Things that make you go hmmmm?
Like why on the SCAA homepage UPCOMING EVENTS section the N. Central RBC 2/18-20 and SE RBC 2/11-13 are up there while NW RBC 1/28-30 happening before them is not? Hmmmmm
NW Region being dissed (ignored, forgotten) by the SCAA or what?!
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Mike McGinness on
-
You know, I have worked on dozens of event and convention committees for non-profit organizations, many times done venue negotiations, including being on Convention Corporation Board of Directors for 5 years. (not SCAA or coffee related, truly non-profit) It's totally lame and ridiculous that 2 weeks out and "Travel Information" is still "coming soon" for the NWRBC. Not a single hotel or motel suggestion, nada, squat. I'm actually shocked how poorly this event has been organized, announced etc. Getting any information has been like pulling teeth.
-
Permalink Reply by Dan Streetman on
-
http://maps.google.com/maps?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en...
hotels near the Tacoma venue... for NWRBC
-
-
I guess my question is this: Does the $300 registration actually represent the sustainable competitor fee level? If so, has the SCAA determined that a regional competitor is so valuable to the BGA ranks that they are willing to discount the fee severely to guarantee they join? That makes a little more sense to me.
This might be one way to look at it, there is two sides to this coin. Yes $300 is the sustainable fee, but as an organization the interest is to attract and maintain membership. Also the BGA is extremely aware of the limited finances of it's constituents. (sometimes from my perspective too aware/accomodating). Because of these two things it is a win/win to discount Competition to BGA members.
-
-
Peter, give how dispersed the current and former members and leaders of the BGA are, I think that this coffee-focused community is a great place to discuss ideas for the BGA to consider. Perhaps its not as focused (or private) as the twice-a-year EC+Chapter Rep conference call, but the discussion here seems to be far more open. Nobody here seems too concerned about ruffling feathers, and besides, the membership can contribute too. Besides... I highly doubt that Mike, Jay, Chris, Jared, etc are here just to bitch. None of us would be here if we didn't think that the conversation had some potential to make a difference. Am I right?
-
Permalink Reply by Brady on
-
OK, I get it now.
Thanks Dan.
Dan Streetman said:
I guess my question is this: Does the $300 registration actually represent the sustainable competitor fee level? If so, has the SCAA determined that a regional competitor is so valuable to the BGA ranks that they are willing to discount the fee severely to guarantee they join? That makes a little more sense to me.
This might be one way to look at it, there is two sides to this coin. Yes $300 is the sustainable fee, but as an organization the interest is to attract and maintain membership. Also the BGA is extremely aware of the limited finances of it's constituents. (sometimes from my perspective too aware/accomodating). Because of these two things it is a win/win to discount Competition to BGA members.
-
-
this forum is really hard to use....
ok but back to the topic at hand. Brady, I wanted to comment briefly on this paragraph you wrote because I think there is some interesting stuff here. Also a huge part of why I entered into this conversation.
For the record, the BGA EC and Chapter Representatives have a conference call every two weeks. We just had our last call on Jan 7, 2011. It was 1 hour and 5 minutes long and it was the shortest call we have had in my tenure with the BGA which stretches back to 2007 as either a Chapter rep or EC member.
That being said, I think it is healthy to have conversations with the membership about what is going on and what we are planning. There are however challenges to this as well...
1. All of the members of the BGA leadership do so on a volunteer basis, we spend time on top of our normal full-time jobs to do this work. Balancing these commitments with our lives, and work is not east, but we did volunteer to do it. This sometimes means we fail at communicating bc we have other things to do. This is however not an excuse, and definitely a failure on our part at times.
2. Many times we are already working on the problems that people bring up to us. Aside from conversations like this, we have 1 on 1 conversations with people at events etc. We are keenly aware of what the challenges the BGA as an organization faces. for example: accessability was brought up as a hurdle to getting value out of the BGA. Well guess, what we are always working on ways to bring more events, and more regional ideas to the table. The challenge is none of these things organize themselves and take huge amounts of time to organize.
3. In the past the BGA had a bad habit of over-promising, and not being able to deliver. Thankfully the current leadership is keenly aware that we need to only promise what we can deliver. Because of this however, it makes us hesitant to announce what we are working on for the future until it becomes solidified. Not wanting to say "we're going to host 2 BGA camp's next year" and then get disappointed barista frustrated with us because it was not realistic. We are much more interested in doing what we are capable of and making it work well...
4. many times it is difficult to not see threads like this as complaints, or attacks. I know that personally it was very difficult for me to come back to this thread and respond again. There is not a single problem on this 4 page thread that I have not in some way already experienced, or am not working to solve through multiple avenues within the SCAA. It is not helpful in my opinion to throw attacks, or beat up on the people who are trying to get these things done. As it causes them to batter down the hatches, and dismiss the complaints. This is basic human psychology. There is also an easy solution to this problem, and it is: be careful with your tone when bringing attention to a problem, and ask "what can I do to help". As you said Brady, and I believe you are right... everyone on this thread wants things to be better! Otherwise you probably wouldn't take the time to read or write to this thread... however... let us all keep in mind... WE ARE ON THE SAME TEAM!! we all want to advance specialty coffee!
-
-
That link does show nearest parking garage (and a Toyota dealership), no hotels. Which is no biggy in and of itself, I can (and have) search and find them on my own.
The issue is official event website not having that or any travel or lodging information links...
Dan Streetman said:http://maps.google.com/maps?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en...
hotels near the Tacoma venue... for NWRBC
-
Permalink Reply by Jay Caragay on
-
Dan-
Looking through this thread there is only one post that was an attack - and that was the post that the SCAA President, Peter Giuliano directed towards me.
Instead of addressing the concerns expressed here, he goes on some sort of tirade about conspiracies and what not. This is an elected leader of specialty coffee and you want to reassure us that things are being considered and handled responsibly???
The difficulty of volunteering your efforts towards administering an organization is well known amongst those who have done similar - your "pain" is understood by many of us. However, it is the job you pursued as an elected official and to "batten down the hatches" under scrutiny is not leadership, and "dismissing the complaints" will only lead to the erosion of support and credibility.
Sadly, you make a call for people to ask "what can I do to help" and offer solutions when identifying a problem. However, when those potential solutions are presented, they are ignored and/or dismissed - ostensibly because you're "battening down the hatches" or, as I have called it in the past: "circling the wagons."
You talk about being "on the same team" and you deign to act as our elected leaders yet fail to realize that each of us are on the same team as well. "Battening down the hatches" demonstrates the "us v. them" and enemy complex that permeates the SCAA style of "leadership." You fail (or worse, choose not) to realize that each person expressing a problem represents opportunity for the elected officials to demonstrate service by addressing the complaints rather than dismissing them or giving us vague assurances that these concerns haven't already been addressed or are being worked on.
As with anything, give us results. So far, the results have been a complete lack of communication regarding the regional competitions, dates, venues, schedules - and when you're talking about a competition that's only a couple of weeks away and there's still no data, that's a problem.
Maybe it's time to recognize and address current failures instead of noting failures of previous administrations.
Dan Streetman said:4. many times it is difficult to not see threads like this as complaints, or attacks. I know that personally it was very difficult for me to come back to this thread and respond again. There is not a single problem on this 4 page thread that I have not in some way already experienced, or am not working to solve through multiple avenues within the SCAA. It is not helpful in my opinion to throw attacks, or beat up on the people who are trying to get these things done. As it causes them to batter down the hatches, and dismiss the complaints. This is basic human psychology. There is also an easy solution to this problem, and it is: be careful with your tone when bringing attention to a problem, and ask "what can I do to help". As you said Brady, and I believe you are right... everyone on this thread wants things to be better! Otherwise you probably wouldn't take the time to read or write to this thread... however... let us all keep in mind... WE ARE ON THE SAME TEAM!! we all want to advance specialty coffee!
-
-
Jay,
please know that I agree with you, and think most of this thread is highly productive as a communication tool between the leadership and the membership. That specifically is the only reason why I chose to respond to this thread, as I know there can never be enough open dialogue.
I do not doubt, that you especially are cognizant of all the "pain" that leadership experiences. Although I think we probably would respectfully disagree about the best way to address our grievances. Maybe it is still my naivety, but I feel that it is especially true of public discussion to force people to want to "circle the wagons" as it were, since the audience is so much broader, whereas if you and I were having this conversation one on one the tone, and direction would probably be much different.
I do recognize that we are on the same team, and I take all of the concerns very seriously. Some things are within my purview to provide direction, and feedback and some things are not...
that being said... I will say again... I really do hope that you will come judge at one (at least) regional this year. I know several of the Head Judges who would be highly appreciative of you specifically, and that all of us appreciate all the judges immensely.
We say it at the end of every training,... but there is no way to express how true the words are... We (literally) CAN NOT do this without you"
-
Permalink Reply by Sandy Hon on
-
Dan Streetman said:3. In the past the BGA had a bad habit of over-promising, and not being able to deliver. Thankfully the current leadership is keenly aware that we need to only promise what we can deliver.
Really Dan? Really?
Every year the BGA grows and matures. Please dont openly bash those that have gone before you and have worked just as tirelessly laying the groundwork, making it possible for future leaders such as yourself to grow the organization that you yourself are "tirelessly volunteering" your time and expertise to grow.
Every year people bitch about what the BGA is or is not doing. Unfortunately, that's just 'how it is and how it's going to be' For the people by the people. the people are speaking and this is what they're saying.
BGA EC- convince; dont get all disgruntled or take disagreements personally, it's the people and they're talking. they are telling you what they want. for the people by the people, right?
you can't please them all. that's just life. carry on.
you guys are doing an amazing job. don't let complaints and criticisms trip you up. an organization can only grow so fast. but please, don't bash the ones before you that had to carry the shovels and lay the groundwork.
the BGA has great potential and it takes leaders such as yourselves to make it happen. Unfortunately, all of the great things that the BGA is intended to do cannot happen overnight. It takes lots of time and effort every year from everyone involved.
-
Permalink Reply by Anthony Rue on
-
As a small shop owner, I have sacrificed much to participate in the barista competitions over the last four years-- I've volunteered ('07), judged ('08, 09, 10), and paid out of pocket for members of my staff to both judge and compete. You might say I'm a believer. Still, I'm dismayed by the changes this year for several reasons. For starters, the fee structure feels like nothing more than a shake-down. Honestly, you have to understand that there are shops that get very little from the BGA membership. I started paying for our baristas to be members two years ago, and they asked me to stop. There's just no benefit for them. There's never been an activity closer than 400 miles away-- enough that it requires days off and hotels. No outreach. Nothing tangible. Not that it really matters; perhaps the BGA is absolutely necessary for frustrated baristas working for shop owners who just don't care, or for motivated owners who just don't know how. I hope that neither applies to our shop. I don't think that there's anyone on our staff that believes they need anyone from the EC to tell them how to be more engaged with their work as baristas. It might be a story for another thread/topic, but let's just say that for us the we either have to look at the cost of competing as having either doubled or tripled, and the requirement of the BGA membership to get the lower fee is little more than a tax.
What does that tax pay for? As a professional organization, the SCAA has to recognize that the regional and national competitions have marketing value for the speciality coffee industry that they are chartered to promote. If it didn't pay off, there'd be no reason to bother. I can't imagine that it was ever looked upon as a revenue stream. If the competitions have not been self-sustaining, then they have been paid for by some combination of sponsorships and the higher fees paid for SCAA membership by growers, exporters, producer associations, importers, and distributors. The goal of naming a national champion is to create a friendly national spokesperson for the SCAA. It's as much a benefit to the big players as to the working barista. If there is a problem with financial foundation of the competition schedule, why shift the burden onto those who can least afford to pay? Was there any discussion about increasing dues on the corporate level to sustain a program that has at least as much benefit to the big guys?
Again, if you are asking working baristas and small shop owners to double their financial contributions, what good-faith effort has been made by the organizers to cut the costs of producing the competition? Do we have a guarantee that the paid-for hotel rooms, car rentals, and per diems for head judges and organizers have been arranged with cost-cutting in mind? I hope you understand that given the new fees, participants will be doing the same; it's only fair that you make an effort to show that you are skipping dinner at Craft and also staying at the Motel 6. How about the cost of the event itself? (is there any possible way that it is less expensive to hold the SERBC at the Georgia World Congress Center than at King Plow, or any of a hundred other available spaces in Atlanta?) Is there any way to review the breakdown of how it costs $500 (or whatever that claimed cost was) per competitor above the $100 entry fee that had previously been charged? With an industry rife with so many very smart people, I can't help but wonder if the competition couldn't have been made more efficient if you had gone to the membership with the problem.
Finally, I really hope that the fee hike isn't in anticipation of the loss of sponsorship. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that there is a fundamental contradiction in having the competition sponsored by companies that are made increasingly irrelevant by the success of the competition. (Not to say that the prior sponsors are not amazing and wonderful and deserving of recognition and support-- just that someone, somewhere in those sponsoring companies, has to recognize the potential of the competition to shift the ways shops do business in a way that isn't in their own best interest...) The staff of the SCAA have five months to stage the regionals and and the national competition, then seven to plan the next year. One new primary sponsor would have paid for all of the money you need to raise by increasing fees on the baristas and judges. Is the pool so thin that there hasn't been any way to recruit a new top-level sponsor in years? Let's see a sustained effort to attract a more diverse, better-suited sponsorship spread!
-
Permalink Reply by Deferio on
-
Let's not forget that the BGA represents both people who critisize and those who approve. Neither one should be made to feel less welcome in the barista community for voicing either view. I seem to remember that the SCAA and the BGA were both born of criticism and malcontent regarding the state of the industry in their day. It is not to be thought of as "bitching" when someone criticizes but as opportunity to better a movement that began with descent. I hope that Dan continues to be true to the roots of the community that he now represents.
If it is not true today then was it ever?
Sandy Hon said:
Dan Streetman said:3. In the past the BGA had a bad habit of over-promising, and not being able to deliver. Thankfully the current leadership is keenly aware that we need to only promise what we can deliver.
Really Dan? Really?
Every year the BGA grows and matures. Please dont openly bash those that have gone before you and have worked just as tirelessly laying the groundwork, making it possible for future leaders such as yourself to grow the organization that you yourself are "tirelessly volunteering" your time and expertise to grow.
Every year people bitch about what the BGA is or is not doing. Unfortunately, that's just 'how it is and how it's going to be' For the people by the people. the people are speaking and this is what they're saying.
BGA EC- convince; dont get all disgruntled or take disagreements personally, it's the people and they're talking. they are telling you what they want. for the people by the people, right?
you can't please them all. that's just life. carry on.
you guys are doing an amazing job. don't let complaints and criticisms trip you up. an organization can only grow so fast. but please, don't bash the ones before you that had to carry the shovels and lay the groundwork.
the BGA has great potential and it takes leaders such as yourselves to make it happen. Unfortunately, all of the great things that the BGA is intended to do cannot happen overnight. It takes lots of time and effort every year from everyone involved.
Barista Exchange Partners
Barista Exchange Friends
Keep Barista Exchange Free
Are you enjoying Barista Exchange? Is it helping you promote your business and helping you network in this great industry? Donate today to keep it free to all members. Supporters can join the "Supporters Group" with a donation. Thanks!
© 2024 Created by Matt Milletto.
Powered by
