Scott Stewart's 1997 Thoughts Revisited...

[bawker]

In another post (http://www.drumcorpsplanet.org/forums//ind...dpost&p=1314674) , there's a look at what Hop thought best for the activity in 1997 or so in a presentation to DCI.

http://www.geocities.com/marchingresearch/lamsym01.txt

Scott Stewart's 1997 "State of The Activity" which I think was in DCW at the time...is not necessarily a rebuttal, but a different way of looking at things.

Here's a few high points concerning key issues...

Here's an overall assessement of things circa the time this was written:

To create a more realistic and healthy environment, we must first agree on the

philosophical base that will dictate how we make decisions in the future. I would

offer the following thoughts toward that objective.

Drum corps is a unique and valuable, but relatively small, fragile mini-society

which will only survive based on cooperation and fraternalism among the

participants. The leadership must share an understanding of what the

foundational building blocks are that make its existence worthwhile. Drum corps

cannot operate on the same value system that the rest of our society does. It must

aspire to a higher, more altruistic set of standards and values if it is to continue.

Drum corps exists to provide a meaningful, challenging, positive experience

to the youthful participants (primarily) and to the fans, supporters and adult staffs

(secondarily), through an environment which encourages musical, physical, social

and personal growth and the achievement of excellence, utilizing a unique,

exciting, tradition-based entertainment form as its vehicle.

The concepts of "cutting edge art form," financial profit and celebrity status for

individuals and over-emphasis of competitive dominance are not part of this

definition.

Decisions must be made that serve what is best for the survival and growth of the

entire activity, not the interests of a select few. The activity needs groups at all

levels to be healthy and ensure longevity. The more corps that exist, the stronger

our future will be. More corps mean more participants, relatives, friends and

alumni as fans and greater awareness, in general, of our activity.

This philosophical base must be used as the foundation for the following six

topics so that we can adjust our current direction and work toward a better future.

1. Tour structure and schedule.

2. Competitive environment.

3. Economics of drum corps.

4. Maintenance and growth of our fan base.

5. Membership levels.

6. Administration and governance of DCI."

Re: a change in name for the activity/moving towards mainstream:

"an erroneous assumption that the activity could and should transform itself into

something much larger, more main-stream and more glamorous than it was ever

capable of becoming."

Regarding touring (warning this is long...I tried to snip what I could):

"All junior drum corps that desire to be should be allowed to be members of DCI.

The criteria outlined below would indicate which division the corps would

qualify for and the touring restrictions explained earlier would apply.

The objectives are to offer realistic guidelines for development, to diminish the

amount of touring and encourage more community-based corps and allow for

growth and success at various levels.

I would see a small group of division IA corps, a slightly larger group of division

I corps and a hopefully ever-growing number of division II, III and IIIA corps.

These four areas would be used for determining division membership:

1. Organizational -- by-laws, organizational structure, insurance compliance, tax

reporting compliance, budgeting and financial reporting.

2. Operational -- management, support and teaching staff, vehicles, food program,

scheduling (must ensure safe, healthy, educational environment).

3. Performance excellence.

4. Size of membership.

Areas 1, 2 and 4 would be monitored by a separate, knowledgeable, impartial

committee. Area 3 would be determined by evaluation panels. There would be

five divisions for purposes of classification and touring restrictions, but only

marketed as three (division I/II/III) as is currently done.

1. Division IA -- 110-128 members, top performance excellence level.

2. Division I -- 90-128 members, at least second performance excellence level.

3. Division II -- 60-129 members, at least third performance excellence level.

4. Division III -- 30-128 members, at least fourth performance excellence level.

5. Division IIIA -- 1-128, no minimum performance excellence level.

Organizational standards must be met by all corps, although division IA cannot

have flaws. Operational standards must be adequate to ensure positive

achievement of touring options at various levels. Pay scales would be based on

performance excellence level achieved. Bonus paid on size of corps

membership."

And here is what he wrote about touring for each level:

"Another part of this solution would be to restrict touring based on classification.

The object is for all (except *division IA) to tour less. The message is that touring

is the last ingredient a corps should be concerned with until other criteria

(organization, operational, membership size and performance excellence) have

been met.

Restrictions on touring would be:

Regional season --

* Division IA can tour more than two weeks and out of their region (subject to

national control and regional line-up balance)

Division I -- two weeks

Division II and III -- one week

* Division IIIA -- weekends only

DCI season

* Division IA -- four weeks

Division I -- three weeks

Division II/III -- two weeks

* Division IIIA -- weekends and championships only

These are maximum touring lengths, there are no minimums. No corps is

required to tour more than they feel is healthy for their group."

And here is what he wrote generally about touring and the scheduling of

championships:

"Tour Structure and Schedule Currently -- and many times in the past -- tour

schedules have been structured with the financial "bottom-line" as the

rationalization or because a vocal individual had a new idea. All the corps then

followed the direction, even if it wasn't the most realistic or sensible thing to

do.

Most corps currently tour too much. The more intense the touring and time

commitment, the more the local base is depleted. This affects the membership

base, the teaching and support staff base and the value to, exposure to and support

from the local community. Also, most corps are not developed enough to have

the vehicular and managerial quality necessary to support extended touring at a

healthy level for the membership.

To correct this, the first step is to put more emphasis on the regions rather than on

national touring and to stress regional show development. It is important that

there are enough shows to accommodate all levels of drum corps to a satisfactory

degree. One of the steps in this is to shorten the DCI portion of the season to the

last four weeks of the summer, with regional championships taking place four

weekends before the DCI Championships.

In order to accomplish this, the DCI tour schedule must be revised (some shows

may become regional shows), there could only be one meeting, if any, of all DCI

corps prior to championships and the championships would have to be in a

location which was accessible to most corps and would allow the tour prior to

championships to flow sensibly.

My suggestion would be that the championship not be farther south than

Tennessee or farther west than Denver. We must also settle on a championship

date from 1999 onward that allows the season to be a standardized length each

year.

In addition, I would suggest condensing DCI Championship Week to five days

instead of six by eliminating quarter-finals. This would allow for more shows

prior to DCI week, less experienced corps could leave on tour later for

championships, less housing and stadium costs and greater spectator participation

at the division II and III competitions. The new schedule for the week could be:

Tuesday, I&E; Wednesday/Thursday, division II and III; Friday, semi-finals of

division I (same as present quarter-finals) and Saturday, division I finals."

...and regarding the fan base:

Maintenance and Growth of Fan Base

In any activity that requires the support of a fan base to further its endeavors, it is

important that those supporters (fans) are kept interested in the activity that needs

their support. Over the past decade we have alienated much of our fan base. I

believe this has happened because, rather than fostering a fraternal atmosphere

where the fan felt he was an important part of the activity, he was treated as a

consumer who was expected to purchase his product (drum corps) from the

manufacturer (DCI). In this environment, he felt disassociated from the activity

and lost his feelings of loyalty and obligation that were once an important aspect

of his involvement.

There are several more issues associated with this problem as well. I feel the

biggest, by far, is that the corps stopped producing programs that entertained the

fans by eliciting a unique type of gut-level emotional reaction. This was a

foundational building block of what attracted people to drum corps in the first

place. As a small but influential contingent of designers and judges managed to

convince the entire activity that.

In addition, the activity was led to believe that being unprepared at the beginning

of the season was a sign of creative genius. The result was that audiences

attending events before the end of the season were deprived of quality

performances in many cases.

To make matters worse, we greatly inflated the costs of attending our events by

raising ticket prices drastically and holding championships in a location perceived

by many as being difficult to access.

By attending to the above, I believe we an maintain our current fans and recover

many that have been lost. In addition, it will be an important factor in attracting

new supporters.

New fans will come as a result of efforts at a local show level as well as an

increase in the number of drum corps and the number of people associated with

these new corps.

Money spent by DCI at a national level will do little to attract new fans. The

television broadcast is the most valuable tool we have for attracting new fans at a

national level. It would be even more effective if we could ensure that it would

be shown when people would be watching their televisions."

As you can see, quite a difference from what Hop presented in a lot of ways.

Discuss away. :)

[MiamiSun76]

When is the current Executive Director's term up? What is Scott doing today?

[bawker]

I know that he's involved with the Madison Reunion corps for '06, and had been involved with Pioneer, at least for a season or so.

I'm sure one of the other Scouts here can update you better than I, though.

Not sure when Sal Salaas' tenure would end...but given the job he's done, I would imagine he'd stay put.

[Phantom&Phitch]

Not sure when Sal Salaas' tenure would end...but given the job he's done, I would imagine he'd stay put.

i think he's doing what's best for the corps. keeping them alive.

[bawker]

i think he's doing what's best for the corps. keeping them alive.

Same here. He did what he had to in order to make the Scouts competitive in the new landscape of DCI. I guess the sticky wicket now is reconciling some of the "old" Madison traits with the new in some regards.

[liebot]

I think MiamiSun76 was referring to the DCI Executive Director position, but I could be wrong...

I wish we could've gone more in the direction of Scott's vision than in Hoppy's.

[MiamiSun76]

I know that he's involved with the Madison Reunion corps for '06, and had been involved with Pioneer, at least for a season or so.

I'm sure one of the other Scouts here can update you better than I, though.

Not sure when Sal Salaas' tenure would end...but given the job he's done, I would imagine he'd stay put.

I didn't mean Sal, I meant Acheson. ^0^

[bawker]

Oh.

That's a good question. Don Pesceone was there for a good long while...I wonder how often it does come up for a vote?

[jfmello]

Thanks for the information, Bawker. I'd been out of the activity for a while, and am still a little hazy on the whys and wherefores of Scott's departure from the Scouts. That being said, I have never been prouder than I am at this moment to have marched under Scott. He is, and always has been, a great man.

[Jeff Ream]

Scott delivered a lot of what we see here day in and day out, especially in regards to the fan base.

the problem is, he became a lone voice in the woods, and when the Scouts absorbed the other corps and struggled, he got pushed out. which can happen to any CEO. See YEA struggle, and see Hop gone. that's business.

but, Scott is so dead on. I wish his proposal and statements had been taken a lot more seriously.