WWALD - What would a leader do?

[garfield]

It seems, subject to verification of an email posted (and taken down) in another thread, that there is another "creeping mutiny" being planned by leaders of the 2010 G7. If proven true, it then would seem obvious that those who hoped that the issue had died in the over-throw were wrong. The DCI BOD are facing a split-off of the 7 corps, and facing the prospect of stepping into the unknown abyss of drum corps being comprised of two, probably competing, circuits.

Where should the attention of the ED be placed? What can be done to heal the rift? Can it be healed at all?

Earlier this year there was a proposal, named DCI-Next, presented to the corps and Boards of those corps by Dan Acheson. It's contents were kept very quiet in order to give the players a chance to work together, even if they all hated the new DCI plan. It died a quiet death, and comments I heard from some involved were "Unworkable", "A mish-mash of everything anyone's ever wanted", "Ineffective", and "DOA".

As an outshoot of its death, there was convened a "working group", made up of leaders of several corps - G7 and not - to try to hammer a way forward that all could agree with. Comments I heard were "Hop came in at the last minute and poisoned the talks", "BD will have to carry the whole group financially", "It's a sincere effort to get the parties talking", and "It still comes down to paying the 7 more".

It appears from the timing and email comments that Music in Motion was established to house the G7 organization. Several other comments from the email suggest the 7 is well-underway in planning to exit DCI, while trying to spend a minimum of their own money to prove their concept. I've heard qualified opinions that the 7 are planning as many as 20 shows -outside of DCI - in 2014.

Surely the DCI BOD sees that giving the 7 complete control of 6 TOC shows in 2013 is the slippery slope they're using to prove their concept; is DCI spending any money on this effort? Are they charging the 7 to use DCI's name and branding? Will these shows be on FN where DCI will market the videos and pay royalties to the 7? What's DCI's cut?

Dan Acheson has apparently presented a proposal that was accepted by no one and now the foxes are chasing the chickens around the yard. Shouldn't Dan again try to gain control of the situation? Shouldn't a leader try again to stop the fracturing of the activity? Does Dan have that leadership?

Now that the G7's plans are exposed should the DCI BOD make a statement?

Edited November 19, 2012 by garfield

[BOBSMYTH]

Some comments on your statements:

Earlier this year there was a proposal, named DCI-Next, presented to the corps and Boards of those corps by Dan Acheson. It's contents were kept very quiet in order to give the players a chance to work together, even if they all hated the new DCI plan. It died a quiet death, and comments I heard from some involved were "Unworkable", "A mish-mash of everything anyone's ever wanted", "Ineffective", and "DOA".

The DCI Next proposal was very workable.

As an outshoot of its death, there was convened a "working group", made up of leaders of several corps - G7 and not - to try to hammer a way forward that all could agree with. Comments I heard were "Hop came in at the last minute and poisoned the talks", "BD will have to carry the whole group financially", "It's a sincere effort to get the parties talking", and "It still comes down to paying the 7 more".

The working groups concept was a part of the DCI Next proposal, not a response to its death. The working groups consisted of corps directors at different levels who could give input and feedback on different sections of the proposal.

Dan Acheson has apparently presented a proposal that was accepted by no one and now the foxes are chasing the chickens around the yard. Shouldn't Dan again try to gain control of the situation? Shouldn't a leader try again to stop the fracturing of the activity? Does Dan have that leadership?

The DCI Next proposal was Dan taking a leadership position and showing how DCI could continue to move forward and evolve. The proposal specifically addressed the G7 issue and demonstrated how most everything that the G7 say that they want could be achieved underneath the DCI umbrella. From what I have observed, most of the other corps would have followed Dan's lead on this proposal.

The G7 corps did not accept the proposal. They have their own agenda and are working from a different playbook. They already decided back in 2010 that they do not want Dan to lead.

If someone is dead set on a particular path, there is not much that can be proposed that would dissuade them from it. Even if it is to their own detriment.

[MikeN]

Just watching from afar with no inside information other than what's posted here, it feels like a split is inevitable. Which in some respects does come down to leadership. I think this probably could have either been negotiated or headed off long, long ago had the issues been addressed at that point.

But, hindsight is also ever perfect.

Mike

[Grandpa]

At this point we have to look at DCI and ask if it's worth saving.

The G7 will be the venue for the high end performers - and we all know about the touring model. Maybe we should consider saying good bye to DCI - let the G7 do their thing, and concentrate on sustainable regional drum corps for the rest.

[Michael Boo]

At this point we have to look at DCI and ask if it's worth saving.

The G7 will be the venue for the high end performers - and we all know about the touring model. Maybe we should consider saying good bye to DCI - let the G7 do their thing, and concentrate on sustainable regional drum corps for the rest.

The efforts of 40-plus years of struggles, accomplishments, some setbacks, musical excellence, life-affirming experiences and untold joy to thousands upon thousands of fans and marchers is certainly worth saving...and continuing to push forward.

It's appropriate that the movie "Lincoln" has recently opened. His words speak true yet today. "A house divided against itself cannot stand."

[bawker]

Maybe we should consider saying good bye to DCI - let the G7 do their thing, and concentrate on sustainable regional drum corps for the rest.

There's no reason that DCI . . .after a G7 split/schism/fight . . .couldn't take up the mantle of regional touring again.

There would still be 30 or so units left after losing those seven. Drop the Open Class/World Class stuff, rethink the touring process, and go forward. Partner up hard with DCA regionally for even more corps to put on at shows and then let the seven top "bands" cannibalize each other in their USBA as the years go on.

Boo is right, though, that we have to have some semblance of unity to work from . . .and recent stuff just proves it won't happen until we either have those seven directors running DCI, or out on their own.

[craiga]

There's no reason that DCI . . .after a G7 split/schism/fight . . .couldn't take up the mantle of regional touring again.

There would still be 30 or so units left after losing those seven. Drop the Open Class/World Class stuff, rethink the touring process, and go forward. Partner up hard with DCA regionally for even more corps to put on at shows and then let the seven top "bands" cannibalize each other in their USBA as the years go on.

Boo is right, though, that we have to have some semblance of unity to work from . . .and recent stuff just proves it won't happen until we either have those seven directors running DCI, or out on their own.

Interesting point, but I wonder...where would that leave corps like Boston and Madison? One might argue that these and a handful of other corps are,in many respects on a par with at least some of the G7, both organizationally and in terms of market appeal....I don't claim to be unbiased here, but when I look the make up of some of the G7, those lines are not so black and white.

[bawker]

Interesting point, but I wonder...where would that leave corps like Boston and Madison? One might argue that these and a handful of other corps are,in many respects on a par with at least some of the G7, both organizationally and in terms of market appeal....I don't claim to be unbiased here, but when I look the make up of some of the G7, those lines are not so black and white.

Yes, I agree with you, and I would think . . .at least for the first couple of seasons . . .Madison, Boston, Spirit and the Blue Knights become the odds on favorites to win the championship. Given the amount of parity that seems to exist in the 11-17 group now, it would make "any given night" a reality again, wouldn't you say?

Of course, if we do see the top seven corps leave, I think you'd see a restructuring within DCI not only at the organizational, logistical and touring level, but I'd also say there would be some tweaks from a rules standpoint as well.

Nothing like going back to G's or anything, but I'd be willing to wager money that the sheets would change a bit to make sure DCI butts stay in seats the first couple of years. Not sure if that would be by moving a more DCA "entertainment" model, or what, but I wouldn't be surprised.

[garfield]

Some comments on your statements:

The DCI Next proposal was very workable.

The working groups concept was a part of the DCI Next proposal, not a response to its death. The working groups consisted of corps directors at different levels who could give input and feedback on different sections of the proposal.

The DCI Next proposal was Dan taking a leadership position and showing how DCI could continue to move forward and evolve. The proposal specifically addressed the G7 issue and demonstrated how most everything that the G7 say that they want could be achieved underneath the DCI umbrella. From what I have observed, most of the other corps would have followed Dan's lead on this proposal.

The G7 corps did not accept the proposal. They have their own agenda and are working from a different playbook. They already decided back in 2010 that they do not want Dan to lead.

If someone is dead set on a particular path, there is not much that can be proposed that would dissuade them from it. Even if it is to their own detriment.

Bob, I appreciate your inside viewpoint but, the fact is, here we are again.

Is Dan just "one and done"? Is that a leader?

I realize that I'm undoubtedly simplifying what's been happening over the last 8 months but, to paraphrase the old saying:

"What's Dan done for us lately?"

And, because I know you have particularly good insight into this issue, why has there been nothing public from Dan or the BOD to try to gain support against the G7 hijacking? If there's no swaying the G7, even to their own detriment, what does DCI have to lose by exposing their demands and letting the market forces put on the pressure that he can't, or won't, apply.

It worked in May, 2010 (thanks Ream). It could work again.

There's some discussion around about whether DCP or Facebook is more relevent to drum corps. I say stop that crap arguing and use both of them to rally the forces. Let both be a voice for the DCI BOD rationale and stop being weak-knee'd every time the G7 say No.

[BOBSMYTH]

Bob, I appreciate your inside viewpoint but, the fact is, here we are again.

Is Dan just "one and done"? Is that a leader?

I realize that I'm undoubtedly simplifying what's been happening over the last 8 months but, to paraphrase the old saying:

"What's Dan done for us lately?"

And, because I know you have particularly good insight into this issue, why has there been nothing public from Dan or the BOD to try to gain support against the G7 hijacking? If there's no swaying the G7, even to their own detriment, what does DCI have to lose by exposing their demands and letting the market forces put on the pressure that he can't, or won't, apply.

It worked in May, 2010 (thanks Ream). It could work again.

There's some discussion around about whether DCP or Facebook is more relevent to drum corps. I say stop that crap arguing and use both of them to rally the forces. Let both be a voice for the DCI BOD rationale and stop being weak-knee'd every time the G7 say No.

I have a feeling there is a lot more going on behind the scenes than anyone knows.