Is Twitter really a viable platform for association members to have discussions amongst themselves? Put another way, are Twitter chats (occurring at a designated day and time each week) viable for associations themselves? To be honest, I’m not sure they’re worth it — at least not yet.

Hear me out. I was following the Oct. 6 #assnchat and the topic was how a Twitter chat might drive association engagement.

For one thing, Twitter chats tend to get super slow when more than 20 people participate. For another, it can be extremely difficult to get people to commit an extra hour each week to focus on a still-buggy technology, especially when many of them are already staring at their computers for at least 40 hours a week.

Forgive me, but aren’t there other chat platforms that will work just as well as Twitter, if not better? Examples include Meebo, Yammer and Real Chat.

I understand why Twitter is so enticing. There are millions of users and Twitter chats are often great places to find new followers.

One idea from @bethbrodovsky was for associations to ask a specific question on Twitter and post the responses in a window on your Web site. Perhaps you don’t have to start with a chat — simply designate a hashtag for your association and use it throughout the week rather than at a specific time. Whenever members tweet something pertaining to the association, they can just attach the hashtag.

As someone in the Oct. 6 #assnchat rightly pointed out, a Twitter chat should be a habit — people have to remember to regularly attend. That comment made me think of the bygone days of “appointment viewing” for television. On-Demand, TiVo and DVR killed appointment viewing. For instance, people used to make it a point to be home on Thursday nights for “Seinfeld.” But if you can easily tape it, why bother?

I know a chat isn’t the same thing as television for obvious reason — a chat is interactive and engaging while TV is one-way communication.

And I do think there are ways an association could utilize a Twitter chat to make it useful. For example, smaller chapters or special interest groups could host chats that could also draw non-members’ attention to the organization.

At this point, I’m just not sure Twitter chats are a viable alternative to face-to-face meetings, which association staffers can easily hold. I think chats such as #assnchat succeed because, in addition to a motivated moderator, it’s comprised of the leaders and staffers from different associations coming together to discuss broader ideas.

To create a viable chat through Twitter for your association, it’s crucial to educate your members on why Twitter itself is beneficial. I’m not sure anyone will create a Twitter account for the sole purpose of participating in a chat, especially when there are other chat options available.

I like the idea of streaming members’ tweets (with a hashtag) on an association’s Web site. It shows visitors to the site that members are active, engaged and know how to use new technologies. But I think some associations might be getting ahead of themselves with the possibility of utilizing Twitter for chats right away. If you do have members on Twitter, encourage them to add the URL to their e-mail signatures, or even business cards. It’s really not as lame or techy as it seems!

Put together a comprehensive list of people for your members to follow, as @dhelwig suggested. This can help your members see immediate value, as well as encourage them to participate in conversations that are already taking place.

Focus on getting your members on Twitter first, then you can take advantage of everything that’s made it one of the fastest-growing social networks in the world.

This is part two of a series exploring the value of virtual attendance following the Aug. 25 Association Chat (#assnchat) on Twitter. Part one can be found here.

It’s no secret the economy is flailing. And, though things are looking up, a trip to Toronto for ASAE and The Center’s Annual Meeting and Expo probably wasn’t in many organizations’ budgets this year. Creating a fulfilling virtual experience one year can drive “real-life” attendance for the following year, which should be ASAE’s goal.

I initially was going to rehash some highlights and quotes from the transcript, but I ended up retyping practically everything. Some key takeaways, though:

• Virtual attendees could pair up with exhibitors for sponsorship on blogs. For example, a blogger would host an ad for a certain exhibitor in exchange for them sponsoring the blogger’s virtual attendance. (@maggielmcg)
• Create a virtual event manager role to maximize virtual attendance. (@maggielmcg, @jmoonah)
• Charge for the edited package of video, audio, etc… There should be a revenue stream attached to valuable content. (Many participants shared this view.)
• What if virtual attendees had access to the live sessions and then paid what they thought it was worth afterward — otherwise known as the Radiohead model? (@dcoriale)
• “Virtual” could encompass a lot of items put together that could not be so easily replicated (i.e. professionally edited packages). (@spkrinteractive)
• Offer a “teaser” for free (perhaps of the general sessions), but have virtual attendees pay for other content. (@spkrinteractive)
• Most content creators want to be paid for what they create. (@busyevent) (My thoughts: Does it matter who pays them? It could be the association, the virtual attendees or perhaps the exhibitors.)
• Volunteers could tweet and take video from each session. (@ceosolutions)

The amount of interaction available to virtual attendees should determine the event’s monetary worth. Maybe it’s worth nothing. Personally, I like the idea of hiring official content creators to document each session — they could essentially function as reporters. (I think it’s the journalist in me really likes this idea!) At this year’s ASAE, it seemed as if the majority of active Twitter users went to the same few learning labs, which minimized the amount of possible coverage.

Jeff De Cagna (@pinnovation), the chat’s moderator, said he was concerned that “associations are looking for ways to make virtual attendees pay for value that should be free. [IRL attendees] pay for the actual value of experience.”

Although I agree with that statement, shouldn’t there be a certain level of experience and interaction that comes with virtual attendance? Of course, face-to-face interaction always trumps electronic, but virtual attendance is becoming more viable as technology continues to evolve.

Perhaps there wasn’t a huge capability for a stellar virtual experience at ASAE this year, and that’s OK — we should look ahead to ASAE 2010 and explore different options. At the rate technology is evolving, there are probably possibilities for next year we haven’t even thought of yet.

The chat’s transcript is available here.