LIZ ON THE BIZ

By Elizabeth Zielinski, CMM
 
In my last blog post, I discussed the appointment of a new CEO at MPI, and what it might mean for the future direction of that organization. I received a lot of responses to that post, mostly by email. In one of them, I was asked what kind of change I would like to see at MPI. As I composed my answer to that question I quickly realized that it was its own discussion rather than just a reply to the person who asked. After all, the things I would like to see go beyond just MPI, and are really what I would be looking for from any membership organization.
 
I would like to see MPI expand its advocacy for the industry. Advocacy means two things to me: The first is helping members and their organizations to expand their influence using meetings as a strategic communications vehicle. "Influence" is,  however, defined by the member; it might be recognition, salary, promotion, etc. MPI's role is to help its members achieve whatever goal they set for themselves on their professional path. I think the organization has done a pretty good job of this in the past, but in recent years it has lost sight of this focus somewhat and has shifted more to putting buyers and sellers together. While the latter is valuable, so is the former.
 
The second part of advocacy is political. Most nonprofit organizations of MPI’s size have a government or public affairs department that researches, tracks and lobbies for issues that affect its members on a local, national or international level. In MPI’s case, that role has generally been handled by the CEO and committed volunteers. There should be a formal organizational response to issues that come before governing bodies that will ultimately affect our work, and there should be proactive tracking of issues in the pipeline. Government advocacy is not generally the thing that members think of as important to their success, but when an entire industry is affected by government perceptions and decisions, it's a crucial role that MPI can play.
 
I'd like to see MPI personalize its membership experience more. It's a big and diverse membership, and its members don't really have any one thing in common with one another. We live in a very data-driven era, and as organizations collect that information they should act on the potential for individualizing the member experience. One member just doesn't want or need the same products or services as the next person, and that point of view becomes more critical with a large membership base like MPI's. The data exists to do this, but MPI (and other organizations) should collect it and act responsively to what they learn.
 
Finally, I'd like to see MPI held accountable to the promises it makes, both large and small. Marketing messages aren't just pithy offers designed to incite action, they are representations by an organization of what a buyer can expect to happen. If you promise large, you'd better be ready to deliver large as well. People often dismiss these organizational promises as unimportant, but I don't agree. If you say your conference will be the best, make it the best. If you say you are going to return a phone call, do it. If you fail to take these implied promises seriously, in time you will destroy trust and damage your professional reputation. That's true of individuals, and it's true of organizations.
 
By identifying these issues, I'm not suggesting they aren’t already being done by MPI or other industry membership organizations. But delivering on those strategies is key to determining where the value lies in becoming or staying a member of any of them.
 
I'd like to hear what else you want to see from MPI, or any other of our industry organizations. You can comment below, or send me a message by email to LizontheBiz@gmail.com.

By Elizabeth Zielinski, CMM

Last week, Meeting Professionals International announced the appointment of Paul Van Deventer as its new president and CEO. He will take over leadership of the association starting on April 29. Van Deventer comes from his position as a vice president in the health-and-wellness division of Walgreens, where he was responsible for overseeing revenue generation and client retention for the drugstore chain's suite of employer-focused health-care solutions. You can read more about the choice here.

Throughout the search process, MPI repeatedly stressed that it was seeking a leader who was in alignment with the strategic priorities and vision of the organization. In the announcement naming Van Deventer as the candidate chosen, participants in the search process confirmed that they believe that goal has been met.

From the announcement, we can infer certain things about what MPI envisions as its future under Van Deventer's leadership:

1. Building the MPI brand;
2. Driving overall growth;
3. Developing new partnerships and products, and
4. Expanding levels of engagement.

In the announcement, the reference to members and chapters is made only in passing; the overwhelming emphasis is on branding and growth. But how does one improve the latter without addressing the former? Moreover, the strategies seem to be focused on improving the benefits of partnering with or sponsoring MPI, but you can't offer value to those business units if you can't deliver their buyers -- the planners.

The reaction to the announcement on social media and in my personal network has ranged from lukewarm to indifferent. A few have mentioned to me that MPI has told them this is the time to expect real positive and substantive change at MPI. But that has been promised many times over recent years. And it begs the question, how often does change need to be promised before an organization realizes that something is fundamentally wrong? Let's never forget, MPI is an association, which by definition is a group of people who come together for a joint purpose. In an association the size of MPI, those joint purposes are diverse and variable. But in the end, we all want to be able to do our work better than we can do it without MPI. I'm not convinced that growth and new partnerships are the way for the planner membership to best achieve that.

I'd like to be cautiously optimistic about this choice. The announcement does mention that Van Deventer was chosen in part for his excellent communication skills and his collaborative management style. I thought Cindy D'Aoust, the interim CEO, was doing a great job -- and I believed MPI was on its way toward becoming a member-focused organization once again. Maybe that day is on the horizon, but from what I have seen discussed as the MPI strategy, I'm planning on keeping my membership dues in the bank for the time being. There might not be another organization bigger than MPI, but there are others who are getting the education, services and member engagement accomplished far better.

I'd like to know what others are thinking about MPI's choice. If you'd like to comment anonymously, please contact me via my email address at LizontheBiz@gmail.com. You can also leave public comments via the form below.

By Elizabeth Zielinski, CMM
 
I have given a lot of guidance in this blog about how and why I do things, and advice for improving your own planning processes. What I think gets overlooked sometimes are the ways we come to learn those lessons in the first place -- often, by making world-class mistakes. We can’t avoid mistakes; they’re a natural part of life, work and learning. Sometimes they’re the most efficient way to learn a particular lesson, because the results of a mistake are so profound that we will never make the same one again. What follows are some of my own hard-won lessons.
 
The mistake I made: I was planning a board meeting for a trade association at a five-star resort. About two weeks out, a major news event involving the association’s industry occurred, in which nationwide public opinion went strongly against one of the member companies that was going to attend the meeting. A few days before the meeting began, I learned that a protest was being organized at the resort location, and that national news organizations were planning to be present to cover the story. The potential for negative press for the company, the association, and the resort was high. I had no plan for properly responding to any of this activity, and not enough time to form a good one.
 
The lesson I learned: Always have a crisis communication plan in place. If there isn’t an individualized one for a specific meeting, there should at least be a basic one for the host organization that can be implemented regardless of location. One of the keys to managing a public relations problem is remaining calm when others are not, and proper planning allows that to happen.
 
The mistake I made: A different client this time, but another board meeting. The meeting was planned for Washington, D.C. One week out, I was contacted by the hotel, telling me that a diplomatic party was going to be using the hotel over my dates, and for security reasons they would need the use of one entire floor, as well as the floors directly above and below it. Washington, D.C., doesn’t have skyscrapers, so three floors of the hotel was most of the sleeping rooms -- including the ones I had blocked for the group.
 
The lesson I learned: It’s beneficial to know what the risk areas are in a particular destination. A diplomatic matter may be uncommon in some cities, but it’s not in Washington, nor would it be in other world capitals. Other cities may have an increased risk of seasonally severe weather, civil unrest or other location-specific challenges. You can’t plan for everything, but knowing where the problems are most likely to occur helps in preparing your response. In this case, my group was offered the option of different meeting dates. Although that option was not ideal and did not reimburse travel that had already been booked, the hotel graciously provided financial incentives to make this resolution agreeable.
 
The mistake I made: I booked a small boutique property for a group that liked independent, unique facilities. Shortly after contracting, the hotel announced an ownership change that would transition it into a more inexpensive chain hotel. I did not have language in my contract that would protect my group’s interests in the event of a brand or ownership change. The boutique nature of the hotel was a crucial part of my site selection, and that was going to change before the meeting occurred.
 
The lesson I learned: Economic certainties do not exist. Even if a hotel has been operating under the same brand for decades, it can change. And it’s rare that a new owner or management company will maintain the status quo in all areas of the hotel after taking over. Know the names of the parties to the contract, including the hotel’s actual ownership (vs. the brand it carries, which may not be the owner), and follow the financial news related to that company to stay ahead of the potential influence on your site. Also include a clause in your contract that provides some protection to you in the event the hotel changes ownership or management.
 
Bonus lesson:  Each of the above problems would have been lessened if I had conducted better risk assessments. Risk assessment doesn’t have to be complicated; it can be as simple as a brainstorming session in which you consider what could happen to prevent the meeting from delivering the expected results, and then considering what could be done to mitigate those possibilities. Risk assessment is like insurance in the sense that you hope you don’t need it, but if you do it is enormously beneficial.
 
I’d love for you to share a story of one of your own lessons; we can all learn from each others’ mistakes. Please feel free to share via the comments below, or by email to me at LizontheBiz@gmail.com.
 

By Elizabeth Zielinski, CMM

In past blog posts, I’ve discussed the value and quality of education at our industry meetings. But we attend these meetings for more than just education; we also attend for the networking opportunities. And in some cases, we might attend for only that reason, if we find the education lacking.

Also, as planners we often are charged with creating a high-quality networking event. Knowing what’s useful to ourselves at these types of events is helpful toward creating them for others, too.

What follows are some basic rules for crafting quality networking for yourself or for attendees.

1. Choose (or plan) carefully. Some events are worth your time, and others are not. And never forget that time is money, so even if the event is free, it comes at a cost if the time is spent poorly. The most obvious qualification for your attendance might be specialization in your planning segment — government, corporate, association, etc. — but you can move a bit out of your typical circle, too. For example, an association planner in the health-care industry might find it beneficial to network with pharmaceutical-industry planners. The key is locating the people who can actually offer some benefit to your own career via knowledge or products, rather than choosing blindly based on what looks good in an invitation. Similarly, when you are building your own event intended for networking, cross-marketing to related industries can increase the depth of your attendee base — but don’t stray too far from your core interest group.

2. Have clear goals. That’s what good planning always comes down to, so this isn’t new information. But you might not be accustomed to goal-setting as it applies to networking. Just as you would write goals for any event you are planning, you should also write them for events you are attending. Writing the goals down makes them concrete intentions and not just hopes or expectations.

3. Build relationships, not a database. Don’t collect business cards indiscriminately if you aren’t interested in taking the time to develop the business relationship. You can’t afford to say “you never know” about each contact you make, and you shouldn’t expect your own attendees to do that, either. If you can’t make the connection meaningful in some way, then it isn’t really a connection at all. You should, however, keep your mind open to new contacts and not be dismissive of those that might not align obviously with your interests.

4. Know your own value. Networking isn’t just about what others can do for you, it’s also about what you can do for them. One basic premise of influence is that people will return favors that are paid to them. So you also are building your personal brand when you assist others toward their own goals.

5. Treat networking as a career investment. Going to these events is not cheap, particularly when travel is involved. The expense to attend one of our industry conferences easily approaches $2,000 if you have air and hotel expenses in addition to conference registration. Will the event you attend (or plan) offer a return on that amount, in terms of business revenue or career promotion? This is about the success you are building for yourself, so you shouldn’t dismiss an event just because your employer isn’t paying for it, nor should you attend it simply because they are.

Whatever your professional path holds, everything will come down to having solid relationships with present and future colleagues and partners. That’s true in any industry, but particularly with those of us who specialize in hospitality, which is at the core of connection.

What are some of your tips for making your networking more meaningful? I’d love to hear your ideas, either in the comments below or via email to LizontheBiz@gmail.com.

By Elizabeth Zielinski, CMM
 
Once upon a time in the meeting planning industry, we were all just known as planners. Then came corporate, government, association and, later, independent planners. Now the categories are countless: insurance,pharmaceutical, nonprofit and military, just to name a few. And within our types of planning, there are types of events: trade shows, board meetings, citywide conventions and client work-for-hire are some examples.
 
We know that in order to be the best at what we do, we have to know where our skills are best assigned. We can’t be a “jack of all trades” without the risk of being a master of none. And so our best chance at a successful career — whether as an employed professional or an independent planner — is identifying and cultivating our niche.
 
The two most common questions I am asked about being an independent planner are how I set my rates, and how I determined my niche. The answer to the latter question is far more critical to success than the former.
 
In the years that I have been working independently, my niche has shifted from time to time to respond to my interests or market conditions. But I have learned basic elements about identifying a niche that I believe translate to all types of meeting professionals, presented below as a trio of questions.
 
1. What is your passion? If you’re planning meetings of a type or for a host organization that doesn’t inspire your energy, then the money you get paid for doing it will never be enough to fulfill you. And while your personal fulfillment is unlikely to matter to your employer or client, being passionate about your work will definitely allow you to apply more energy to creating a stronger end product.
 
2. Where are your strengths? There are so many different skill sets in planning that might play to your strengths more than others. Are you especially skilled at measuring results, reading contracts or establishing objectives (just to name a few)? We are taught in school to strengthen the areas where we have weaknesses in order to succeed, but if you work to where you already have strength, then the results will show the positive difference. Employers and clients pay for skill, and they pay for a job well done.
 
3.  Where is the demand?  Let’s say for example that you’re passionate about fitness (question one, above), and you’re talented at planning trade shows (question two). That doesn’t establish a niche if there currently isn’t a demand for fitness-oriented trade shows. Identifying the demand is what makes questions one and two work. If a market segment is saturated, orperhaps is exceedingly small, it’s not going to be easy to get hired or to find clients.
 
The bottom line is that establishing a niche means finding the intersection between what you like to do, what you’re best at doing and what other people want. Answering the questions I’ve posed might require a lot of research, but the answers are easier to find than you might think. And finding them is crucial to being both successful and fulfilled in your work.
 
I’d like to hear more about how you ended up in your specialty niche in the planning industry, or if there are other questions you think are important to ask before determining a niche. Please feel free to comment below, or send an email to me at LizontheBiz@gmail.com.

By Elizabeth Zielinski, CMM


Recently I was involved in a contract negotiation where I had reason to believe that one of the parties was taking advantage of certain personal circumstances being experienced by the other party. It caused me to consider, what are the rules for this kind of thing? Is it a savvy business practice, or does it cross the boundaries of professionalism?

I'm being purposely vague on the specifics, because I'm not asking about this particular incident. What I want to discuss is the role of ethics in negotiating a deal.

Keep in mind, ethics and morals are not the same thing. Generally speaking, ethics are the rules of one's profession, but morals are a personal set of principles. For example, a defense attorney may find the action of a client to be morally wrong, but the ethics of the profession compel the client to be defended.

Using that definition, there are tactics many of us may use that may not be moral to some, but are perfectly ethical in a negotiating situation. What do you think, readers -- are the following scenarios ethical?

• A planner offers way less than market value for a meeting package because she knows a facility just experienced a cancellation.

• A hotelier tries to "upsell" a previously booked group, even though the salesperson knows the group is a poorly funded charity.

• A planner leverages a hotel's best offer by claiming another hotel offered a lower rate (whether true or not).

• A third party accepts a commission from a seller that is not disclosed to the buyer.

My guess is that members of our profession wouldn't agree on which of these are unethical, and that is exactly the point of my discussion here. The very fact that we don't agree on such things means that what one party expects from another is not necessarily what they will receive. Ethics are expectations of professionalism, with consequences when those expectations are not met.

And why are ethics important? Haven't we been doing fine as a profession in policing ourselves? Why don't we all just take a "caveat emptor" (buyer beware) approach to our negotiating?

Picture this: You buy oranges at a grocery store. You get home and discover the oranges are rotten inside, and so you take them back to the store to return them. The store refuses to refund your money, saying that you should have inspected the oranges better prior to purchase. The lasting effect is that the consumer spends a disproportionate amount of time inspecting oranges no matter which store it is, and the store loses customers. On a large scale, maybe the price of oranges then goes up and affects all buyers.

In the meetings world, planners don't have the time to validate things that should be considered as fact in an ethical exchange, and suppliers can't afford to lose customers. And the profession can't afford to be seen as opportunistic.

And yet, our industry organizations have been reluctant to establish any ethical standards, and those that have don't enforce them. I find that very surprising, given the push for us to be accepted as influential forces in business. It would seem to me that a code of ethics would be intrinsic to that. We operate in a seductive field with access to money and privileges. In my opinion, it's an oversight not to teach professionally accepted methods of operating.

What are your thoughts, readers? And what do you think is unethical about the scenarios I presented? I'd love to hear more discussion, via the comments below or by email to me at LizontheBiz@gmail.com.

By Elizabeth Zielinski, CMM


The former U.S. Speaker of the House of Representatives, Tip O'Neill, is credited with coining the phrase, "all politics is local." The message was intended to say that voters are more influenced by their own everyday issues than by the abstract, larger issues that often take precedence in governing bodies.

Lately I have been wondering how this principle applies to membership organizations. Associations don't typically issue press releases when membership is decreasing, but downward trends have been documented in membership organizations of all types. Could it be because the rank and file no longer get practical information for their work directly from a membership experience?

It's well known that association members join for two main reasons: networking opportunities and educational products and services. But those things take an investment of time, and time is the most valuable commodity any of us possesses. In order to save time, most professionals I know are looking closer to home, or toward technology, to meet these needs.

I'm not suggesting that there is no place for the industrywide strategy that is put forth by the collective voice of a membership. I'm certainly not saying there is less value in face-to-face meetings than there ever  was -- in fact I believe there's more value there than ever before. But what I am suggesting is that the era of the huge industry association, into which members pour thousands of dollars and countless hours each year for "members only" benefits, might be gone.

If you dropped your MPI, PCMA or ASAE membership today, would you be able to get the same benefits they offer anywhere else? Increasingly the answer is yes. Here in the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area, there are numerous local networking groups specific to the meetings industry that offer educational programming. And LinkedIn, webcasts, Facebook, and sponsored or hosted educational programs (just to name a few) are accessible to anyone, regardless of location. There are even membership organizations being developed that specialize in smaller segments of the industry, such as SPIN (the Senior Planners Industry Network).

Another challenge faced by a large membership organization is how to meet the diverse needs of its constituency. In recent years, the organizations representing us have spent most of their strategic efforts on broad-based issues facing the industry as a whole, such as quantifying the business value of meetings. That's important work, but not the kind of thing that gets an individual to make a membership-buying decision. 

I know many of you reading this will not ever entertain the idea of ending your professional memberships. And that's a perfectly reasonable choice to make; the organizations offer tremendous value to those who invest in them. But their relevance under an old model of pricing, exclusive benefits and expensive conventions might not appeal to the new generations of professionals.

I'd like to hear readers' thoughts on association memberships, whether in the meetings industry or elsewhere. Are you seeing similar trends to what I have described, or do you think differently? Please comment below or via email to LizontheBiz@gmail.com.