Together we are stronger – or what? This blog post is about the merger two associations, clubs, or NGOs and the pros and cons of it. For small associations in particular with declining membership and unfulfilled ambitions, it may make sense to merge with a new, larger association. This blog post is about the merger two associations, clubs, or NGOs and the pros and cons of it.
Merger decisions are often taken by the general meeting on the initiative of the Board of Directors. A merger may consist in one association taking up one or more other associations. This can also be done by the dismantling of two or more associations and the replacing of a new one.
There are arguments both for and against merger, and it depends to a large extent on the individual circumstances whether merger is something it makes sense to speculate on. A narrow sample of the pros and cons of merger of associations is examined here.
More members – for better or worse
When two associations have common interests, perhaps even joint members, and do away with the same problems in terms of recruiting members and volunteers, fusion can make sense. For example, if two sports associations join forces, members stand to benefit from two offers for one membership.
This gives current members the incentive to continue in the new association. The association also gets a broader profile with it and can intercept several new members. Because if a new member quickly gets tired of the association’s one offer, the member can try out the other offer. And in relation to volunteers, you can do more with the volunteers in one large association than in two small ones.
However, the disadvantages of shaking up members and volunteers together are that as the association gets larger, there is a longer gap between members. In smaller clubs, everyone knows each other by first name and maybe also outside the club’s framework. The same is not necessarily true of bigger clubs.
Smaller, joint board
Finding board members can be difficult. Not all members are fresh to take on the tasks assigned to a board of directors. Here, too, it may make sense to bring together the board members of two associations in one association. The board of directors of the merged association will be no bigger than the boards of the two previous associations merged, so it will be easy to occupy all board positions.
The disadvantage here is that fewer board members have to look after the interests of the association relative to the number of members. And if the merged association is shaped by two associations with different, perhaps conflicting, interests, the board in its work must weigh more considerations in its work than the old two.
Resources are shared
Members of small associations that join forces with larger, resourceful associations will benefit from the financial leeway and facilities of the larger associations. And the larger association will be strengthened by bringing in new members.
Assuming that the two associations that merge are essentially doing the same – e.g. sports, just with different offers or exercises – merging associations will facilitate the coordination of activities, because it is now easier to take into account members who want to try out the different offers.
It is therefore easier to plan activities so that they do not clash with each other, as was perhaps the case with the activities of the two associations before they merged. The disadvantages of sharing resources and re-planning activities are that resources do not extend to the activities of the large new association and that many members will not be able to continue in the association if the training times are reschedule.