John Mancini recently published his ebook, The Death of the AMS >> perhaps it should read The Death of the AMS as we Expect It >> which outlines his disgust for the way that associations have overcomplicated their expectations of their AMS. I admit that I often refer to the AMS as the mothership and I know that many organizations are better for having multiple uses for the AMS. I’m not crazy about his title, but I get it, and I think there’s truth to John’s message. Your AMS isn’t a swiss army knife. You can’t expect it to be the tool that skins the buck* and also opens your beer bottles. Expect it to do several of your organization’s needs really well and then find technology vendors that fit your other requirements well and integrate if it makes sense.
When the IT department says that we need the AMS to do the work of 8 systems, I think someone definitely needs to step up and ask why. What reporting/information is needed (for staff, members and leadership) to propel the organization forward? What can be done to execute those needs without paralyzing the entire system?
Our favorite line in the ebook is “Let’s start a conversation about how we in the association community can move out of the slow-moving backwaters of the IT world. We’ve all got important work to do – work the world needs.”
As for the odd photo, well, you’ll have to read John’s ebook to understand his explanation.
*Though I am a southern girl, I’ve never actually skinned a buck for those of you who might be worried about that non-animal-friendly language. I’m actually fond of deer.