Technology and governance.

A look at the downsides can head off serious problems.

Technology promises capacity unknown, convenience, and speed for virtually all association management functions. For the purpose of association governance in particular, the application of new technologies can mean streamlined strategic planning and decision-making processes using tools such as decision-support software. It can also mean fewer meetings and reduced travel expenses when preliminary or less-critical decisions can be arrived at online.

But what about the quality of governance? Will technology simply let you pursue policy-related issues faster and with less effort and expense? Consideration of how your organization can best communicate using technology should incorporate issues such as how your board makes decisions, the long-range dollar investment required to implement the new technology, leadership interest in using technology, and the capacity of your staff members and volunteers to keep pace with these new methods of communication.

An informal sampling of 52 association leaders - both elected and chief staff executives - that I recently conducted confirms that association CEOs are open to using and implementing technology. For example, some association boards are holding fewer meetings, using computers to conduct elections for new leaders, and employing optical scanning devices to quickly tabulate feedback from meeting attendees regarding association programs and policies to aid in board decision making as early as the next day. However, those executives with whom I spoke suggest that, for the most part, actual use of technology in their governance processes is still limited.

The reality of governance

One reason for the cautious embrace of technology may be the realization that effective governance is more complex than it appears. How governance is accomplished is really secondary to the quality of communication and decision-making being done. If your association's governance system is broken, for instance, technology won't magically fix it. In other words, technology might not - and perhaps should not - be your priority.

The focus on issues and outcomes coupled with the proper flow of quality information and mutual reliance and respect between the elected leadership and the paid staff form the axis for high-quality decisions and harmonious, effective governance. Part of your responsibility as chief executive officer is to help your directors fulfill their responsibilities by devoting themselves to your organization's mission, objectives, and strategic plan - your association's intellectual issues. While technology is a tool that can greatly aid your governance process, technology is not governance.

Having said this, let's take a look at some of the potential, as well as some of the drawbacks, that technology represents for board leaders.

Technology potential

When considering the impact of technology on the association's ability to govern effectively, it was mostly thumbs up in my sampling of association leaders. Here are several gleanings from their comments.

* Technology can quicken feedback processes, helping to streamline decision making.

* Greater input can be achieved with more-confidential technological response systems.

* Technological capacity may become an empowering agent, leading to a more democratic organization and governance structure.

* Geographic boundaries will decrease in importance, and instantaneous, intercontinental communication may increase participation from "distant" members.

* The use of technology may enhance the reputation of the association by offering an image of its being on the cutting edge of communication and governance.

Questions to ask

Before making a major financial commitment to using technology in your governance process, develop your own list of potential hurdles and drawbacks. As part of your analysis, it might be prudent to address some basic questions. For example:

* Given that your directors concentrate on policy-level strategic issues and objectives, not activities, what prompts you to pursue more technology in governance?

* Is your interest in upgrading your organization's technology a true need or a response to the personal drive of a technically competent officer?

* Will your leaders keep their eyes on outcomes despite the technological bells and whistles?

* Will technology help your elected officials think and act differently at a substantive level?

* Will the application of new technology reduce the need to meet in person? If so, could such distancing inadvertently undermine your leader's sense of affiliation? What would you need to do to correspondingly strengthen this need?

* Could the ability to communicate quickly prompt your staff to transmit information more often simply because the capacity is there? As a result, might this abundance of information sent to directors - beyond their need to know - increase their time burden and cause them undue frustration with serving on your board?

* Will increased access to association information stimulate ill-informed criticisms among disaffected directors or committee members?

* Will the speed of communication spawn insufficient reflection?

* Will the majority of your leaders today, many of whom ma not have matured professionally with automation, be computer literature.

* Do your directors have the technology in hand to join in your new procedures? Will the association be expected to provide a laptop for every director?

Consequences to ponder 

As well as asking some serious questions, you should be prepared to handle some realistic consequences of adding technology to your governance process. For instance, the association may need to begin some long-term technology training for your directors, committee chairs, and others. Likewise, the organization must consider the resources necessary not only to implement the technology but also to sustain and enhance the investment.

Let due diligence set the pace. Retain a consultant to help research your current practices, industry dynamics, competitive forces, leadership in the pipeline, staff resources, current and needed resources outside of technology, and the continual investment in technology that may be required during the next decade. Balance proffered net economies with potential losses, including nonfinancial ones such as a decrease in the sense of affiliation among leaders. Ensure that there is consensus on investing in more technological capacity and the objectives to be achieved. Don't want the new technology so much that you can't see the downsides.

If and when your board decides to invest in and use more technology, be prepared for a cultural evolution. At the personal level, your own decision-making time will be compressed as the expectations from leaders about what can be accomplished will likely increase. You must be ready at times to deal with more ambiguity than certainty and prepared to learn new tricks on the fly.

RELATED ARTICLE: The Up Side?

Is the clamor over using technology in governance more than it's cracked up to be? Or do technology advantages outweigh drawbacks? ASAE members can participate in online conversations on the topic of this article or others in this issue by sending a message to the ASSOCIATION MANAGEMENT listserv. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to [e-mail]. In the body of the message, type subscribe assnmgmt. You will receive a return e-mail indicating that you are subscribed. If you'd like information about ASAE, call [phone].

Gerard F. Hurley, CAE, is president of Association Executive Resources Group, Gaithersburg, Maryland, an executive search and consulting firm.