What went wrong with Toastmasters?

Dubious leadership

If you truly want to embody the “Where leaders are made” tagline, remember that real leadership is less about adhering to a “distinguished” plan that primarily boosts TI’s membership revenue. Instead, it’s about creating a club that its members are genuinely proud to be a part of. An exceptional club prioritizes the needs of its members first and TI’s needs second.

Toastmasters International sit back

We can definitely see how Toastmasters International has become more commercialized. It’s easy for them now—they just sit back and watch the money roll in while clubs grapple with outdated platforms in a “set it and forget it” approach that leaves everyone else to manage.

I’m optimistic that change will come from within, ideally starting at the club level. I’ll do my best to make a difference, and if you notice any ripples where you are, you’ll know where they started.

Changes in profit driven, not education driven

The changes in Toastmasters seem driven by profit and executed carelessly. Many people may go along with them out of enthusiasm, but when you closely examine the program, its flaws become apparent. It’s disappointing to think that the main motivations for these changes were commercial rather than focused on improving the program. There’s definitely a need for a strong public speaking program, but not for another questionable leadership track aimed at expanding Toastmasters clubs, as is required to achieve the DTM. After six years of membership, I’ve found myself increasingly conflicted with the direction Toastmasters is heading and ultimately decided to step away. Some Type-A personalities will persist and pursue the DTM award, but for me, the disconnect between what’s promised and what’s delivered is too significant. There’s a leadership gap at Toastmasters International, as evident from their recent strategic decisions.

If the emphasis on mastering speechcraft diminishes within Toastmasters, the organization will lose its essence and become a mere shadow of its former self. The leadership track, though muted, was originally helpful in recruiting club and regional leaders. However, the integrated tracks now force members into area, division, and district leadership roles, which can be political and frustrating, especially if your main goal is to hone your speaking skills.

Toastmasters might not disappear, but it could start attracting a very specific type of personality in community clubs and, unfortunately, some reluctant individuals in corporations who feel pressured to follow the company’s expectations.

Divide between club and district

This concern has been widely discussed on this and many other forums. One key issue—though it does have some positive aspects—is the dedication of members at the club, area, and district levels, who often put in tremendous amounts of work without any real compensation. It’s evident that Toastmasters International could provide even the most inadequate resources, and the committed, hardworking members on the ground would still do their best to make things succeed.

In my view, there’s a significant and possibly unbridgeable gap between Headquarters in Englewood and the rest of the organization. As long as thousands of clubs continue to send in large sums of money regularly—funds that primarily go toward salaries—there’s little incentive for change. Has anyone else noticed that the time of year when Toastmasters International is most engaged with club activity is—drum roll, please—dues collection time? Just try reaching someone during that period; all efforts are focused on ensuring every last penny is collected and accounted for. It often seems like clubs are seen primarily as revenue generators, with little concern from upper management beyond that.

To truly change the system—which is unlikely given the good intentions of the members—there would need to be a complete halt in dues payments until changes are implemented. If Toastmasters International stopped receiving dues and began struggling to meet financial obligations, only then might we see genuine change.

Until that happens, I expect the quality to keep declining and the communication between grassroots clubs and the decision-makers at the top to weaken even further.

New blood

Toastmasters International appears to have taken the traditional MLM model and introduced significant innovations. While WHQ may sometimes seem slow or uninspired, their adaptation of the MLM structure demonstrates remarkable ingenuity when it serves their purpose.

Unlike typical MLMs, which must share a portion of the income with their “distributors,” Toastmasters has trained its members to work for pins, ribbons, and paper recognitions—rewards that hold little value outside our relatively small, insular organization. This is akin to paying natives with beads or children with play money, yet it’s surprisingly effective.

Whereas MLMs expand vertically, adding new levels of distributors and distancing them from top management, Toastmasters grows horizontally by adding new clubs, areas, divisions, and eventually, split districts. This structure keeps the leadership of each branch connected until they inevitably burn out, while ensuring consistent training at every level.

By making the DTM designation easier to achieve, Toastmasters brings fresh members into district service more quickly, thereby securing their free labor sooner. Under the old system, many members wouldn’t consider district service until reaching ACG, which typically required completing around 30 speeches to attain ACS—almost equivalent to completing two paths.

Pathways accelerates this process, guiding members into leadership roles earlier, with some paths even encouraging involvement quite early on.

To be clear, district leadership is essential to maintaining the viability of each district. Toastmasters has simply made this leadership structure almost entirely dependent on volunteer labor while finding creative ways to maximize their income.

Pathways gamification

Arguably gamification is only a successful model while the game soft remains novel. With Duolingo, which we have experience with, the novelty ends up turning to apathy in many users. If that trend is more generally true then gamification is only as successful as far as the company is able to replace users that stagnate/churn. We are also skeptical of how successful Duolingo is specifically since they have significantly slowed on language development and upkeep, and long ago failed to harness human translation as a product. I think they’re mostly bring supported by educational subscriptions.

Digital evolution

As society evolves, organizations must adapt to keep up with social changes. This can be more challenging than expected, especially when long-term members are accustomed to the old ways. However, organizations must also consider attracting new members.

Take Blackberry, for example. It was once a major player in the cell phone market, with long-time users insisting that their Blackberries would have to be forcibly taken from them. Yet, as the market shifted towards personal phones over work-focused ones, new competitors and innovative ideas emerged. Blackberry’s failure to adapt led to its decline.

In the case of Toastmasters, while it once relied on physical manuals, the major social shift has been the move towards digital and online formats. This shift may not appeal to those accustomed to traditional methods, but it is necessary to attract new and younger members. Unfortunately, Toastmasters International didn’t execute this transition very effectively. The platform used is not as intuitive or user-friendly as today’s standards require. Although improvements are needed, the shift to digital is fundamental and unlikely to be reversed (though physical manuals are still available if needed).

Members accustomed to the old ways have reacted poorly to these changes. Toastmasters had resisted change for so long that the transition felt more like a jarring leap than a gradual step. Organizations should continuously adapt to meet their members’ needs and respond to new environments. Avoiding change leads to inertia, making any shift feel more drastic.

Most new members I’ve spoken with appreciate the online system, as it eliminates issues like locating a manual before meetings or remembering to bring it.

Another challenge that might be overlooked is the availability of time. The new generation tends to have their free time divided into smaller segments, making a weekly 2-hour meeting less practical for many.

source https://www.reddit.com/r/Toastmasters/comments/jlpgp8/what_went_wrong_with_toastmasters/