Proposed Program:

Internalize and integrate the administration, direction, marketing, production and operations of the STARFLEET International Conference into the STARFLEET corporate and operational umbrella.

Executive Summary:

This proposal outlines the benefits to internalizing the International Conference function and having a STARFLEET level staffer manage the conference process. There are many more benefits to making the IC a function of STARFLEET’s EC, rather than using the system we are using now, which is not functioning for the greater good of STARFLEET and for the protection of its assets.

Current Situation:

As an International Conference Chair, as well as being a veteran hotel manager, an experienced meeting planner and owner of a travel agency, I have had a unique perspective on the entire International Conference process. Being a close observer for three years and a major participant for the last two has made me aware of one thing. Our IC system is broken, and there’s no way to develop a system that includes the oversight that STARFLEET needs to insure the conference doesn’t lose money and the marketing the conference needs to be well attended, but that also guarantees the operating autonomy that goes with taking the financial risk that most IC committees take.

Proposed Program:

Conference Director:

STARFLEET shall establish the position of Conference Director under the office of the Commander, STARFLEET, and shall endow them with the responsibilities of the International Conference. This includes conference site selection, marketing, finances, operations (both prior to the conference and onsite operations), registration and production.

This position basically internalizes the current functions of the International Conference Chair from each bid, and makes it a static position. This position should also be bondable.

Bidding Process:

Currently, bids are accepted from wherever and whoever submits them. No matter the geography, we accept bids and select from those who submit them. For only one bid being submitted, the bid is selected.

This proposal would create a whole new system. We would no longer create a bidding process, per se. We would divide the US and Canada into 6 areas, of which the conference would rotate through. From those areas, the chapters (or regions or an amalgamation of both) would be able to form a “Host Committee” to assist in location selection, market their area and help with the onsite logistics of the conference. The Conference Director would begin an RFP (Request for Proposal) process for the conference, allowing STARFLEET to retain control over sites, prices and contracts. While the host committee can recommend, the final decision lies with the EC, with recommendations from the Conference Director, who shall also have a vote in this matter.

This would accomplish a great number of things. First of all, it gives members in all areas of the country a chance to have the IC a little more local to them. This has been a constant complaint about IC attendance. Second, it unlocks new markets and areas that may not have been considered due to the lack of chapters willing to take on the full IC responsibility in their neck of the woods. Third, by utilizing an RFP Process, we can get the most attractive bid in terms of location, facility and financially. It gives us negotiating power with the facilities and we can insure the best value for our members’ money. Finally, it also allows the rank-and-file members to focus on regional events instead of international ones.

Note: the timeline for the RFP process would remain the same as it is currently. For example, RFPs and Selections for IC 2013 would be solicited and decided in 2011, for IC 2014 in 2012, and so on. We would keep the cycle the same, just stop the bid process. (Added June 17, 2010)

Second & Third Tier Cities:

When looking at site selection, second-tier and third-tier cities have a lot to offer. Cities like Omaha, West Palm Beach, Pittsburgh, Baton Rouge, and Providence have great meeting space at cut-rate prices. Again, by moving the conference around on a geographical basis and not relying on a chapter or region in that area to do the pre-work of an IC, we can utilize cities and areas that will not just bid on our business, but compete for it.

The Host Committee:

The current committee is the “bid committee” each with varied responsibilities. Under this new system, the Host Committee would have most of the responsibility of the “Pre-Planning” process removed. They would remain the “boots on the ground”, and would be utilized onsite, recognized first and given other perks, but not carry the responsibility of the conference with them.

Volunteers:

This would not be a “one-man show” and the IC would continue to need and welcome volunteers. There would be volunteers needed for registration, security, programming, and many of the other functional areas. These could be from the host committee, members in attendance and even HQ Staff who are in attendance.

Financial Oversight:

Currently, the Commander, STARFLEET (acting in his duty as President of the Corporation) signs all hotel contracts. The Chief Financial Officer’s office sets up bank and PayPal accounts and issues access to such accounts to the IC Committee in the form of passwords, STARFLEET Debit Cards and requested disbursements over $500 from the CFO. One does not have to be an attorney to recognize that while the IC Committee is ethically bound to protect STARFLEET’s from losses related to the IC, it is certainly not legally bound to do so. Contracts are signed by the CS for, and on behalf of, the corporation. The IC’s funds are under the nominal control of the CFO. It can be easily argued that this equates to the actual liability for a failing conference to fall solely on STARFLEET’s shoulders. As we all know, it has happened before and the steps we have taken are not nearly enough to protect the organization.

The Conference Director would be a member of the STARFLEET staff, and therefore reports to the CS. This removes the nebulous responsibility from the IC Staff and puts a bonded, vetted and (hopefully) well-selected staffer with true EC oversight into the position. It makes STARFLEET responsible for its own success or failure, not a group that may or may not have the ability to pull a conference off.

Financial Spend:

Liability aside, International Conferences cost money. First, through the RFP process, we’ve already saved money. We’ve leveraged the power of competitive pricing to secure the best deals. We’ve also selected sites that may not have been on the radar based on location that can save money in the long run.

In addition to these arenas, we would be able to take advantage of economies of scale that would benefit the organization as a whole. What if we knew we were going to use items in the future and were able to purchase them in bulk when they are priced lowest? For example, nametags could be purchased in lots of 500 or 1000 for half the price per unit of 200. By leveraging the buying power of long-term use and planning by one group, you could save a lot of money that could be put to better use.

Relationships:

Again, long term planning means long term relationships. What if we consistently used our preferred partners for our IC? It would result in better terms all around. Also, by making this an organizational level responsibility, there are opportunities for increasing revenues as well. As the owner of a Travel Agency, I have a program where commissionable rates that are paid by 501(c)3 and 501(c)7 organizations have a giveback component to them. This means for every dollar of commission earned, a percentage goes back to the organization or charity that sponsors the event. However, revenue streams such as that or long-term commitments to our partners can’t be taken advantage of when the decision making gets jiggered around each year.

Marketing:

The marketing of IC’s in the last few years hasn’t been exciting, innovative or even really informative. There’s little information put out there on them, completely uninformative Web sites, divergent messages, no media plan and lack of contact from the committees to the members. Attempts to get the “rank and file” out to them have been ineffective and it seems like many of the conference committees believe it to be the responsibility of STARFLEET HQ to do its marketing for them.

By internalizing this function, the Conference Director; in conjunction with the STARFLEET Chief of Communications and the STARFLEET Chief of Computer Operations, can develop a crafted media plan with a consistent and well-developed message that is echoed on mailing lists, through Social Media, in the Communiqué and on the Web. They can also create a Public Relations and Press Campaign that not only has the great information and service we offer, but with the professional polish and panache that comes with it being issued by STARFLEET. This would remove the responsibility from the committee level and move it to the ‘Fleet level, where it belongs.

It would also remove the delicate tightrope that IC committees walk with each other to get their message out. We could focus the message to ensure that nothing conflicts with one another.

Production:

This is an area where anyone who attends our conference from the outside would take one look at our organization, declare us to be completely unprofessional and probably walk away. In reviewing videos of the last 5 years of conferences, I can tell you that the production of these were completely and totally unprofessional. From in-jokes that were only funny to 20 of the people in the room, to people literally getting up on stage and grabbing the microphone, it made for a poor presentation of our organization.

Again, by internalizing these functions, you can present a crafted, professional image to everyone. A well planned, professionally outlined production, using proper equipment and proper staff takes us from a raucous, disrespectful group with a microphone, projector and a laptop at the podium to a produced event with polish that won’t cost much more than what we already spend.

Theme: (added June 17, 2010)

The IC should have a theme consistent with the area being held. It should coordinate with the local area it is being held. (Ex. Orlando - Magic of Starfleet, Las Vegas - Fortune Favors the Bold) Programming elements or activities should be held to take advantage of the unique surroundings of the IC. (Boston - Duck Tour, Poconos - Ghost Hunting) 

Dissenting Arguments:

There are a lot of opinions surrounding IC’s and the IC process. Some of the arguments against this plan is that it takes some of the fun away from the members in planning the event. While this is true, it also takes away the financial burden from STARFLEET. Another argument is that there’s no way to plan a meeting without being onsite. That argument is bunk. I personally ran the Super 8 Motels International Convention at the Gaylord Palms in Orlando, FL and never set foot inside until the day I arrived to begin the show. It is done all the time, and with an experienced hand at the helm, it provides few issues. Another argument is that it is just another example of STARFLEET exercising control over the members. I would submit that when it’s STARFLEET’s wallet on the line, it should have the right to do so. Some may even argue that it’s a constitutional issue, but the handbook and by-laws have no statement on how IC’s are awarded or conducted. It’s all administrative policy and the EC can always change it. But I think the main argument is that this is a departure from the past. However, if you always done what you’ve always did, you’ll always get what you’ve always got. In the case of what we’ve gotten recently, our members deserve more.

Closing:

The main responsibility of the officers of the organization is to protect it. Many unpopular items have come out of protecting this organization that I believe were for the greater good. There are a lot of advantages to internalizing this function.