the recent shitstorm when Klout changed its algorithm and scores across the board plummeted. But do I think they meant to exploit minors by creating profiles for them? No. To be honest, if I were to blame anyone, I'd have to blame myself. Facebook's TOS say users have to be 14 to create a profile--so why is my son--a 13 year-old, even on Facebook? Because I let him. And because he, as millions of other kids do on Facebook, doesn't use his real age. So shoot me--I let my kids watch rated R movies and I let my 13 year-old be on Facebook. Do I think it's right that Klout was creating profiles for unregistered Facebook users? No. But were they specifically targeting minors? I would hope not.

I will say, however, that I think they need to revisit their privacy policy towards children--I don't really get the disparity between "this site is not directed at persons under 18" and "We do not knowingly collect personally identifiable information from children under 13." How about not knowingly collecting information for anyone under 18 since the site is not directed at persons under 18?

Google+ Pages: My First Impressions

Earlier today Google made a big to-do about announcing that the ability to create Pages had launched. Then they took it back and said that the functionality was "coming soon" for everyone, and only available now to select few. Then later they announced, no, really, Pages are live for everyone. Talk about an annoying beginning.

But of course I had to try it to see what all the fuss was about--and you can too.

Here are my first impressions about Google+ Pages:

• I am totally underwhelmed. I still don't get the Circle concept for personal use; I get it even less from a company POV.
• It seems very redundant of Facebook. Shocker, I know, but seriously--what is it other than a Facebook page circa 3 years ago, albeit way more confusing? I say circa 3 years ago because that was back when you had to create a Facebook page via your personal account and pages were inextricably linked to personal profiles.
• Apparently there are some issues with pages being able to add people to Circles. I honestly do not get Circles so I can't weigh in on that either way--I just created the page to see how it worked; I'm not worrying about fans/followers/circles at this point.
• The only thing about Google+ pages that seems promising at this point is the hangout feature. I could see that being useful.
• For now the only way to create a custom url for your Google+ page is via gplus.tohttp://gplus.to/

That's all I've got for now; what do you think of Google+ page functionality? A game-changer or a yawner?

Associations' 15 Minutes of Fame Courtesy of Herman Cain

So even a total political non-participant like me (read: I do not vote and think politics as a whole is a crooked, crazy mess) can't help but pay a tiny bit of attention to this Herman Cain thing because of the association tie-in. I mean, seriously--how often do associations get huge news coverage that talks about governance, staffing, internal politics and more? Not too often. I constantly have to explain what an association even is, let alone the whole bit about volunteer leaders versus staff, etc. But today, there it is, above the fold in the Washington Post: an article detailing Cain's time as first head of the National Restaurant Association's board then as the association's chief executive. The article talks about the challenges of running an association, balancing the needs of staffers, board members and state associations. All real challenges for association execs, and good for the general public to know about to better understand how associations run.

But obviously the point of the article isn't to give the average person an overview of how an association exec's job works, nor just to detail the inner workings of an association. Sadly, this whole Cain scandal is shining a very unflattering light on associations--the lavish perks Cain enjoyed at the expense of members, including a lavish DC apartment, weekly first-class trips back to his wife in Omaha, schmoozing poolside and wining and dining--oh, and allegedly sexually harassing female colleagues. Hopefully not an accurate portrayal of most association execs, but there it is--the association world's latest 15 minutes of fame, and it's pretty much all bad.

Bad PR for the association industry as a whole, and especially bad for the National Restaurant Association. Their Facebook page is being slammed with complaints and demands that the women who signed confidentiality agreements in exchange for accepting (huge) monetary settlements for their sexual harrassment claims against Cain while he was head of the association be released from those agreements. Aside from being a PR and social media nightmare, it's also an association nightmare. I mean, legally, can an association even release people from confidentiality agreements that have already been executed and paid? Is it even up to the association to decide to release the women from the agreements? Not being either an executive, a lawyer or a CAE, I don't know the answer to that question...all I do know is that I don't envy the job of the social media or PR people at the National Restaurant Association right now.

I'm sure the posts are coming--if not already out there--about how the National Restaurant Association is failing in terms of crisis response to this situation. They are still posting to their Facebook page--but not about Cain. They are not responding to any questions or comments. As a fellow association social media person, I get it. Sticky situation, social media person not empowered to act or speak on behalf of the organization, this is a VERY sticky legal situation and not something they're allowed to comment on--from their POV, I get that and I sympathize. But it doesn't change the reality that social media is a give and take proposition. An association, company, brand, person--you name it--can't launch a Facebook page just to tick the "we have a Facebook page" box and not be prepared to deal with situations like these. Situations like these happen--this is happening right now. And unfortunately in terms of social media, the association is getting an F in terms of handling the crisis.

At the VERY LEAST, a canned statement about how they're working on it, discussing with lawyers, can't comment, appreciate the input, SOMETHING...anything would be better than what they're doing which is worse than nothing: continuing to post to the page but not anything about the Cain situation. At the barest minimum, just abandon the freaking page while you're waiting this situation out. Continuing to spit out daily posts like "Industry posts more job growth, figures show" (today), "SFCI pilot program at ATL airport wins green award" (yesterday) and "Illinois Dennys franchisee dishes up conservation" (Wednesday) is just adding insult to injury. It's like blurting out "how about them Redskins?" at a funeral or something. If you have to go to radio silence because the situation demands it, that's understandable, if not great...but silence is better than nervous chatter that nobody cares about right now.

Why I Know the Kardashian Wedding Was a Sham

The beauty of having your own blog is that you can blog about whatever you want, whether or not it's on topic. So, while technically this blog is about social media, who's to say I can't blog about Kim Kardashian's divorce? Nobody! So here I go.

If you read this blog you know I'm obsessed with movies. I go to the movies usually at least once a week, plus watch a decent number of them at home. What you may not know is that I'm a particular fan of documentaries--much to the chagrin of my husband and kids, who are not fans. Pretty much doesn't matter the subject matter is--I just like them. Even though I am a fast food indulger, I loved Super Size Me (makes me crave McDonald's food every single time I watch it--go figure). So when I heard a while ago that Morgan Spurlock was making a new film about product placement, I couldn't wait to see it. Sadly I missed it in the theater, but luckily it's now at Redbox.

By the way, I'm getting to the Kardashian part...this is relevant.

So anyway, a few weeks ago I watched--and loved--The Greatest Movie Ever Sold. I loved it because I like knowing how things work behind the scenes and, as you know if you read this blog, I like to know when I'm being sold to. Don't get me wrong--I'm a marketer's dream and buy a ton of stuff, but I like to know when I'm being marketed to. That's why I'm rabid about transparency and disclosure when it comes to blogging. If you haven't seen The Greatest Movie Ever Sold, I highly recommend it.

So onto the Kardashian part. Yes, I watch Keeping up with the Kardashians and every spin-off show they spew out. Hey--I have a 15 year-old daughter and she watches it--it's her fault! It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that the Kardashians are the epitome of product placement and non-disclosure. I mean, who could forget the whole $10k per tweet thing, totally undisclosed and totally untouched by the FTC, despite their regulations? Is it really such a mystery that the whole Kardashian empire is about product placement--some disclosed and some not? While I suspected that the whole wedding thing was just a big commercial and the actual marriage would last mere months, I chided myself for being jaded and figured I'd be proven wrong.

But I wasn't. If you watched the two-hour wedding show--not to mention the several part Bora Bora episodes leading up to the wedding--you could tell the whole thing was fake and just a mechanism for raking in some huge bucks via product placement. The Bora Bora trip? Basically a commercial for the Bora Bora Nui Resort & Spa. You think they paid for that trip? Please. Then the $10 million wedding. I know I don't have to tell you that they not only didn't have to spend a dime of that $10 million, but MADE money off the deal to boot, right?

So seriously--the whole thing was just a ruse to add to the Kardashian's already crazy making-money-for-doing-nothing lifestyle....as reported by my trusty Us Magazine, Kim Kardashian brought in $65 million in 2010 alone off product endorsements. So sanctity of marriage my ass--the marriage we're all so shocked is over after only 72 days (and yes, even though I called it, I admit I, too, was shocked to hear I was actually right and they were already divorcing) was never a real marriage to begin with; it was one huge, very lucrative real-life commercial.

Oh, and be forewarned...apparently the younger Kardashian girls are all set to step into their big sisters' ways....Kendall's sweet 16 party will be paid for--I mean broadcast on E!

Please Help Me Raise Funds for The Children's Inn at NIH Through Give to the Max Day

I blog because I love writing. Period. Through blogging I've met cool people and been offered cool opportunities, but have never had a chance to use my blog to give something back. Until now, that is.

Enter Give to the Max Day. Give to the Max Day is a one-day fundraising event on November 9, 2011 that will unite local Maryland, Virginia and Washington, DC communities to support nonprofits serving the area. The goal of the event is to get thousands of local residents to support their favorite regional charity, in hopes of raising millions in donations and grants in just 24 hours.

I'm lucky to be involved with Give to the Max day as an "activator"--an online advocate who has volunteered to help raise awareness of the event, and to help spread the word about both Give to the Max Day and some of the participating nonprofits. I have chosen to try to raise funds for an area nonprofit that I feel is deserving of some major attention and funds: the Children's Inn at NIH.

I know how blessed I am to have two healthy kids, and I know that not everyone is as lucky as I am. Way back in February I read this article in the Washington Post about the Children's Inn at NIH. It talked about how the Children's Inn is a place where kids with rare, often deadly diseases can come in a last-ditch attempt to be treated and, hopefully, cured. It's a place where their families can stay while the kids receive treatment, where they can live in much more comfort than that afforded by hospital and/or hotel rooms, and where they can bond with families going through the same horrible struggles. Some kids recover while being treated at NIH; some don't.

So, do me a favor if you would be so kind: please visit my fundraising page for the Children's Inn at NIH. Watch the video. Share the link. And, if you are so moved, please donate. On Give to the Max Day there will be prizes awarded to fundraisers who garner the most individual donations--together we could win up to $10,000 for the Children's Inn!