Most association leaders can name two or three programs they should probably sunset but haven’t. The challenge isn’t always identifying what isn’t working. It’s having the structure, evidence and shared language to decide what to do about it.
Associations are under real pressure and cannot afford to put off critical decisions about their offerings. For many organizations, core revenue streams may be at risk as member needs and market conditions change, while staff capacity remains tied up in programs that may no longer deliver enough value to justify the resources they require.
A portfolio analysis creates a structured way to make those choices. Done well, it reveals where to invest, where an offering needs to evolve, where programs compete for the same audience and where it is time to stop doing something. With the right measures and the right people at the table, leaders gain the confidence to make choices instead of continuing to add programs without subtracting any.
Start With Readiness and the Human Side of Decision-Making
Before diving into spreadsheets, take an honest look at whether your organization is ready to act on what the analysis reveals. In our experience, readiness shows up in three dimensions.
Culture and decision-making. Programs rarely exist without history. A staff member may have spent years building an offering, or a board member may see it as fundamental to the association’s identity. That makes portfolio analysis as much a change-management exercise as an analytical one. Leaders need to understand how decisions are actually made, who needs to be involved and who has authority to act. The goal isn’t unanimous agreement. It’s enough shared understanding to make a thoughtful decision and move forward.
Strategy and outcomes. Before asking whether a program is performing, you need to know what it is supposed to accomplish. That means identifying meaningful outcomes rather than tracking outputs. An output looks like “we hosted 18 webinars and 2,000 people attended.” An outcome looks like “first-year member retention rose from 45% to 68%” or “members are applying new skills on the job.” Without that clarity, you end up measuring whether a program is busy rather than whether it is valuable.
Data. You need reliable financial, resource and engagement data, but it doesn’t have to be perfect. Waiting for perfect data can become its own barrier. The question is whether you have enough information to make a better decision than you could on instinct alone.
You can take our Portfolio Analysis Readiness Assessment to evaluate your organization across these areas and identify where you may need to strengthen your foundation.
Look Beyond Revenue to the True Cost of Programs
Associations aren’t traditional businesses, and financial return tells only part of the story. An offering may intentionally operate at a loss because it advances the mission. Another may generate significant revenue but consume disproportionate staff capacity. So the question isn’t simply, “Does this make money?” It’s “What role does this offering play in our portfolio, and is its performance worth the resources we’re investing in it?”
One of the most consistent findings in our portfolio work is that associations underestimate the true cost of programs, especially when staff time isn’t tracked by program. That shouldn’t stop you. Proxy estimates of staff time and overhead are far better than ignoring fully loaded costs altogether. Comparing top-line revenue against direct costs alone can mask programs where the cost to generate revenue is out of line with impact.
Establish a Financial Baseline
A high-level financial review can quickly surface efficiency issues and opportunities. Key indicators include:
- Net margin: Which programs contribute to the bottom line, and which require subsidy to fulfill the mission?
- Salaries and administrative costs as a percentage of program revenue: How much capacity does an offering require relative to what it generates?
- Revenue concentration: How dependent is the organization on a few programs, sponsors or audiences?
- Budget versus actuals: Where do cost overruns or overly optimistic projections recur?
- Expense growth versus impact growth: Are costs rising without a matching increase in outcomes or engagement?
- Staff time allocation: Are your people focused on the highest-value priorities?
These measures don’t provide answers on their own. They tell you where to ask harder questions.
Apply the Strategic Lenses
Next, look at each offering through lenses that align with your strategy.
Mission impact: What outcome does this offering advance, and how important is it to the mission?
Member value: Who does it serve, and how much do they value it? Is it meeting a current need or continuing because it always has?
Strategic opportunity: Does it align with where the organization is going? Could you invest, redesign, combine or deliver it differently?
Organizational capacity and delivery: Do your staffing, technology and infrastructure support delivering it well? Some programs underperform not because the core value is off base, but because the organization lacks the capacity to execute them at the level they deserve.
Viewed together, these lenses reveal trade-offs that aren’t apparent when programs are evaluated one at a time.
From Insight to Action: Be Prepared to Make Choices
A portfolio analysis only creates value if you act on it. That doesn’t mean every underperforming program should disappear. It means every offering should have an intentional role. The analysis may lead you to:
- Invest where mission, member value and financial performance reinforce one another
- Maintain programs that consistently meet clearly defined goals
- Reimagine offerings that meet an important need but aren’t delivering enough value in their current form
- Consolidate offerings that serve overlapping purposes or audiences
- De-emphasize programs that warrant fewer resources
- Sunset offerings that consume resources without creating sufficient value
Portfolio decisions require clarity on who makes the final call and who is consulted, along with a facilitated process that makes space for both “what the data says” and “what we want to be true.” The most successful analyses treat governance and change management as core to the work rather than an afterthought.
Bringing the Process to Life: NACUA’s Portfolio Analysis
The National Association of College and University Attorneys (NACUA) used a portfolio analysis to evaluate its programs, publications and services and clarify which offerings created the most value, where there was overlap and how resources could best support long-term impact.
NACUA and McKinley built a customized framework that considered mission alignment, member value, financial performance and risk. After an immersion and readiness assessment, the team combined quantitative analysis with surveys, interviews and task force discussions to bring stakeholder perspectives into the process.
Most importantly, the data wasn’t simply handed to leadership. McKinley facilitated working sessions where NACUA’s leaders interpreted the findings, explored trade-offs and decided where to invest, refine or sunset offerings. The result was shared understanding of how each program supports the mission, along with a framework NACUA can keep using for future decisions.
“It wasn’t just about data. It was about connecting data-informed decision-making to our mission and building shared understanding across the organization.”
- Ona Dosunmu, President and CEO of NACUA
McKinley’s Approach
Whether you’re starting your portfolio journey or seeking a full-scale analysis, McKinley’s portfolio analysis solutions blend data, stakeholder insights and strategic guidance to create actionable roadmaps and build organizational alignment.
Ready to take a closer look at your portfolio? Start with McKinley’s Portfolio Readiness Assessment to understand where your organization stands, or reach out to our team to discuss what a portfolio analysis could look like for your organization.
