It would seem this would be self-evident at this point in the game, but in case it's not, here's more empirical evidence that, given the option to pay online or pay offline, your customers prefer to pay online.

One of my clients, the Child Life Council, has approximately 4,000 members. Until early this year, the only way a member could join or renew was to fill out a paper form and mail or fax it in. Since April, CLC has been live with a new association management system that allows members to join and renew online, paying with a credit card. In addition, customers can also purchase products and publications via the website, again paying with a credit card.

In the first month of going live, CLC was processing 30% of its transactions online (meaning customers were going online and paying with a credit card rather than sending information via snail mail or fax, all of which was processed automatically). Now at six months since go-live, over 5,000 financial transactions have been processed online, representing over 75% of its total transactions. Seventy-five percent! That is amazing, and yet totally expected.

It's simple. Customers want to manage their interactions with you at their leisure, in the manner that's most convenient for them. And buying online, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, is convenient.

So what is your organization doing to make buying from you more convenient for your members and customers?

I provided my thoughts on the Gartner CRM Summit these posts. But I was recently quoted on CRMBuyer.com for my thoughts on the conference. You can read that here.

The association management software world is known more for its smaller "mom and pop" vendors than for big software players. It's fairly unusual for venture capital money to be invested in this market (though it has happened on a few occasions, as noted here.)

So today's announcement that Avectra has landed $26 million in venture capital comes as a bit of a surprise, not so much for the VC itself, but for the size of the investment. You can read all about it here.

I've worked with Avectra for a long time. I was even a client of theirs at one point (nearly ten years ago now). I think their latest products are quite good, so I'm hopeful this money will be spent wisely over the coming months and years.

Full disclosure: EDM is an independent third-party consulting firm. This means we have no financial relationship with any of the vendors mentioned in this blog. We provide unbiased opinions on what we see.

At the dinner table with my family the other day, I was discussing an issue as my nine-year-old son listened in. The conversation went something like this:

My father-in-law: They want to bulid a traffic circle at the intersection of Jacaranda and Venice Avenue.

My son: What's a traffic circle?

Me: Instead of putting in a traffic light, a traffic circle is placed at an intersection so that all cars have to drive around the circle to turn, or to continue straight.

My son: Well how does that help anyone?

Indeed!

And it struck me at that moment that frequently we make decisions without asking "How will this really help?" In the case above, the locals think that if there's a traffic circle, it'll be better because then you won't have to stop to make a turn. You can just drive through the circle. The reality, of course, is that the circle will slow all travel down, and the net result will be longer travel times, not shorter. I'm not sure it will really help anyone.

So when making decisions at your organization, be sure to ask "How will this help?" And "Who will this help?"

UPDATE: Link fixed 

Terry Dowdy forwarded me his thoughts about this recent story in The Washington Post about The Nature Conservancy's mismanagement of data. With his permission, I present Terry's (slightly edited) thoughts:

This is wrong on so many counts: why was old data was still being used, why was it on a laptop (SSNs!), where is the AMS in all of this, why didn't they have good anti-spyware programs in place, etc. The only good point I see is that the network folks were monitoring their network traffic and were able to pinpoint the breech (albeit too late).

An organization as large as Nature Conservancy should've known better…and protected themselves better. But in the end, it always comes down to the end-user and their sense of personal responsibility — or lack thereof.

Terry raises some great points:

1. Sensitive data on a laptop. That should never happen. Laptops are, by definition, mobile, which means the information can be easily physically stolen. Ironically, in this case, this information could have been on a workstation since it was stolen using spyware.
2. Old data still being used. There may be some reason for keeping old data (since this related to payroll). But again, why would this data be on a hard drive? It should be a one a network drive that's well-protected.
3. Where is the AMS? Good question. This was employee information, so it's arguable it didn't belong in the AMS, but a case could be made for that.
4. Where's the anti-spyware? Again, hard to say if there was any loaded and whether or not it was updated.

But all of this points to data management malpractice. As data managers we are caretakers of the data. We have to be sure the data we're managing is safely handled at all times. And that includes keeping the data up to date and keeping it well-protected.

Where are your security holes? And what have you done to address them? It only takes one well-publicized incident like this one to sully an organization's reputation for years.

Aside from your annual "member survey," what kind of mechanisms does your organization have in place to collect feedback from your members and customers? There are plenty of vehicles for collecting feedback. In no particular order, here are a few ideas.

1. Put feedback forms at the bottom of every web page.
2. Add a tagline on outgoing emails with a link to that form.
3. Place self-address, postage-paid postcards in physical orders, asking for feedback.
4. Have your database automatically send an email one or two weeks after an order is fulfilled, asking them for feedback. See this post for a great example.
5. Set up kiosks at meetings asking for feedback on just a few items.
6. Allow for comments on your organization's blog. (You do have a blog, don't you?)
7. Have anyone who is answering the phone to ask a question at the end of each conversation, soliciting feedback from the caller.

As a side note, try to make as many of these options anonymous, where possible. And, when possible, be sure to thank anyone who has provided feedback (it would be difficult to thank an anonymous sender of a postcard).

The beauty here is that some of these feedback mechanisms can be tied to a customer's record in your database. For example, if you have a blog and the user must be logged in to post comments, this information can be captured automatically into your association management system. And using this feedback can help you identify who your potential future leaders are.

So how many have you tried or are you doing now? And what other ideas would you add to the list?

At the Gartner CRM conference I attended recently (see my posts here), an analyst listed five key points about metrics. One point was "Impatience," or as he described it, "overreacting to blips." What he meant by this was that too often as human beings we react to a single point of information or feedback, rather than waiting to see if the single point of data is part of a trend, or just a "one-off." This is what he meant by "patience." You have to be patient to see if the data you're receiving now is consistent or just an anomoly.

I wrote about a similar phenomenon in this post on managing to the exception. The concept is the same: we need to have a preponderance of evidence in order to change how we do things, rather than basing it on onesie-twosie feedback.

Ask yourself how many times your association has changed its policies or practices based on the feedback of a single member (usually a board member).

The same concept can be applied to our personal lives as well. When you get single feedback on something, do you immediately change your behavior based on that feedback? Or do you wait to get more feedback, to ensure (or reject) the validity of the initial feedback?

Have patience. Don't overreact to the blips.

I recently placed an online order at Jockey.com for some t-shirts. My order was delivered as promised, but what really got my attention was an email I received a few days after the order arrived. It read in part:

"I just wanted to thank you for shopping with us–and to ensure that your experience with us was a pleasant one.

If you have any unmet needs or concerns, please just click reply on this email for a real, live, human response. Ninety-three percent of our emails are answered within 24 hours."

I think this email is impressive for three reasons:

1. It is unexpected. How often do you receive emails from someone after you've purchased something and it's been delivered?
2. It is easy. They ask you to reply directly to the email if you have any issues, as opposed to giving some link or another email address.
3. It is real. They tell you that the email will be answered by a human and even give you impressive statistics on how quickly they reply.

What's most interesting about this is the email itself can be automatically generated by a good ordering system to go out at some point after the item has been shipped, so no additional work is required. And the reality is, the vast majority of recipients will not respond at all. But they'll get the message: Jockey wants to be sure you got what you wanted, and if you have any questions, we're here to help. A real, live human being is here to help.

What is your organization doing to surprise and impress your members and customers?

I've been hearing a lot lately from vendors about "registration kiosks." These are computers or kiosks set up in a meeting registration area to allow self-check-in for meeting registrants. The concept is similar to what you see at the airport now when you go to check in: the meeting attendee goes to the kiosk, slides a credit card to identify him- or herself, and then walks through the process of checking in.

I've actually used this check-in process at the Avectra Users and Developers Conference (although I needed someone to help me check in). I know that ARC Solutions is also offering this type of service. At ASAE's Annual Meeting, they do a similar thing with "wandering registrars" who carry barcode scanners and can check you in without you having to stand in line.

I'm curious to hear stories (success or failure) on this concept. Have you ever used registration kiosks at your conference? Or have you ever attended a conference that had registration kiosks? What has been the big advantage or serious impediment?

I went to see my doctor the other day. At the end of the appointment, the doctor asked the receptionist to give me two sheets on "rotator cuff tendinitis" (which is what I'm being treated for).

The receptionist hands me two sheets of paper that look like they are about fifth or sixth generation copies. That is, the copy I was receiving was copied from a copy of a copy of a copy… well, you get the point.

The copies are so poor that I can barely read what they say. All of this begs the question: Do they not have computers in my doctor's office? The last time I checked, one could create a document in this fancy program called "Word," and every time you need another copy of it, you can click the print icon, and a brand-new, original copy prints from your printer.

Look around your organization. Are you distributing any kind of printed material that is not an original print from a printer (whether in-house or outsourced)? Print is cheap. There is absolutely no excuse for giving your members and customers anything but original copies of printed materials.

Not that I feel strongly about it.