I once worked for an association whose Board members were older than my parents. During an Executive Committee meeting (before cell phones), the receptionist interrupted us to tell me my father was on the phone. I told her to take a message.

The Committee members were appalled. They expected to be able to call their children anytime, anywhere, and get them on the phone immediately.

They recessed the meeting so I could take the call and scolded me before the meeting resumed.

My members were parents, and they understood how parents think.

Since becoming a parent, I have come to understand, too. Morning car pools, mid-day teacher conferences, and sick children have been routine events in my life. I expect to balance family needs with work needs - in whatever way I think best for both - and not have to sneak around to do it.

Our society promotes family values, often forgetting that family responsibilities are the natural outcome of that policy. Association executives shouldn't forget.

Wireless is great when you are on the road and need to get connected. It can be less than ideal back at HQ.

My wife and I work from home offices at opposite ends of the house, and the wireless signal cannot reach us both (something about our home construction), even with a range expander.

After having installed a wireless network, we had to hard-wire all the computers, including our kids'.

Then, my keyboard died (never happened before) and the only available replacement was wireless. That won't work because the keyboard and mouse are battery-operated and could lose power - a technological step backward, it seems. A receiver is needed, plugged into the USB port, and it should not be positioned near the monitor, mouse, keyboard, computer - or anything metal. My entire system sits on a metal desk next to a metal file cabinet.

So, I grabbed an old keyboard that had not yet been discarded, and will use that until it doesn't work anymore.

People around us often pick up other people's signals from computers, telephones, and even television remotes. I feel secure with hard wiring.

I like the postings of Cindy Butts and Cynthia D'Amour because they talk about real, everyday events that have practical applications in association management.

Another person who does that is Ron Rosenberg, in his weekly newsletter (although I'm not sure I receive it every week). His presentation last year at ASAE on "Outrageous Marketing" was one of the best I've seen.

The monthly ASAE case studies by Lisa Junker also describe real situations that I have experienced, could have experienced, or may experience in the future.

Thanks to Kevin Holland for letting us know about this vibrant, and unusually frank, debate.

Many people believe it began with them.

Association executives do not make a habit of consulting their predecessors, even if the organization has a sterling reputation. Past Board presidents are often ignored, and associations often try to avoid giving much of a voice - if any - to Past President Councils (if they even have them).

Lots of folks think all that preceded them was inferior and they measure progress beginning with their tenure.

That's why I don't think too many people are worried about the loss of institutional memory brought on by boomer retirements.

Every generation feels it is more capable than the previous ones. Today's innovations will be tomorrow's deletions. What happened yesterday may have helped the association, but tomorrow will require something different.

Change is inevitable. It is necessary. It is usually positive.

Just don't tell that to someone who doesn't work here anymore.

There was a time you'd have to search for a pay phone to make an emergency call. Now, you just reach for your cell. You don't have to know where your child, friend, or employee is or how to reach them. Call their cell. No more expensive hotel room telephone calls. Use a cell.

We used to play board games like Risk, all the time wishing for a more realistic version. Now we have Sid Meier's Civilization and countless other games. Budding urban planners would draw pencil sketches of street grids. Now there is SimCity.

Natural disasters, comedian bloopers, and police brutality have all been captured on cell cameras and broadcast on YouTube. Convenience and reality are just a click away and can be shared with millions.

Some advances don't seem that helpful, though. Why would someone want to watch a television show or movie on a tiny cell phone screen? Or wake up in the middle of the night to read and respond to a text message (disturbing housemates with the ring)? Why twitter someone to tell them a meeting is a bore? Just get up and walk out.

Technological advancements have always been enticing, and they always will be. For lots of people, "cool" is a more salient feature than "utility."

It will be nice when people get over the novelty of these devices and start using them appropriately. By then, however, a newer version of "cool" will probably be making the rounds.

Here's a study that found word-of-mouth marketing more likely to be triggered by traditional media than by digital. Researchers also felt that "situational differences determine when advertising works."

I guess that means marketers should select their tactics strategically and not expect the same thing to work every time in every venue.

People will always want to associate with other people, whether face-to-face, online, or through venues that have not yet been conceived.

All groups - no matter what they call themselves - engage in a multitude of tasks and require people who possess various skills. Groups can benefit from marketers, fund-raisers, writers, editors, designers, technicians, publicists, facilitators, organizers, managers, and a host of others.

Discussions about the necessity of associations and association professionals, while thought-provoking, often cast the issue as backward-thinking vs. forward-thinking, which is not always accurate.

The nature of association work may change, and organizational structures may change, but associations will always attract people and association professionals will always have something to offer.

Face-to-face communication works because it employs all of your senses. You can observe body language, detect inflections of speech, and pick up all sorts of other visual cues. Tact can more easily be employed in speech than in writing - printed smilies and winks can only go so far as substitutes for oral diplomacy.

However, face-to-face conversations are limited by time, distance, and cost. So it's necessary to supplement them with electronic communications that can include a vastly larger audience, be conducted more frequently (or continually), and cost far less.

Neither communication mode is superior to the other. Despite the prevalence of age groups favoring one or the other, each has value in different situations.

Even those who rely primarily on electronic communication enjoy meeting each other face-to-face. It is much easier to communicate online with people you've met, since you know how they act and react in conversation and you are less likely to develop incorrect assumptions about them.

The question is not which is better, but which is most appropriate at any given time.

Another report was published today noting the decline in consumer confidence in the economy. Gallup Poll reported similar data and others have ferreted out the feelings of individuals and corporations.

The trouble with a lot of these surveys is they measure opinions. While we all want to anticipate future happenings, a lot of opinions tallied in surveys yield self-fulfilling prophecies.

Consumers and businesses worry about each other's health. So, consumers reduce spending and businesses lay off employees. Associations lose business and professional members (or worry about losing them), so they trim spending and lay off employees.

Politicians raise their rhetoric about economic conditions and may, or may not take action (which may, or may not, really impact the problem), fueling everybody's fears.

A business may achieve record sales and record profits but falls short of analysts' expectations. The stock drops, businesses lay off workers, and consumers reduce spending.

Each entity reacts to the others' actions and anxieties.

Maybe we shouldn't have so many surveys.