Re-engaging lapsed members

Discussion
1

I read somewhere on discourse that from the start a lot of members have dropped out, which I think is understandable due to the makerspace not being a usable space to make!

I don’t know if anyone could get the statistics out and work out the demographic of those that have ceased membership.

But if we are looking for more members to join and take part, is there anyway we can send an email or mailshot to these lapsed members informing them that we are now open for makers, and inviting them to come down to an open evening to see how far we have progressed since they were last here.

After all these are the strongest “leads” as everyone of these at one time had a need to join a working makerspace.

1 Like
2

Good point. Let’s do it, but apologise for ‘spamming’.

Not exactly on topic - can someone split this?

3

I would argue the space has been usable and been used, but where we previously were electronics focused, we’ve added a bunch more facilities but much of them have been usable for a while.

That said, the drop out rate has been consistent, and is common among many similar types of spaces, and I actually think it’s more to do with people joining and not feeling able to know how to get started, or lack of motivation. However I expect there are other factors.

4

I’d be keen to do some kind of outreach in this area. Might be nice to do some kind of email with a soft touch, ‘we miss you and look! It’s shiny!’ Type thing.
@welcome ?

5

The presumption is people left just because of what Mark said above.

When there are other factors, and do we actually need to boost membership numbers?

6

well, we don’t actually know. Whatever intervention is done here is by definition experimental.

7

We could ask…?

‘Hello, hope you don’t mind us contacting you as a lapsed member. This is what SLMS looks like now - we’d like to invite you to come back and have another look. While we’re in touch, do you mind us asking why you left?’

8

That sounds very sensible.

9

Me and Tom used to do this in the past, but we rarely got an answer and it was mostly the fact that people didn’t use the space and stopped paying for something they didn’t use

10

I figure that’s probably the case, but either way, probably low effort to implement and some data is better than none.

11

The question might be more about why they didn’t use the space.

And also what percentage of members drop out are male/female in the context of where this conversation started.

1 Like
12

Yes, we usually make contact with members who’ve been actively engaged and then left: and we’ve had some useful feedback via this route. However: subjectively a large proportion of the turnover is people who join and then never actually use the space. Of course the space not being usable could be a factor! And we haven’t put much energy into chasing no-show members.

With an increasing number of facilities it will be interesting to see how the turnover rate changes.

1 Like
13

Not so sure we should link this back to the original context especially as this was split from there for a reason.

What other factors are causing people to leave?
I am just going on my own experience and my own feelings when I joined.
The biggest disappointment for me was the fact that hardly any of the tools that I wanted to join the space for were usable.
Shapeoko. Mill. Lathe.
And this was this September.
So I disagree that the space was usable. And until every tool in the space has been risk assessed and regular inductions being carried out, there will be a reason to leave

2 Likes
14

I work in the comms department for my work I would send a mail out say something like: sorry it’s taken so long to be in touch, we thought you would be interested in…please respond no if you do not want to be added to the mailing list. Very effective. Those that say no you can engage in a conversation as to why?

3 Likes