Happy Friday! Short workweeks are fun, but you know what’s NOT fun? Cramming five days worth of work into four. I’m definitely ready for the weekend!

Before you hit the (proverbial) road, though, be sure to check out this week’s Friday Top Five — five blog posts from around the association community that were extra-special to me this week.

1. The Zen and the Art of Nonprofit Technology blog questioned whether or not cloud computing is good for the environment. Although many in the association community (including, of course, those of us here at MemberClicks) are big advocates of cloud computing, it may not be so environmentally sound. Read on for more info.

2. Jamie Notter discussed conflict this week, and why we should be moving toward the conflict rather than avoiding it. I’m the first to admit I can be passive-aggressive, so actively engaging in conflict isn’t exactly my favorite thing. But sometimes, moving toward conflict and confronting it can be beneficial; you can resolve small issues before the become big problems.

3. In a post for the Nonprofit Conversation blog, Nancy Schwartz shared nine keys for nonprofit organizations to utilize online video. One of my favorites? Online video is an expectation, not an option, for members under age 25. Additionally, remember that short and sweet is so important when it comes to videos. Attention spans for online video are minuscule.

4. According to a survey cited at the Association Management Group blog, demand for association management services is up. Bruce Wardle interviewed a few association execs and asked readers why thought demand for AMCs has increased. What do you think?

5. Conor McNulty at the Acronym blog asked a few insightful questions this week: What would you have done differently in your association management career? The post garnered lots of great comments, and I encourage everyone – no matter how far along in your career you are – to take a look.

From everyone at MemberClicks, have a great weekend!

Continuing with Acronym’s “Big Ideas” theme…

Would you still think members complain too much or would their complaints seem more valid if you had to walk in their shoes?

This question stuck out to me for a few reasons. When I first began learning about associations, I — for some reason — thought association staffers had previously worked in their memberships’ fields, or had some sort of interest in the industry. I didn’t realize there was an industry comprised of “association staffers.”

It makes sense, though. Someone has to plan the events, do the administrative work and take care of all the behind-the-scenes things required to make an association run smoothly.

So what if you had to work as an engineer, or a photographer, or an accountant? What if you belonged to your association and you just wanted to be able to take advantage of the great things it had to offer and meet other professionals in your field? Wouldn’t members’ “complaints” (requests) seem a little more valid?

Let’s even take it a step further and imagine if members had to work in their association for a few weeks, too. I think everyone would appreciate his or her own job, and also gain a lot of perspective.

Imagine how improved communication and understanding between staffers and members could be. (Sure, communication still might be not be perfect, but it would improve a little at least. Right?)

I think this idea is a great one, despite how unfeasible it is. It reminds me a bit of Maggie McGary’s post on association staffers working at another association. It just makes sense that staffers who support their members’ common interests should be aware of their perspectives. I’m sure some association staffers belong to other organizations, but I think to truly understand where their members are coming from, staffers should walk a mile in their shoes (so to speak).

This also goes along a little bit with Elizabeth Engel’s post about staffers cold-calling members just to connect and listen. She wrote about connection, community and a new source of ideas — and I think her idea is great, and obviously a lot more feasible than actually swapping lives.

Maybe this is all a little idealistic of me (improved communication! more perspective!), but in all seriousness, I think we too often get caught up in how our own jobs are so difficult, not thinking how our roles play into the big picture.

Do you think your members would appreciate the hard work staffers do if they had to do it themselves? Would you have a better understanding of your members’ wants and needs if you had to work in their industries?