Does your charity have members? And are you clear on what their duties are?
These questions are not a challenge of your intelligence or expertise. It is simply that the terms ‘membership’ and ‘members’ are two of the most ambiguous words in third sector vocabulary.
Different organisations - rightly - use the words in varying ways. This is because the meaning of ‘member’ depends on whether you are incorporated (e.g., a SCIO or company), a trust, club or other structure. In one organisation, a ‘member’ could refer to a trustee; in another to a service user; in another to a supporter.
An existential issue
This all matters because the concept of 'membership' and its management is crucial for charities, as it can affect their governance, accountability, and overall sustainability.
This can occur in different ways. One common situation is where a charity is constrained by an outdated membership structure.
Such a charity may have members (for example, supporters, donors or the families of beneficiaries) who by historical accident have powers or duties such as electing trustees, changing the charity’s constitution or passing resolutions at AGMs. This can give rise to a variety of problems, for example, AGMs not being quorate, or members using their rights to advance a personal agenda rather than the interests of the charity or its beneficiaries.
Out-of-date membership models can also make administration more complex or expensive or alienate supporters who are not interested in correspondence about attending AGMs or exercising their duties.
At the other end of the spectrum, some charities may benefit from a stronger membership structure. This could enhance the legitimacy of trustees (because they are elected by the membership) and bolster accountability. In this scenario having members could make a charity more purposeful, reputable, or dynamic.
Key checks for every charity
These examples demonstrate that there is no definitive answer as to whether charities should have members or the type of membership structure they should adopt. However, there are questions and issues that every organisation should consider.
Firstly, it is worthwhile for every charity to map its membership model:
- Do you have members?
- What duties and rights do they have?
- And what advantages or disadvantages does that bring?
Secondly, look at the legal aspects:
- Are you meeting your obligations under relevant charity and/or company law?
Thirdly, consider wider governance questions, such as:
- Do you need a membership base that is broader than your trustees?
- Is a legacy membership structure draining resources, holding back progress or preventing change?
- Are current members well-informed and do they receive clear information on their role, or could this improve?
- Would it be helpful to follow other charities and introduce a tiered membership system? For example, having voting members who engage with trustees and the decision-making processes, and non-voting supporters or friends who support the objects of your charity but do not wish to be involved in its governance.
These are important and sometimes complex questions that require a good understanding of charity governance, and the different membership models available. In addition, it requires trustees to have a real understanding of the specific context of your own organisation.
Considering the impact on organisational efficiency, governance and reputation, they are certainly questions worth asking.
Helen Kidd, Partner, Head of Charities and the Third Sector
Published 22 October 2024
