Are we going for quality members or quantity of members?

If quality, then I would think dues would be required if not made higher. I see many professional associations with dues in the $200-400/year range.

If quantity, then removing dues would certainly allow people to decide on an event by event basis on when to particpate with the chapter.

If some are concerned about dues being a barrier to some, then allow all college and grad students to become members for free (that’s our policy in OKC). Another idea would be to offer those right out of school a discount on thier dues.

When you factor in the networking opportunities, as well as the practical information diseminated at monthly lunch meetings, a nominal dues amount(i.e. $25/year) seems like a bargain.

The fees were a deterrent for me. I graduated with an MBA from BYU in 1995. I have been actively involved in volunteering at the Marriott School on an advisory board for years. But paying dues didn’t make sense to me because I knew I wasn’t in the stage of life to be attending monthly meetings. (My volunteer work is mostly done from home.)

BUT — and this is a big but — I probably would have benefited by being a part of the Management Society before now; during all of these years as a stay-at-home mom, I have kept an active network, tried to help people find jobs, mentored students, and, as I said, helped in various ways in the Marriott School (including with internships).

On an indirectly related note, the Marriott School is very interested in recruiting more women to enter its programs. I think little things like removing potential “barriers to entry” for women in the MS could possibly help the school toward this end.

As such, on another side note, I would love to see the MS develop more support structures and functionality that can help those women who have left the full-time workforce for a time to raise their children. The MS is a perfect vehicle to help women keep a current network and even possibly help them continue building their résumés in creative ways along the way.

Also, I think a member who attends at least one event per year, could be considered active.

If you really want to scale the organization and multiply influence and impact, you have to bring the barriers to entry to the floor. Fees should be event based. Let members assess the potential value of an event and pay on that basis. Let members decide where to exchange value. Let the fundamental value proposition of the organization be available to all.

The dues may seem small or inconsequential to some, but they are a huge deterrent for many people, particularly if you want to increase global membership. Pull them in at no charge and then demonstrate value one element at a time.

The traditional model of dues-based-membership has outlived its usefulness. If you really want to accelerate, you need to let it go. Then you will have the opportunity to achieve the stated institutional mission of the Society as never before.

My two cents.

Tim Clark
Alpine, Utah

Because different chapters have different dues structures (amount of dues and what benefits paying dues brings), paying dues does not mean the same thing for all chapters. Also, some countries do not allow chapters to charge dues at all.

Personally, I would rather spend our energy trying to get people to meetings and hope that over time they will become more committed. But that is just my two cents worth.

I believe an active member could be someone who attends at least one activity per year. The chapters could be asked to report this each quarter.
We would start at the beginning of each year tracking the number of active members.