Official DCP G7 Proposal Discussion Thread

[Jeff Ream]

As an addition to this, how about sending unique codes to band directors, that give discounts? You'd want to have a limit based on use that's reasonable for their kids but not enough to get out of control, and if the allotment does get used the director can call for a new code). You can then track usage of the codes by director, and identify the programs that are most supportive.

Another possible idea... do what some companies have done before for word of mouth promotion and offer free webcast access for directors willing to host 'webcast parties\viewings' for their students, and provide pictures afterwards. Lose a little on the subscription, but get more kids exposed to drum corps.

that is a great idea. I know several schools that had parties the night of WGI percussion finals

[Jeff Ream]

but....how many premier events are within driving distance for many schools?

The past few years, DCI has offered free fan network subscriptions to band directors who have purchased 25 or more tickets to premier events.

[BigW]

yes. he spoke, from a judging standpoint, that too much of what is written to technically wow the judges and the designers peers, and not enough to evoke emotions from the fans...and he said to remember that judges are fans, so don't be afraid to evoke their emotions too.

he gave an example of a WGI regional he worked years ago, where, he was technically impressed by many of the units, but then one group came out, and moved him emotionally so much, he was in tears at the end of their show. they touched him that much. ( i wish I could remember who it was). And he said that all these years later, he couldn't tell you anything about the other groups that day, but how he remembered that one unit.

And, it was his opinion that we have gotten away from made this activity so exciting...passion. Emotion. We're so hung up on the technical and the buzzwords, that we have taken the emotion out of designing shows. he said he remembered going to DCI finals and being all jazzed to see every show, because everyone left him with something he could remember. This clinic was, I believe in 2007, and he then talked about the 3 DCi shows that summer that left him withsomething he remembered....3. Then he rattled off something about every corps from 1987 DCI finals. All 12.

So, if this is where he is going with the review of judging, I hope it trickles down to how design is rewarded over performance, especially on the GE side. Even better, he takes that and then begins to work with the designers of the world.

Mike's point is well-taken here. I think I may have seen video of the WGI unit he speaks of, may have been a Vietnam/Wall show, which also left me in tears. Forget the HS name.

I've said to people who design programs, "Are you trying to just impress me or maybe entertain me too?" and I've gotten some real hems and haws in reaction from a lot of people, who don't realize there's a danger of separating the two or don't seem to care- or perhaps think deep emotions and excitement is a cheap and crass thing to do anymore. Heaven forbid. Then again, Some groups lean too far the other way, lose their sincerity and genuiness, and it becomes trite. A balance needs to be struck.

I know over the years that people in general seem to have become afraid of being passionate about anything, to care at all about something deeply unless it's NASCAR or pro sports (How are rthen Phils doin', Jeff!... better than my Buco's...) . I think that staffs are afraid to push into that realm because they then take a risk that the execution level won't be pristine and they'll get gunned down by the panel. They don't thnk they can trust their own emotions or the kids' to stay in control of the performance. That's sad. A state of controlled recklessness can be healthy.

There are instances I remember, and Mike's right- they're moments where the corps or band were passionate and intense, caring deeply about what they did and trying to break through the fourth wall between themselves and the audience.

I also like the comment about judges being fans as well. I know one DCI judge has been quoted as saying they're the activity's "biggest fans", and they too seek special moments from the shows. And yes, they have become farther and father apart, like panning for gold nuggets in a stream.

Part of the issue over design taking precedent over performance would be the scoring system and its weighting. One still has to keep in mind though what Jim Prime, Sr. was fond of saying- "Anyone can do a tough chart badly" and that also needs to be properly appraised as well.

[GUARDLING]

OK my stab at this mess. In my simple pea brain here we go...lol.. I think there is alot of passion here which is what this activity was founded on but I also think that ( especially here on DCP ) one side is trying to preserve and the other total change. IMO...neither will work. I think somewhere in the middle will be that answer , and who knows maybe that was the intent from the beginning

( Business tactic ) who knows !

Something new is needed I think to move on to the next decade but total change to the roots of the activity is not necessary.

How this happens, I don't know but to me it seems both sides of this argument are at extremes . Both sides MUST be willing to see through the fog and come up with a viable solution that will benefit the activity as a whole which includes from top to bottom. I think for the past it's delusional to think that the top big dogs weren't running the show...always have , always will but to restructure to this degree all at once my not be in the best interest of many. I think format changes, additions of things, better tours, Corps making more of their own decisions. NOT DCI calling the shots for everyone can be a good thing but people go into shock when they have been blind sided for sure.

This is just my thoughts and only mine I'm sure. Thought I would add my 1/2 cent..lol

I think theres an old saying( 3 sides to an argument )" Your side, My Side , and then theres the RIGHT side "

[Michael Boo]

I think I may have seen video of the WGI unit he speaks of, may have been a Vietnam/Wall show, which also left me in tears. Forget the HS name.

"Wall and Remembrance." Northmont HS. 1996. I was there in person and it's one of a handful of shows since WGI was formed in 1978 that left me crying. When the "dead" soldier walked out of the wall (he wasn't seen until the very end of the show) to try to touch his wife and infant girl—who had left flowers under his name—and was pulled back into the wall by a dozen or so arms, I lost it. Amazing program.

Okay; back on topic, but I wanted to reconnect you with the name of the ensemble since you seemed obviously touched by the show, too.

[2CoolVK]

but....how many premier events are within driving distance for many schools?

All 15 premier events are within driving distance for many schools.

[2CoolVK]

another thing I also feel/felt is this: those of us that are passionate and vocal and do spend some time on here and do have knowledge of the activiy should try and get out there and introduce it to people and try and help generate new fans..we like to cry "It's our activity " so we should be held a little bit responsible. I dont mean being inconvenienced or anything like that, but, we are from all over the country, we could take some time and organize some sort of campaign to get the word out to folks that may have lost touch with the activity or people that dont know about places lke DCP and DCI.org

???

G

The DCI Street Team is one way.... dcistreetteam.ning.com/

The DCI facebook page is another... www.facebook.com/drumcorpsinternational

[IntheMood]

Change makes enemies very easliy. And the way one begins a change effort determins what kind of fight is coming. The way you start a change effort says a lot about how you'll finish. I teach that there are three ways to make your opening move, the G7 chose the dramatic method. .

The dramatic method is as follows: One must hit hard...shatter the status quo....shock the organization. The impact should be powerful enough to overcome inertia. When you play this angle you want to get people's attention. Instead of trying to sneak past any resitance to change, you come on so strong you scare off the opposition. Or at least you gain the advantage becaue your opening moves give you a big head start on the resisters. Plus you send a very convincing message about your determination to make change. This is a valid method so why did it fail? To me the number one reason why this method failed is that the G7 did not involved the stakeholders.

Most of us accept change better if we don't think it's being crammed down our throats. If the stakeholder can have a voice in matters that directly affect them, they don't feel so vulnerable. Involving people comes in their having to struggle with the complicated aspects of the situation. They learn a lot. For example, they find that there are no perfect solutions. When they have to wrestle with the hairy problems themselves, they develop a greater respect for the difficulties involved. With more minds working on the problem, one might actually come up with a better strategy than you'd design by yourself. After all, if they were one of the architects, they're less entitled to complain about having to live in the building.

Dean

[garfield]

Change makes enemies very easliy. And the way one begins a change effort determins what kind of fight is coming. The way you start a change effort says a lot about how you'll finish. I teach that there are three ways to make your opening move, the G7 chose the dramatic method. .

The dramatic method is as follows: One must hit hard...shatter the status quo....shock the organization. The impact should be powerful enough to overcome inertia. When you play this angle you want to get people's attention. Instead of trying to sneak past any resitance to change, you come on so strong you scare off the opposition. Or at least you gain the advantage becaue your opening moves give you a big head start on the resisters. Plus you send a very convincing message about your determination to make change. This is a valid method so why did it fail? To me the number one reason why this method failed is that the G7 did not involved the stakeholders.

Most of us accept change better if we don't think it's being crammed down our throats. If the stakeholder can have a voice in matters that directly affect them, they don't feel so vulnerable. Involving people comes in their having to struggle with the complicated aspects of the situation. They learn a lot. For example, they find that there are no perfect solutions. When they have to wrestle with the hairy problems themselves, they develop a greater respect for the difficulties involved. With more minds working on the problem, one might actually come up with a better strategy than you'd design by yourself. After all, if they were one of the architects, they're less entitled to complain about having to live in the building.

Dean

Very insightful, Dean.

The first DCI counter-punch...how would you dissect that?

This is in sharp contrast to the "nudge" methodology GH has been using for years. How do you analyze the use of both of them when he seems to have attained so much change already? Is the big kahoona the intro of woodwinds. Is this the "shock" method's ultimate goal in this situation? Could he have felt that the shock method was the only way to cross that final hurdle?

I assume you're a professional in this area ("teach", who? Your kids? ). If this is your profession then I appreciate your professional input.

[audiodb]

If this PowerPoint is it, then the G7 idea will fail on the voting block, even if Academy and Pac Crest go along with it.

Not to pick on you specifically....but where did we get the idea that Academy and PC support the G7 proposal? They never voted on it. The only thing they voted on was whether or not to throw people off the DCI BOD.