Together for Good: Measuring Member Engagement

After my last post on the importance of member engagement to mutuals and cooperatives (‘mutuals), I was asked a great question on Linkedin. For me, the question had echoes of my work in social collaboration and employee engagement. The question was

“How should boards of mutuals measure member engagement?”

This post will explore the potential measures and the role of a board in governance of member engagement as a key part of a mutuals strategy

There’s No One Number That Rules All

Best to save time by supplying the answer in a heading for those looking for an easy answer. There isn’t one, but the discussion of what matters to track is more important.

Just as there’s no single number that best explains employee engagement or collaboration for every organisation, there is no single number that can describe member engagement universally. If you spend a moment considering the idea, it would be unusual if it was the case. Every member organisation is different, comprised of different groups of members with different inclinations and each organisation has a uniquely different strategy (at least ideally).

Start and End with Strategy

The mutual’s strategy should be the source of the measures that the board tracks and where membership engagement measures should be found. Membership engagement is not something that sits outside of strategy. It needs to be fundamental and connected. The issues that organisations seek to address and the connection that organisations seek to make with members are found in the purpose and strategy of the organisation.

Boards of mutuals, should be governing this aspect of strategy and assessing performance the same way and with the same frequency that they do on customer, people, financial, risk, compliance and other non-financial dimensions such as sustainability and resilience. Questions that can help define the right measures of engagement include:

  • If members are customers or employees, does the measure start and end with employee engagement or customer engagement measures? What else is needed to define the unique characteristics of a mutual strategy over a commercial one?
  • What role do members play in our strategic success? How will we know we are winning with and for members?
  • What role do members play in governance of the organisation in our constitution and strategy?
  • What issues that we exist to address matter most to members and how are we seen by members in addressing these issues?
  • Do members feel like the belong to a cause that matters to them? this is more than a NPS score. It is a willingness to see the organisation benefit others in line with purpose and strategy and to feel ownership of that work.

That’s a lot of questions. As always when there are lots of possiblities, Boards of mutuals can be at risk of slipping into dashboard mode and considering too many minor measures to the detriment of effective strategy governance. The purpose of these questions is not to guide a lot of measures but to ask the kind of questions that prompt consideration of what matters most to success of the strategy. Let governance start and finish there.

Some Minimums to Consider

Whatever the strategy of the organisation it is worth considering that a mutual is an organisation that operates according to cooperative principles. This gives rise to a few issues to consider from the perspective of organisation structure:

  • Do the customers of the mutual understand that they are members if it is a consumer mutual? Members with a purely transactional relationship with the organisation can hardly be engaged in the strategy. This is particularly important where a mutual may engage members through intermediaries or online digital experiences.
  • Are members using the benefits available to them as members of the mutual? If their purchasing or other activities are spread around or there are benefits unclaimed, is the strategy effective enough? Does the organisation need a deeper connection with its members to succeed?
  • Do members participate in the organisation: open rates, clicks, conversion and depth of engagement? Does the organisation have contact details that are up to date? it’s hard to engage the uncontactable and unresponsive.
  • Are members exercising their rights to vote or otherwise contribute to governance?

Governance of a mutual is never simple, easy, or sleepy. Performance accountabilities are sharp when the performance of the organisation for members is the sole point of existence and when capital must be earned. A well-set strategy will consider a wide range of performance measures and the right cycles of review and iteration based on performance. These measures will adapt and evolve as the strategy moves through its cycles of delivery. Setting and managing that is a role for the board and management together. Done well, it can be the defining conversation at the heart of strategic success.

Governance is a Leadership Conversation

image

Governance best practice requires a vibrant conversation that shares the diverse insights & experience of directors so that organisations can make better decisions. We need to focus as much on the quality of the conversations and the networks of the directors as we do their experience and expertise.

Directors are chosen for their experience, insights and expertise. The role of a director participating in a governance process is to bring their personal capabilities to bear helping the management of the organisation to make better decisions. However, experience, insights and expertise will go to waste if the directors are not part of an effective conversation and if their networks are not keeping them up to date.

Focus on the conversation at board level

A vibrant conversation is one with rich and relevant contributions from all parties. A vibrant conversation is engaging because it is an exercise in joint learning. Directors and management working together to understand how best to proceed leveraging their collective insights and experience. Both the chair and management need to help facilitate this process of learning and encourage an engaging and effective conversation.

If a board conversation is predictable, agenda driven, runs to only the papers or dominated by a few voices, particularly those of management or a chair, then there is a good chance that the governance process is failing. Disrupting a comfortable board to improve its function takes leadership, tact and courage.

Questions matter as much as expertise. Questions are also a powerful source of disruption to patterned thinking. While a director brings expertise, that capability is more engagingly used to frame provocative questions for the board and management to consider. Great questions prompt reflection, draw out new perspectives and can change the understanding of all involved in the conversation. Well framed questions respect others ability to contribute and to learn.

Questions also highlight the potential of conflict to frame and define an issue. If everyone is in agreement all the time, then nobody is required around the table. The role of a governance process is to interrupt this experience with relevant pushback. One of the benefits of a diversity in a governance process is it is more likely to surface other relevant questions and perspectives to be considered.

The learning nature of any governance conversation should extend to the effectiveness of the conversation. Double-loop learning that looks at the process as well as the content accelerates effectiveness. The best question to finish any discussion at board level should be “How can we have a better conversation next time?”

Broaden the Conversation with Networks

The second way to improve the governance process is to broaden the inputs to the conversation at board level. The networks of the directors and other stakeholders around the organisation can be a critical source of other views and considerations.

If a board is considering a highly technical issue, they may well reach out to engage experts, peers or friends who has deeper expertise in that area. Board processes should encourage this leverage of the networks around directors and the organisation as a regular exercise. In our rapidly changing networked era, the networks from which directors may gather insights can stretch globally mediated by technology. Leveraging and improving this flow of knowledge will help directors and organisations stay current on latest thinking and also diversify their thinking. Being well networked as a director is an antidote to disruption.

Stakeholders around an organisation are also an important network for directors to consider in the governance process.  How often do directors engage with customers, suppliers, communities and other key stakeholders of the organisation? Do directors have access to critical information from these conversation?  For example, reading verbatim customer complaints can be a rich source of insight for a board that is not captured in metrics of customer satisfaction. Stakeholder engagement also creates new awareness of accountabilities that can be critical to improving performance in an organisation.

Governance is a Leadership Conversation

Playing a governance role should not be easy or risk free. All participants in a governance process need to be helping make conversations more effective for the organisation. Governance is a leadership role and as leaders boards need to consider the effectiveness of their conversations and the value of their networks.