One of our assumptions has been around the idea that a Next Generation constituent needn't necessarily have a postal address. As many of you know this requirement in the current software has caused us to jump through some hoops with web registrations where we actually temporarily create constituents with a dummy address. So the thought was if a large percentage of your constituents only address you electronically, why bother with a required postal address? Furthermore, considering the type of "groups with members" constituent model that we've been talking about, why should a every child in a family need an address when all of the children belong to a family that has a postal address?
So yesterday we got into having a big discussion about whether we needed to carry on the notion of a "primary address" for a constituent. Currently each constituent must have a primary address and that primary address must not be control grouped--everyone can see it.
Primary addresses has some nice advantages--if you want to analyze purchasing by postal code sometimes you just need any easy way to get to a postal code. Plus if you've got several addresses on a constituent and none of them really match the criteria for a particular mailing, you've always got the primary address to fall back on.
Obviously if no postal address is required then you can't force a primary address. You could make a rule like "if there are any addresses, then one of them must be primary". But then we thought, "does this work in a consortium setting"? Let's say the Symphony and the Ballet share a system. Couldn't you make the case that the Symphony might want to store a private address that only the Symphony could see? And that's the only address the constituent has on file? You can't say it's the primary address because the Ballet can't see it.
So several questions:
1. What about this notion of a constituent with no postal address? Does that make sense? Or does the current model feel better? Even with the group/member model we could say that each constituent has to have a primary address, even if that address is not specifically tied to that constituent. That's the example of the child's primary address actually being the family's address.
2. If there were no requirement for a postal address, then there are obviously still times when one is required. We couldn't have a delivery method of "Mail" if the constituent didn't have an address. Of course we could require that an order have a shipping address before allowing that delivery method. But what does this do to subscribers if some percentage of subscribers didn't have postal addresses? Or is this just the way the world is going and we have to learn to operate that way?
3. If we don't require an address, what about a primary flag? Is it ok for a constituent to have say 3 addresses (some shared, some not) and none of them being a primary address? Is it ok for a constituent to have 3 addresses, all only visible for some part of a consortium?
Believe me it's a nice feeling knowing that we can put questions like this in front a large, interested audience. We're eagerly awaiting your help.
In my version of Utopia, we wouldn't be mailing paper, we would be electronically transferring information. I think that day will come, however, in my current world - Opera - that day is many years away.
That said, I agree with most of you that it would be totally ok to have constituents without postal addresses as long as there is some other identifying address - email, phone, etc. I wouldn't want a database full of John Smiths without any distinguishing information.
I personally like the idea of a primary flag for postal addresses. It certainly makes analysis easier. In the case a constituent who has several residences it can also give you an indicator of which one they call home.
A few more thoughts just popped into my head regarding allowing records with no address. I agree with all the other posters that, with the way the world is, we need to allow this. I wonder, though, how we can balance the need for address-less records with the desire to keep our database as duplicate free as possible. i.e. How do we dupe check accounts with no address? Obviously the requirement of searching by last name and zip before creating a new record won't work. Or do we not worry about it until a no-address account makes a purchase which requires an address and dupe-check at that point? And how do we configure our constituent search to easily access and show all account information, not just name and address?
Watching this conversation with interest---I think Kjersten has articulated a defining point: seeing the database as a relationship management tool. It seems ok to me to have two separate “modes” for the database, one in which it’s not important at all where someone lives and gets mail---they’ve already started the relationship by providing an email, and we’ll start from there. All about communications management, and moving folks from this “mode” into the other mode of “purchasing patron” where for business reasons it is necessary to know a bit more. Chuck is right that it would be cool to hook at least a zip code to an e-mail only account---seems very normal and easy to do.
-----Original Message----- From: Tessitura Next Generation Forum [mailto:forums-nextgeneration@tessituranetwork.com] On Behalf Of Kjersten Schladetzky Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 8:27 AM To: Bob Hackett Subject: Re: [Tessitura Next Generation Forum] Primary Addresses A few more thoughts just popped into my head regarding allowing records with no address. I agree with all the other posters that, with the way the world is, we need to allow this. I wonder, though, how we can balance the need for address-less records with the desire to keep our database as duplicate free as possible. i.e. How do we dupe check accounts with no address? Obviously the requirement of searching by last name and zip before creating a new record won't work. Or do we not worry about it until a no-address account makes a purchase which requires an address and dupe-check at that point? And how do we configure our constituent search to easily access and show all account information, not just name and address? From: Dale Aucoin <bounce-daleaucoin4707@tessituranetwork.com> Sent: 2/24/2010 9:36:21 In my version of Utopia, we wouldn't be mailing paper, we would be electronically transferring information. I think that day will come, however, in my current world - Opera - that day is many years away. That said, I agree with most of you that it would be totally ok to have constituents without postal addresses as long as there is some other identifying address - email, phone, etc. I wouldn't want a database full of John Smiths without any distinguishing information. I personally like the idea of a primary flag for postal addresses. It certainly makes analysis easier. In the case a constituent who has several residences it can also give you an indicator of which one they call home. You were sent this message automatically by www.tessituranetwork.com because you subscribed to the Tessitura Next Generation forum email notifications. You may reply to this message or visit the site to reply to the post above. If replying via email, please consider deleting the previous message text before sending to help with readability on the site. Thank you!
From: Dale Aucoin <bounce-daleaucoin4707@tessituranetwork.com> Sent: 2/24/2010 9:36:21
You were sent this message automatically by www.tessituranetwork.com because you subscribed to the Tessitura Next Generation forum email notifications. You may reply to this message or visit the site to reply to the post above. If replying via email, please consider deleting the previous message text before sending to help with readability on the site. Thank you!
Maybe for initial contacts we need / require at least one form of identifiable address on each individual or group. However, it may not be a postal mailing address. I am starting to think about a communications channel as one of the other writers suggested. Either,
Email OR
Postal address OR
Phone number
Maybe we need at least one of these “unique” communications channels on every record. However, that communications channel may not have to be a traditional postal address. Maybe Email addresses, Postal Addresses, Phone Numbers are really all the same kind of thing a form of unique communications channel that will reach the person we are establishing a relationship ship with. As, that relationship grows into a sale, and the person wants us to mail tickets, then and only then does a postal address become “required”.
--Tom
From: Tessitura Next Generation Forum [mailto:forums-nextgeneration@tessituranetwork.com] On Behalf Of Kjersten Schladetzky Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 11:27 AM To: Thomas Brown Subject: Re: [Tessitura Next Generation Forum] Primary Addresses