DISQUS

charlesday · 2 months ago

Mark. Great to see you on here. I agree wholeheartedly with the importance of recognizing the work that is done, largely behind the scenes, to create better platforms for AICP members. It is thankless and difficult. The industry would be worse without it.

It is, however, analogous to putting a new roof on a house. You have to do it periodically or the rain comes in. Which provides you neither with a place to live, nor something of value when you go to sell. And when that day comes to sell, no matter how well your roof keeps out the rain, it doesn't do much to attract buyers or make the sale - essential though it is.

The AICP is selling itself ever day. Trying to convince members they should join - or increasingly that they should stay. Trying to convince agencies and advertisers that they should work with AICP members. At Boards this week, a number of agency producers said to me that AICP has no value proposition that they can articulate to their clients that allows them to argue for better terms or practices. And a new DGA contract, essential as it is, does not further your cause.

Yes, the production community has too many companies making reactive, tactical decisions that hurt themselves and everyone else. But the AICP continues to miss the opportunity to define what the AICP brand stands for, and to sell itself based on that.

The AICP should, in my view, articulate the benefits of being a member and of working with members, on terms that are valuable to both sides. In which case, work like the DGA contract becomes an important part of a compelling story. Instead of a roof.

jsepoch · 2 months ago

charles makes great point. And, mark thanks again for participating.

mark defends the aicp by pointing out the all too often unacknowledged sacrifices made by a few to the benefit of all the rest. however (and you knew i'd have a however), along with the educating people about the organization we must also turn a critical eye. we don't need to defend the organization as much as find ways to improve it.

at the end of mark's posting he said there are problems beyond the trade associations power. they can only advise and recommend. on occasion they can be an effectively strong voice as illustrated by the recent DGA negotiations. I think in this example, the DGA recognizes our benefits and we recognize there. Unfortunately that is not the case with the core issues with our client base.

We need to set the bar higher than recommendation and advisement. I acknowledge that this a different than our past missions. Times have change and the AICP must change with it.

I know changes are being discussed at the highest levels. I know we are looking towards creating policies that encourage more inclusion, accountability and transparency. We need mobilization and unity. It comes through leadership. It comes through mark and others he mentioned in his posting. we need more like them.

I believe we will get there. But, we need to get there soon.

matt miller · 2 months ago

Mark—that is quite a nice post and quite an important tribute to the core assets of the AICP, which of course is the involved membership.


I however must comment about Charles Days posting to this piece. Charles, your analogy of this important function being “maintenance” is so far from correct that I needed to straighten things out. The correct analogy, (since you picked the theme) is actually that of the land, not the house and certainly not the roof. AICP is the land that has been founded and cleared on which companies who wish to be part of the business build their own house and join the community. Within that community, the individual companies work to design, build and maintain their own house in their own style. Many spawn additions, some stay beautiful landmarks, some become dilapidated and may even be sold or abandoned. But that is the freedom of a democratic community where those with the right plans flourish and those who take miscalculated risks do not. There are differences in how they want to live and there is like-mindedness as they have come to live in the same vicinity. One can say that AICP’s role is to allow this community to exist and care-take the grounds, safeguard the land allowing for all if its members to live side by side, and to approach this business as best they can—with ingenuity and creativity.

The negotiation of the DGA contract may have a cycle to it, but it is far from roof maintenance—it is more akin to the farming of the land that needs skill, experience and strategy and allows for this community to eat. Yes it is done cyclically, so it may be taken for granted, but it is, in fact, vital in this community and progressive each and every time it happens.

You speak of discussions regarding the AICP Brand at the Boards summit; I’m sorry that I missed them and would have welcomed the invitation to join in. The only thoughts that you shared with me on the topic was about running people out of town and gating the community—to date, that is not the thrust of our Constitution. Sure there can be some regulation, such as the Independent (the “I” in AICP) structure of the company—but there has never been an “architectural review board”, as some of your past posts have insinuated that there should be. Clearly, Jerry believes there should be. Have there been times where individuals have approached their businesses apart from the crowd? Sure there have, this is a business where many have used unconventional means to lure each others talent, have changed their mark up to get a competitive edge (remember 35%?) or have decided to expand their companies vertically or horizontally. We as capitalists in a free market and those that hold Liberty dear (in our analogy), have never been about telling people how to do business…those who bring value will have the nicest house—those who overstep their mark in the community will be socially chastised and end up homeless.

Yes there is discussion at the highest level happening, and there is clearly forward thinking about direction…its not easy, some want to put the genie back in the bottle, some want to look to new models—as a community we must respect and consider all views. The one thing we can all agree on is that those who have dedicated themselves to the industry, and to governance have created a very strong community a strong brand and have laid the foundation for our future.

Matt Miller · 2 months ago

and furthermore...

As for the agency producers not knowing what to “sell” to their clients—that is just classic. Our mission is to provide tools to our members to help them most efficiently run their business…this in turn allows the system to effectively work. The agency’s job is to sell the best approach to their clients and explain why things cost what they do—or don’t they really have a function? So here is a little exercise to illustrate the value proposition; have one of your clients show you a budget (have them use the AICP Bidform, not the AICP short form or the AICP Spec sheet), one utilizing labor agreements for AICP members and the same budget using the agreements for anyone else. In that bid are they using AICP negotiated travel rates? How about permitting, are they utilizing the procedures that AICP helped put into place working with government and continue to safeguard everyday? How about any of the 42 states that now have tax incentives, or business tax reform with an eye towards small business--are they benefiting from any of those? The list goes on. You see, AICP is the land, the roads the sewers and the utilities. No one knows the value proposition? That may be because everyone takes for granted all of the things that are covered by the work of the association every day, those that are provided which allows them to focus on their own house. People, by their very nature, focus on the potholes that pop up, and forget to marvel at the fact that the road system exists—but thank goodness we have the mechanism to help address, fix and expand those roads. Taken for granted?—I sure hope so, that just means that the Brand value is ubiquitous.

charlesday · 2 months ago

A passionate debate, publicly held, about the value of the AICP is long overdue. And I'm sure this is what Jerry hoped for in his original post. He's expressed several times his frustration that, as widely read as this blog has become in the production community, members of the AICP are notable for their reticence in jumping in publicly. For the sake of the community I hope that the discussion you mentioned as taking place at the highest level is truly forward focused.

We can debate analogy all day. I don't agree with yours. But I understand why you see it that way. And if you want to have lunch one day I'd be happy to argue them both face to face.

Whatever the future of the AICP, I don't think it's well served by a strategy that focuses on all the smart and hard work that has been done in the past. The complaints that I hear repeatedly are that it has yet to define the value it now provides both to its members and to their clients. Classic or not, that's what many people are looking for.

I think the AICP suffers from trying to be all things to all people. Which is understandable given the historical set-up of the organization. I don't presume this kind of change is easy or pleasant and I for one was glad to see you take on the AT Kearney representative on your procurement panel.

At the end of the day, I believe great organizations have clearly defined purpose which makes then valuable. That risks alienating some. Which may not be acceptable to your or the members. But the trade-off is a weaker position than the AICP could enjoy within the community.

As always, it's a choice.

jsepoch · 2 months ago

since were using analogies, i'll stick with my favorite, sports.

when a football coach analyze game footage even in a blow out win, they recognize the things they did well to make them habitual but they emphasize the things they didn't.

no one, not even the most cynical ardent aicp naysayer, can refute the contributions you have listed. the aicp has laid a great foundation for our businesses to operate. we no longer should be wasting our breath defending our past accomplishments. they need to be recognized and used as case studies for what we've done well but our focuses needs to be on where we can do better.

i'm glad both you and mark point out the commitment and the accomplishments. it proves it has been and can continue to be an effective organization. the question we need to ask ourselves is one everyone in the entire country is asking themselves, what is it we want to become now that the games changed? i think we are still striving to answer that question as a community and as individuals. for me, that's the debate.

jsepoch · 2 months ago

since were using analogies, i'll stick with my favorite, sports.

when a football coach analyze game footage even in a blow out win,
they recognize the things they did well to make them habitual but they
emphasize the things they didn't.

no one, not even the most cynical ardent aicp naysayer, can refute the
contributions you have listed. the aicp has laid a great foundation
for our businesses to operate. we no longer should be wasting our
breath defending our past accomplishments. they need to be recognized
and used as case studies for what we've done well but our focuses
needs to be on where we can do better.

i'm glad both you and mark point out the commitment and the
accomplishments. it proves it has been and can continue to be an
effective organization. the question we need to ask ourselves is one
everyone in the entire country is asking themselves, what is it we
want to become now that the games changed? i think we are still
striving to answer that question as a community and as individuals.
for me, that's the debate.