tmassey
Contributor
I have zero involvement in any of this, other than a cave diver interested in North Florida springs.
I've seen this pattern work itself out in every recreational hobby I've ever been involved in. In the early days, when an organization is young, there's lots of energy, and a lot of that energy is spent on fairly basic activities. As the membership and *especially* the leadership ages and their skills and interests increase and narrow, the level of activities tend to narrow as well. Eventually, you come to a tipping point: many of the leadership (and maybe even the remaining membership) no longer wants to be involved in more simple, basic activities (either because they're burned out or no longer satisfied with those basics), but the higher level of skill and narrowness of focus keeps new members away. More of the basic and even middle level members drop away, and all that's left are the hard core. At that point, it rapidly becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy: the only people left are the ones that (knowingly or unknowingly) drove things to be what they are today, and while they might wonder where everyone went, they are unwilling to consider (let alone *do*) the deep changes that might need to be made to change that.
Every dive club I've ever seen has followed that path, in about 10 or so years' time. Larger organizations can take longer, but things focused on recreational hobbies tend to follow that arc.
I see that here in this thread. New (or potentially returning) members want to know, in effect, 'what's in it for *me*, *today*'. Existing members (especially leadership) can point to a long list of accomplishments, and think that this is sufficient to carry them into the future. But for new members, it's not.
Past accomplishments can show that you *have* completed things, and give us confidence that you *will* complete your future objectives. But if you *have* no future objectives...
What's the *next* piece of property that the organization can acquire? Given the success of Cow, that would be a strong rallying cry: "We saved Cow! Now help us save Pig!" Or, what is your schedule for building boardwalks or benches? Or maintaining the ones that are in place? Or your rotating schedule of trash removal and cleanup? Those are the real simple, basic things that beginners to an organization like to see -- and be involved with.
And those are the things that long-time, "experienced" members don't want to do. They feel they 'put in their time'. I won't argue with that. But if you don't have a strategy of constant "beginner" activities, where do you expect a "beginner" to be involved?
Maybe those things are specifically outside of the scope of the organization. Fine. But what are your equivalent base-level projects? That you do on a regular and frequent basis?
No different with outreach. You don't need to be talking to certified cave divers. You don't need to be talking to those already looking for a cave instructor. They've already been sold on your mission: at that point, you're trying to sell them on you, instead of, say NFSA. But that's a zero-sum game: it doesn't grow the pie.
You need to be selling the open-water divers who want an opportunity to dive in beautiful, clear springs -- and don't even live near them. People journey to South Florida to dive in the ocean from all *over* the country. Why not North Florida springs? And how do you get them to experience them? Outreach. Organized events to introduce them. Specific events with specific reasons for them to come.
I'm a full cave diver, but the only reason I went down that path was to become a better wreck diver. I was only interested for the training. That is, until the first time I saw Ginnie Springs. I was gobsmacked: the water was like *air*. I had *never* seen anything even *close* to it in 25 years of diving. And it was only at *that* point that I was the least bit interested in truly becoming a cave diver. And I was actually in a class at that point!
The other thing I see is a lot of pushback against those that state that the organization is not what they want it to be by those in the organization. Even saying how *wrong* that pushback is. Here's the thing: people are stating how they feel. How can that be wrong? Now not everyone is going to be happy all the time. And if your organization is growing, it may not be necessary to change to address an outlier or two.
But, if your organization is *self* *admittedly* falling short, if you *know* you have problems in several areas, why would you ever waste even a single word pushing back against someone who is detailing exactly how you are falling short for them? I would argue that if you are doing so, this clearly points to the real problem: Even in the face of a situation where you *know* your organization is being damaged, you cannot admit to failings. If that's the case, it will never get better.
Anyway, these are my ill-informed thoughts. If you think they are wrong, then they're worth what you paid for them. If you think they don't apply, ignore them. Like @tbone1004, I would love to know what initiatives are planned for the future.
Oh, and one thing specific to NSS-CDS: when there is talk of sloppy money, that's a 100% turn-off for a lot of people, including me. Accountants are cheap, and the process of tracking where money goes is *SIMPLE*: every dollar comes into a bank account, and every dollar out of that bank account is accountable to the person given it. It's incredibly annoying and irritating, but *not* difficult. If an organization that clears 6 figures from an event can't figure that out, well, there are other options...
I've seen this pattern work itself out in every recreational hobby I've ever been involved in. In the early days, when an organization is young, there's lots of energy, and a lot of that energy is spent on fairly basic activities. As the membership and *especially* the leadership ages and their skills and interests increase and narrow, the level of activities tend to narrow as well. Eventually, you come to a tipping point: many of the leadership (and maybe even the remaining membership) no longer wants to be involved in more simple, basic activities (either because they're burned out or no longer satisfied with those basics), but the higher level of skill and narrowness of focus keeps new members away. More of the basic and even middle level members drop away, and all that's left are the hard core. At that point, it rapidly becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy: the only people left are the ones that (knowingly or unknowingly) drove things to be what they are today, and while they might wonder where everyone went, they are unwilling to consider (let alone *do*) the deep changes that might need to be made to change that.
Every dive club I've ever seen has followed that path, in about 10 or so years' time. Larger organizations can take longer, but things focused on recreational hobbies tend to follow that arc.
I see that here in this thread. New (or potentially returning) members want to know, in effect, 'what's in it for *me*, *today*'. Existing members (especially leadership) can point to a long list of accomplishments, and think that this is sufficient to carry them into the future. But for new members, it's not.
Past accomplishments can show that you *have* completed things, and give us confidence that you *will* complete your future objectives. But if you *have* no future objectives...
What's the *next* piece of property that the organization can acquire? Given the success of Cow, that would be a strong rallying cry: "We saved Cow! Now help us save Pig!" Or, what is your schedule for building boardwalks or benches? Or maintaining the ones that are in place? Or your rotating schedule of trash removal and cleanup? Those are the real simple, basic things that beginners to an organization like to see -- and be involved with.
And those are the things that long-time, "experienced" members don't want to do. They feel they 'put in their time'. I won't argue with that. But if you don't have a strategy of constant "beginner" activities, where do you expect a "beginner" to be involved?
Maybe those things are specifically outside of the scope of the organization. Fine. But what are your equivalent base-level projects? That you do on a regular and frequent basis?
No different with outreach. You don't need to be talking to certified cave divers. You don't need to be talking to those already looking for a cave instructor. They've already been sold on your mission: at that point, you're trying to sell them on you, instead of, say NFSA. But that's a zero-sum game: it doesn't grow the pie.
You need to be selling the open-water divers who want an opportunity to dive in beautiful, clear springs -- and don't even live near them. People journey to South Florida to dive in the ocean from all *over* the country. Why not North Florida springs? And how do you get them to experience them? Outreach. Organized events to introduce them. Specific events with specific reasons for them to come.
I'm a full cave diver, but the only reason I went down that path was to become a better wreck diver. I was only interested for the training. That is, until the first time I saw Ginnie Springs. I was gobsmacked: the water was like *air*. I had *never* seen anything even *close* to it in 25 years of diving. And it was only at *that* point that I was the least bit interested in truly becoming a cave diver. And I was actually in a class at that point!
The other thing I see is a lot of pushback against those that state that the organization is not what they want it to be by those in the organization. Even saying how *wrong* that pushback is. Here's the thing: people are stating how they feel. How can that be wrong? Now not everyone is going to be happy all the time. And if your organization is growing, it may not be necessary to change to address an outlier or two.
But, if your organization is *self* *admittedly* falling short, if you *know* you have problems in several areas, why would you ever waste even a single word pushing back against someone who is detailing exactly how you are falling short for them? I would argue that if you are doing so, this clearly points to the real problem: Even in the face of a situation where you *know* your organization is being damaged, you cannot admit to failings. If that's the case, it will never get better.
Anyway, these are my ill-informed thoughts. If you think they are wrong, then they're worth what you paid for them. If you think they don't apply, ignore them. Like @tbone1004, I would love to know what initiatives are planned for the future.
Oh, and one thing specific to NSS-CDS: when there is talk of sloppy money, that's a 100% turn-off for a lot of people, including me. Accountants are cheap, and the process of tracking where money goes is *SIMPLE*: every dollar comes into a bank account, and every dollar out of that bank account is accountable to the person given it. It's incredibly annoying and irritating, but *not* difficult. If an organization that clears 6 figures from an event can't figure that out, well, there are other options...
