Paul Jensen

Question from GF: In looking at the current balance between the twin goals of increased retention and increased recruitment in Mensa, on which one would you focus Mensa's attention right now—and why?

Answer:

This question asks me to choose between two slices of the same apple pie! I know some slices are bigger then others. That is reality.

We dedicate most of our resources to strategies and tactics we develop to meet best estimates of member expectations. These programs and services then seem to be a key to general membership retention. They should and do command our primary resources and attention. This is a 'no-brainer'.

But it's just not that simple.

Our biggest rate of membership lapse occurs in our new member group. How we run our new member qualification program obviously helps create or reinforces a set of candidate expectations which directly impacts new member retention. So the two areas are not easily separable. Both are key factors in member retention.

We all brought a set of 'fantasy' expectations with us when we initiated the process to join. To get inside someone's head to understand these is something we have never done with certainty. Perhaps we never will. Perhaps we never want to.

We spent considerable time here in a Leadership Planning Workshop trying to answer that question of 'why?' people wish to join Mensa. The answers were packed with nobility and buzzwords, but to paraphrase the Bard, signified nothing.

But there are other approaches available to understanding this retention enigma.

We have a gold mine of unexamined data available—clues to help us see patterns. And patterns are the core of predictability. This data flows from new member characteristics. When we decide to actively isolate and 'mine' this important data from our membership qualification program, from our new members, and from their subsequent membership behavior, we may start to see these patterns. We will find some apparent answers.

For just one example, is retention rate higher for prequalifiers or for test system products? Local groups have little if any direct contact with prequalifiers until N.O. processes and reports their identity. Is that a good idea? Maybe our system of dealing with test candidates needs help or refocus. Or not. We just don't know. And common sense says we really need these answers. The data is there. Statistical probability theory is a handy tool. We may find answers to retention questions we didn't even know we should ask.

American Mensa provides defined services for over 50,000 individual members. Testing provides a possibility for 1 individual non-member. Increased retention has to clearly be the primary focus. We can basically ratchet testing growth programs up as needed.

I do not buy into the opinion "it's easier to keep a member than to find a new one.". If that were the case, we would obviously have a higher retention rate, would not have to find two new members to have one still there two years down the road, and would need to spend less in supplying member services. It is harder to keep a member, and that has to be our mindset.

Test programs are interesting to set up and run, and need limited but focused resources. The fact that we have tested over 500 paying candidates here during the last three years while adding significantly to our member services package makes that point. The fact that our retention rate is still about 10/12% makes another point. It's a catch 22. The higher our new member rate climbs, the higher our lapse rate grows.

This is the key area where we need answers. When the question is redefined as 'retention or growth' priority, retention is still the clear choice.

—Paul Jensen

Cyndi Kuyper

Question from GF: There have been many proposals made and accepted by which Mensa has been able to obtain money without raising dues. What are your guidelines for when such proposals should be turned down?

Answer:

After consideration, my reasons for turning down a proposal could be as follows:

• It would cause a hardship for members, such as SPAM or loss of privacy.
• It would result in a misuse of member information or data.
• It would jeopardize the name and/or logo of Mensa.

Supporting these guidelines without a proposal on the table is difficult. A judgment would have to be based on the specifics of the suggested plan. I would likely not accept any proposal that confirms any of the above guidelines. I would be more accepting of increasing dues if other money raising options would compromise the membership of Mensa.

—Cyndi Kuyper
   Petition and NomCom Candidate for RVC—Region 4