Download PDF Version of Entire Q/A

WHAT ARE THE BASIC CORE DETAILS OF THIS PROPOSED PARTNERSHIP?

CAN YOU REVIEW THE TIMELINE FOR HOW ALL OF THIS HAPPENED AS IT SEEMS TO HAVE TRANSPIRED SOMEWHAT UNEXPECTEDLY AND QUICKLY?

HOW IS THIS PROPOSAL CONCEPTUALLY DIFFERENT THAN THE NACDA CORE PROPOSAL FROM TWO YEARS AGO?

WHEN WOULD THIS RELATIONSHIP BEGIN?

WHY IS NACDA NEEDING A DECEMBER 15th DEADLINE COMMITMENT?

WILL CoSIDA GO AWAY AS AN ORGANIZATION?

YOU MENTIONED PAYING NACDA A FEE. HOW MUCH IS THAT YEARLY FEE FOR THE SERVICES/EXPOSURE THAT HAS BEEN DESCRIBED?

SO WHAT’S IN THIS FOR CoSIDA’s MEMBERSHIP?

WHAT HAVE BEEN THE CONCERNS/QUESTIONS RAISED WITH REGARD TO THE EVALUATION OF THE PROPOSAL?

WILL CoSIDA MEMBERS HAVE TO JOIN NACDA AND PAY NACDA DUES?

WILL IT COST MORE TO ATTEND THE CoSIDA CONVENTION?

WILL HOTEL COSTS GO UP?

WHY IS THIS PROPOSAL GETTING MORE BOARD OF DIRECTOR AND LEADERSHIP SUPPORT THAN PREVIOUS NACDA PROPOSALS?

WHAT IF THIS DOESN’T WORK AS DETERMINED?

WHAT ARE THE MAJOR DISCUSSION POINTS AND CONCEPTS THAT HAVE PROVIDED IMPETUS FOR CoSIDA’S LEADERSHIP TO WANT TO PRESENT THIS TO THE MEMBERSHIP FOR POSSIBLE ADOPTION?

WHAT HAPPENS NOW?

WILL I HAVE TO PAY MORE TO ATTEND THE OTHER NACDA PANELS AND SESSIONS?

WILL CoSIDA MEMBERS RECEIVE OTHER NACDA MEMBER BENEFITS?

WHAT IS NACDA?


WHAT ARE THE BASIC CORE DETAILS OF THIS PROPOSED PARTNERSHIP?
This CoSIDA/NACDA arrangement is being referred to by both leadership groups as a “Unique Hybrid Relationship.” Unlike NACDA’s eleven other fully affiliated organizations, CoSIDA would remain a fully independent association and run its own business as it has/wants, including all aspects of its annual convention. Our annual convention, however, would now be placed within the overall NACDA convention so that our profession and membership, both collectively and individually, can gain the needed exposure and benefits that would be generated by now being a very active and visible part of the most influential yearly gathering of administrators in intercollegiate athletics. CoSIDA’s involvement, as the NACDA staff has indicated, is the key missing part of the equation that would bring all of the essential administrative components of the enterprise of intercollegiate athletics together under one convention roof annually.

If approved, NACDA would provide the bulk of “event planning services” for the CoSIDA Convention, including such things as providing on-site management- meeting room preparation, working with the hotel on such things as planning/execution for luncheons and social events that CoSIDA schedules and audio/visual related services. In short, it would provide consistent expertise as well as personnel and services for handling the “nuts and bolts” aspects of coordinating a vast array of logistical details as it relates to the advance planning and on-site execution of the convention. The arrangement would also have them dealing with advance contract negotiations with hotels, room allocations and advance site visits.

The CoSIDA Convention would take place during the NACDA Convention, but it is important to fully understand that CoSIDA would still determine its own programming for our own convention and would set its own registration fee. Other NACDA attendees would have the opportunity to sit in on CoSIDA Convention panels, thus providing an opportunity for others in athletics to better understand what we do as well as creating unique networking and growth opportunities. Also, CoSIDA would fully retain the right to run its own luncheons and social events, awards programs and keeps all appropriate sponsorship revenue that it can produce. An additional key component of this “relationship based arrangement” is the fact that this is not a long-term commitment on CoSIDA’s part. In effect, CoSIDA will be able to try this for a few years and if, from its perspective of the leadership and membership, it does not work as hoped, it can then go back to its stand-alone convention with no financial penalty. In short, it’s a “Lets Try It For a Few Years” agreement.
CoSIDA also retains the right to run its own website and produce its own newsletter and directory. In addition, this arrangement calls for CoSIDA to receive exposure within the NACDA community throughout the year via arrangements that will be worked out to share appropriate stories/news on each other’s various websites and we will also be provided an opportunity to provide a “CoSIDA Corner” column in each of the eight yearly “Athletics Administration” magazines that NACDA produces that is sent to 9,000 university and athletics administrators throughout the intercollegiate community. We will also be able to take advantage of NACDA’s “E-Daily” blast email system, which reaches 13,000 people, to provide appropriate information/news regarding our organization and profession. NACDA has also agreed to provide other meeting and networking opportunities throughout the year that will benefit the CoSIDA leadership in advancing various initiatives as it relates to the profession and the organizational membership- both collectively and individually.

CAN YOU REVIEW THE TIMELINE FOR HOW ALL OF THIS HAPPENED AS IT SEEMS TO HAVE TRANSPIRED SOMEWHAT UNEXPECTEDLY AND QUICKLY?
There is no question that this process has moved at a very rapid pace over the last two month as it became clear that both associations were getting much closer in terms of the philosophical differences that had been roadblocks in previous discussions.

In early July, NACDA President Joan Cronan, Women’s AD at Tennessee, attended our convention in Tampa to help us honor Debby Jennings when she was presented with the Arch Ward Award. Joan indicated to some of the CoSIDA leadership at that time that she wanted to work to try and build a better bridge between our two groups and thus find ways to better serve the overall athletics community and respective memberships.

In early September several members of the CoSIDA leadership group participated on a conference call with Joan and Bob Vecchione, Sr. Executive Director of NACDA, to talk more about “bridge-building” over the short-term. At the close of that call Joan asked CoSIDA Executive Director John Humenik to prepare a short bullet point presentation as to the things that CoSIDA would like NACDA’s assistance and consideration on in the next few years. John produced such a document and presented it the full BOD for review and input and then that was sent to Joan and Bob about ten days later.

At that point about a week later, Bob called John and CoSIDA President Nick Joos to say that due to Joan’s strong urging and support she wanted the NACDA staff to thoroughly evaluate the possibility of an even more meaningful and substantive relationship than had been discussed. Bob indicated that Joan’s feelings were based on how impressed she was with the passion of our leadership group in wanting to pro-actively deal with appropriate issues and challenges during her visit to Tampa as well as that passion being demonstrated again with the recent conference call and the bullet-point presentation. Bob indicated that Joan expressed to the NACDA staff a true desire to want to help our profession, organization and membership. At that time Bob indicated to John and Nick that the NACDA staff had also been impressed with our presentation of “relationship building and partnering” and had, as a result, also been evaluating several others things that would/could be further discussed.

About a week later, Bob indicated to Nick and John that NACDA was indeed moving forward on putting together what Bob referred to as a “unique hybrid-relationship” proposal for eventual presentation to the BOD. Nick then informed the BOD of NACDA’s intentions in this regard. Over the next several weeks John, representing CoSIDA’s best interests at all times, answered questions and provided input as to what NACDA had to do with its upcoming proposal to illicit more positive response and support among the leadership of both the university and college divisions than has been the case in the past, including a failed presentation at the CoSIDA Convention in Nashville 2006.

On October 23rd Bob presented a formal NACDA proposal to Nick and he in turn forwarded that along to the full BOD for their review. A conference call was setup on Oct. 29th in which Joan and Bob talked about why NACDA wants to make this relationship work and why it is important for the enterprise of intercollegiate athletics for all of us to be under the same convention roof. The business-based components of the proposal were also reviewed and a Q&A session was then conducted for the BOD. At the conclusion of the call Nick directed each member of the BOD to provide John, no later than Nov. 3rd, with a bullet-point pro/con evaluation of this proposal based on their review and the teleconference session Members did that and John provided that composite expressed feedback back to the BOD on Nov. 4th. On Nov. 6th another BOD teleconference took place that primarily revolved around a “pro/con” discussion of the proposal. Based in large part on how these BOD conversations have gone and the overall merits that have been advanced on its behalf, Anne Abicht- a CD rep from St. Cloud State University- made a motion on Nov. 6th- which was then unanimously passed - that this proposal should be forwarded to the membership for review and input prior to the BOD conducting a final vote on the matter in mid-December.

HOW IS THIS PROPOSAL CONCEPTUALLY DIFFERENT THAN THE NACDA CORE PROPOSAL FROM TWO YEARS AGO?
NACDA made a proposal to the CoSIDA Board at the Nashville convention in 2006 that would have made CoSIDA a full affiliate organization of NACDA. Under that proposal, CoSIDA would have, like the other eleven associations that are affiliated with NACDA, had much of its association-management duties transferred to NACDA. In short, CoSIDA would have become one of the fully affiliated organizations under the NACDA umbrella and they would have basically run most/all aspects of our association form a business and general management standpoint as well as the annual convention. At that time, the membership was clear in their desire to remain an independent organization. Rather than become a fully affiliated membership part of NACDA, the CoSIDA BOD/membership voted instead, a year later in San Diego, to hire the organization’s first executive director.

From July ’06 until July ‘08 there was nothing much that was evolving in terms of the CoSIDA/NACDA relationship, but that dramatically changed with the arrival of Joan Cronan as NACDA President this June and her trip to the CoSIDA Convention in Tampa on July 2nd. Both the CoSIDA and NACDA boards started to come to realize that it was important to find ways to significantly bridge the disconnect between communications/ information/media relation directors and the rest of the intercollegiate athletics world. There had to be ways to bridge the disconnect between the associations of CoSIDA and NACDA. Both groups started to come to fully appreciate that this “disconnect” must be repaired and significantly improved for the betterment of the intercollegiate athletics community and enterprise. Both leadership groups became determined to find a “Win-Win” scenario in this regard. Both boards have since gained a realization that joining the two conventions will allow CoSIDA and the communications profession to take needed steps forward as it relates to gaining better understanding and appreciation for its role and the intercollegiate athletics community would benefit by more effective joint issue solving, especially in the areas of communications-based issues.

NACDA, as a result of these discussions, has then decided to step forward with this significantly different proposal concept that is much-more CoSIDA friendly and philosophically acceptable than the Nashville proposal. CoSIDA has kept the things that are philosophically important to it; self management and the ability to run it own association as it determines 365 days a year and determine its own convention programming and registration fee. While keeping those core philosophical concepts in place it will also now be gaining many additional benefits for the profession and its membership, collectively and individually, by now being a full partner in the joint-convention process at NACDA. This is also a short-term agreement, one that enables CoSIDA to try this for a few years rather than being a long-term commitment as was the case in previous agreement discussions. The “Lets Just Try This” approach by NCADA became a significant reason why there is more CoSIDA leadership support for this NACDA proposal. Both leadership groups now do see this negotiated arrangement as something that can be a “Win-Win” scenario.

WHEN WOULD THIS RELATIONSHIP BEGIN?
If approved, the CoSIDA Convention would become part of the NACDA Convention in 2013 in Orlando. Since our conference call with NACDA on Oct. 29th they have informed the leadership, as a way of further showing how much it wants to make this work, extended some “transitional benefits” to CoSIDA for 2009-2012 (attending joint leadership meetings with the other NACDA associations as well as website and publication benefits). Those “transitional benefits” would begin in January of ’09 as CoSIDA leadership reps would be permitted to attend NACDA’s annual mid-year joint- associations’ leadership meeting. NACDA had indicated, in its very first approach about this plan to CoSIDA, that it was interested in a partnership/relationship beginning with the 2011 convention, but due to hotel arrangements that CoSIDA could not get out of without a big financial penalty, the conversation switched to ’13 since that is the first year that CoSIDA is not fully tied down to a guaranteed hotel arrangement that it can get out with no financial penalty

WHY IS NACDA NEEDING A DECEMBER 15th DEADLINE COMMITMENT?
Both CoSIDA and NACDA negotiate hotel contracts for their conventions at a minimum of five years in advance. We in fact, have already completed and signed a contract for our 2013 convention in Anaheim. That contract contains an “out clause” to protect us should we decide to enter into this NACDA relationship. To either break or re-negotiate those contracts after the fact can be a very tough, and expensive, thing to do. The December 15 deadline would allow both CoSIDA and NACDA to move forward to insure adequate hotel room allotments and meeting space for the 2013-beyond conventions. This needed deadline is simply based on all of the logistical matters related to the business aspects of running conventions in today’s world. The best way to understand this is to realize that if CoSIDA, with a convention of 800 has a need/demand to sign a contract five years out, then one can only imagine the logistical aspects in that regard that NACDA will be facing with a convention that will number over 3000. This deadline is also needed, if CoSIDA accepts the proposal, to allow more details to be worked out jointly by both groups to ensure that NACDA will have the appropriate planning and execution time to carry out multiple aspects of this agreement.

WILL CoSIDA GO AWAY AS AN ORGANIZATION?
Absolutely NOT! In fact, many on the BOD believe that this move will elevate the visibility of our organization and profession significantly throughout the collegiate community. Under this proposal, CoSIDA would remain a completely self-managed and independent organization from NACDA. We would continue to have our own board of directors, paid staff functions as determined, committees, programs and honors. In essence, we are paying NACDA to provide event planning and management services for our convention as well as for some exposure throughout the year in the intercollegiate community via their communication vehicles. In short, we will run our association as we have/want 365 days a year.

YOU MENTIONED PAYING NACDA A FEE. HOW MUCH IS THAT YEARLY FEE FOR THE SERVICES/EXPOSURE THAT HAS BEEN DESCRIBED?
CoSIDA will pay NACDA a $25,000 annual management fee. This will cover all of the things that they will take on as it relates to advance planning aspects of our convention as well as the personnel needed to carry that out in preparation of the convention and on-site. In addition, we have been provided a comp full page “CoSIDA Corner” column in each of NACDA’s eight “Athletic Administration” magazines (value of that space if CoSIDA would have to purchase such space would be $12,000 per year) and the opportunity to work with NACDA as it relates to sharing links and email blasts. It also provides that CoSIDA’s leadership will be provided opportunities throughout the year to participate in scheduled joint meetings that take place with the leadership of NACDA’s other eleven fully affiliated groups.

It should be pointed out that CoSIDA will save a few thousand dollars per year under this arrangement as it will not have to spend money it now does to execute maters as it relates to the site selection and contractual aspects of convention selection. Also, many feel that the added exposure and visibility of CoSIDA’s presence at the joint CoSIDA- NACDA convention will result in elevated sponsorship levels and commitments and that should more than off-set this $25,000 fee expense.

Many on the BOD have come to view this $25K annual fee as an excellent cost-benefit value. That general feeling on the BOD is best captured by this comment that was part of the Board’s pro/con evaluation: “Talk about a “Bang for your Buck” proposal ! We need to realize that for a management fee of $25,000 our organization of 2,400 members is in effect being charged just $10.50 per member per year for an incredible amount of professional-based benefits. $10.50 per member for all of the synergy, networking, cross-over aspects, visibility and marketing benefits that will take place. $10.50 per member to have our profession and organization placed into a position to strategically advance itself in multiple ways unlike at any point in our history. It is worth repeating- What a Bang for our Buck !”

SO WHAT’S IN THIS FOR CoSIDA’s MEMBERSHIP?
It is important to view that question form both a standpoint of the membership collectively as well as individually. For years, the organizational membership- collectively and individually- has talked about wanting to gain respect from others in intercollegiate athletics, particularly from athletics directors and marketing directors. Having the CoSIDA Convention in concert with the NACDA Convention would allow our organization as a whole to have “a leadership seat at the table” with athletics directors, marketing directors, compliance officers and others. Our leadership will have access to the leadership of these other various groups unlike at any time on our history. Proponents believe that by putting “Profession First”, organization-wide membership benefits- collectively and individually- will then emanate in various ways. Attendance in numbers at this covention will provide all kinds of synergistic membership benefits- collectively and individually- both in a professional and personal nature.

Among the benefits that have been expressed are:
• It puts CoSIDA in the middle of the largest and most influential gathering of intercollegiate athletics administrators in the country each year.

• Leadership representatives from each association would have the opportunity to share thoughts/ views of important athletics issues that are affecting the industry, especially those in the areas of communications.

• Our leadership and membership will be in a much- more visible environment to advance issues and strategic initiatives.

• It provides our membership an opportunity to collectively have more direct access to the leadership and decision-makers in other areas of the athletics community.

• It would allow members of CoSIDA and NACDA an opportunity to interact with one another at one common site and share ideas/concerns that may not have been previously discussed on a national level.

• It would provide the associations an opportunity to compose joint task forces to benefit one another- collectively and individually, allowing for a more open line of communication between the two associations.

• It would allow both associations to “cross-over” its panelists, topics, sessions, etc., which would enable each association to maximize efficiencies going forward. It will thus provide significant.

• For CoSIDA, more resources and opportunities now exist for professional development aspects of its annual convention

• The “cumulative synergy-based’ benefits from such a gathering, both formal and informal, and the professional and personal relationship building-both formal and informal- that will take place can not be overstated in terms of what it will mean to us in terms of advancing various aspects of our profession and our collective membership organization.

• Networking opportunities, from the standpoint of the profession, organization and membership will be greatly enhanced.

• This concept enables CoSIDA members to be able to personally determine what they would like to gain/be exposed to each year at the convention. This is a “value add-on” to the normal CoSIDA Convention. If someone just wants to participate in the traditional CoSIDA Convention, they can do that but still benefit by all of the professional networking opportunities that would be provided by just being there. If someone feels, after seeing the overall programming for all of the associations- including CoSIDA- they can choose to sign up for those opportunities. In short, this concept allows CoSIDA members to personalize their own convention experience.

• Our organization would benefit greatly by now being able to place our Capital One Academic All-America Hall of Fame Induction within this joint event. Then, over 3000 folks in the intercollegiate community, including Presidents, AD’s, and Marketing Directors could have the opportunity to attend this special event. Instead of just us, it would be open to the entire group and that would help CoSIDA greatly from a goodwill and PR standpoint.

• So much of what we as professionals do, especially at the D2, D3 and NAIA levels, overlap into many other areas like marketing, promotions, etc. Thus from a College Division standpoint it makes a huge amount of sense to be placed into such an all-encompassing convention for professional needs and growth

• Athletic Director leadership groups from D1, D2, D3 and NAIA would now be available to attend CoSIDA “Divisional Meetings” and ‘divisional based programming” for those groups, something that does not take place now.

WHAT HAVE BEEN THE CONCERNS/QUESTIONS RAISED WITH REGARD TO THE EVALUATION OF THE PROPOSAL?
During the BOD discussions on this proposal the following points were presented by some members
• The NACDA convention is so big that it is pretty much limited to just a couple of locations due the large amount of rooms and appropriate space needed to execute things. One of the pluses of the current CoSIDA is we get to go to so many different cities around the country. We lose the unique intimacy of our convention with this arrangement

• Question regarding the fact that we appear to gain benefits while being a part of the convention, but the benefits of this arrangement with regard to the other 360 days of the year are perhaps not enough and as a result, we might not be getting enough year-long benefit for our $25,000 management fee charge. Some feel the $25 000 management fee is a lot of money to pay to just have the opportunity to be/participate at a joint-convention.

• Questions raised by some as to where will the money come from within the CoSIDA treasury to pay for the annual $25,000 management fee.

• Questions/concerns with the mid-June time of the joint convention. The early/mid June convention dates is still a “working time” for many information directors and is why our convention has been held late June/early July out of respect for that work schedule. This arrangement would/could result in some established regional conventions/meetings- like ECAC-SIDA - having to change their normal calendar schedule due to conflict with the future dates of the proposed joint NACDA/CoSIDA Convention..

• The organization could lose some sponsorship arrangements and exhibitors due to the fact that some of those groups that currently are involved with CoSIDA, due to our stand-alone convention, are also involved with NACDA and might then decide to just stay involved with the NACDA.

• In the current economic climate some expressed that adding an additional optional $150 to the registration fee in order to have “add-on” access to all NACDA functions is a concern. This is an optional add-on fee, however, one of the selling points to this alliance has been “having a seat at the big kid’s table”, which is fine in theory, but the reality is it does come at perhaps some individual additional expense.

• A few raised the point that the basis of the creation of the Executive Director’s position from the membership’s perception standpoint is that we wanted to invest the money necessary to fill it and move our profession forward without merging with NACDA. This was a discussion that took place for a three-year period leading up to the 2007 San Diego Workshop. The perception, fair or not, could be “why did we establish an ED and are also now doing this as well?”

• The perception, fair or not, is that this alliance will be done to accommodate the wishes of the Division I member institutions and not the greater good of the entire profession.

• Concern/question that perhaps after Joan Cronan’s term as NACDA President expires that the commitment from future Presidents of NACDA might be more indifferent. Could this “relationship-based agreement” take an unfavorable shift due to her leaving and others come aboard who do not feel as she does.

• Don’t see this arrangement as one that will likely help grow the number of JC SIDs who attend CoSIDA.

WILL CoSIDA MEMBERS HAVE TO JOIN NACDA AND PAY NACDA DUES?
No. As CoSIDA will not be a full member of NACDA, CoSIDA members will not have to pay NACDA dues unless they choose to do, which some of our members do.

WILL IT COST MORE TO ATTEND THE CoSIDA CONVENTION?
Not if you only want to attend CoSIDA. CoSIDA will still determine registration fees for the CoSIDA Convention. If this proposal had been in pace at the NACDA Dallas Convention last June, CoSIDA members would have still paid $150 but all other registries at that event would have paid a minimum of $295. A CoSIDA member registration fee will only increase if that member chooses to also register for other NACDA group association’s programming. That could currently cost up to $150 depending on the personal additional selections of that member.

WILL HOTEL COSTS GO UP?
Hotel costs will be about the same as what CoSIDA has negotiated for its upcoming conventions. NACDA shared their negotiated rates for future conventions with us as part of these discussion. In ’13 forward they were pretty much right in line with what we had hoped to negotiate for those years. As an example, CoSIDA has negotiated a $159 night rate if our convention is held in Anaheim in ’13 and NACDA has negotiated a $171 nightly rate for that same year’s convention in Orlando.

WHY IS THIS PROPOSAL GETTING MORE BOARD OF DIRECTOR AND LEADERSHIP SUPPORT THAN PREVIOUS NACDA PROPOSALS?
Several BOD members have expressed that this NACDA proposal/presentation is night- and- day different from what took place in Nashville over two years ago and that has played an important role in the elevated level of leadership support for this concept. That feeling seems to have come about for many reasons

*This was not a “come join us as a full affiliate like everyone else business proposal”, but rather a sincerely true “what is it going to take to get you here proposal because we all want you here and need you here” one.

* A “Win-Win” scenario has been the focus from the start

* A clear sense that NACDA fully understood and respected CoSIDA’s desire to self-manage its own association and convention.

* A core proposal concept that is much-more CoSIDA friendly and philosophically acceptable from our standpoint

* NACDA’s leadership listened very closely to the CoSIDA leadership in terms of what it was going to take for NACDA’s proposal to illicit more support than has been the case in the past.

* Joan Cronan’s personal involvement as President of NACDA and her determination to make this happen and make it work from a CoSIDA perspective.

* Joan Cronan’s personal plea, from an Athletics Director perspective, that for the betterment of the intercollegiate athletics community and enterprise we must get everyone under one roof to talk about issues and challenges, and that includes those in the communications-based field.

* It permits CoSIDA to establish all of its won programming for its annual convention and it maintains the right to establish its own registration free for the convention

* NACDA’s willingness to enter a “Lets Try This” agreement. In short, CoSIDA can try this arrangement for a few years and if future leadership, based on membership feedback, wants to go back to a “stand-alone” convention it will be able to do so after trying this for a few years and not suffer any financial penalty. No such arrangement was granted with the Nashville proposal.

* It permits CoSIDA to run its own website and produce its own newsletter and directory

* It permits CoSIDA to stay the course with regard to all of its current and planned sponsorship arrangements.

* It permits CoSIDA to run its own awards programs, including the Academic All-America program

* The NACDA executive staff was viewed as significantly more accommodating than in the past.

* The NACDA executive staff worked very hard to create an attitude that it is committed to making this work as we move forward.
In short, many among the CoSIDA leadership have come to believe, for the above reasons mentioned, to view this proposal as one that does indeed deserve serious consideration/input from the membership and perhaps adoption due to its overall merits.

WHAT IF THIS DOESN’T WORK AS DETERMINED?
One of the significant changes in this proposal vs. past NACDA discussions, and probably one of the key reasons why this proposal is getting more leadership support than the past, is that CoSIDA can back-out of this arrangement after just a few years. The CoSIDA/ NACDA agreement allows for the two organizations to try and see if this co-mingling of conventions will work. CoSIDA would commit to joining with NACDA from the 2013 through 2016 conventions and would determine a future commitment in that regard by Aug. 1, 2014. In short, CoSIDA will be able to go through two full convention years to evaluate this concept before determining what direction it wants to go- this joint convention arrangement or back to its “stand-alone” one- after 2016. CoSIDA, under this agreement, is being presented a “Lets Try This” proposal concept and we have no financial penalty if we decide it is not right for us down the line.

WHAT ARE THE MAJOR DISCUSSION POINTS AND CONCEPTS THAT HAVE PROVIDED IMPETUS FOR CoSIDA’S LEADERSHIP TO WANT TO PRESENT THIS TO THE MEMBERSHIP FOR POSSIBLE ADOPTION?
From a leadership perspective, once it was realized -due to the reasons mentioned above- that NACDA was prepared and determined to reach a win-win situation, the Board then started to focus on why the leadership of CoSIDA needs to seriously evaluate the proposal’s “ overall merits” and determine if it is indeed in our best interest to make this “relationship-based” proposal work. Many discussion points were raised and presented as to why, form a philosophical standpoint, we should at least give serious consideration to trying this approach. Those presentations/conversations resulted in many on the BOD thinking that we must at least try this joint-relationship approach to see if that can result in significant change and advancement for our profession and organization. Among those points were the following.

• A firm realization that this joint- relationship would clearly establish that CoSIDA, perhaps for the first time, was prepared to do what it must to demonstrate that it had total conviction in placing “Profession First” at the forefront of strategic initiatives. Proponents believe that approach is far-and-away the best avenue to then provide multiple benefits to CoSIDA’s membership, both collectively and individually, and the organization as a whole as it relates to implementing various aspects of its pro-active strategic initiatives in the areas of image building, respect, appreciation, understanding and value.

• Many on the BOD came to realize and believe there is a need- a athletics community demand- for us to become a true partner in the “national process” to deal and solve joint-based issues, both for our self and the athletics community at large.

• A realization that we had reached such a state of pro-longed inaction in terms of pro-actively and strategically dealing with our issues/challenges due in many ways to our “stand-alone” approach. Our status and standing in the athletics community has continued to steadily decline now for twenty or so years and we must accept that we are to some degree responsible for that. We want to be treated as “equals”, but many came to the realization that “separate is not equal” and we have compounded our own problems/situation by our “stand-alone” approach. We need the rest of the intercollegiate community to help us deal with problems and issues.

• Many among the leadership have come to realize that this arrangement allows us to become a much bigger part of “the process” as it relates to the enterprise of intercollegiate athletics. A large communication-based professional presence has been the only missing element when the entire collegiate community gathers at NACDA and that is our own fault. So many of our membership complains that they are not “part of the process” at their respective institutions and that makes it even harder to understand why we- CoSIDA- have then, by our own choice, decided not to be a part of “the process” at the national level. Our attitude with regard to such things has fostered a reputation that we are our own worst enemy and we have no real strategic common sense as to what it takes to advance change/implement change. This proposal and platform provides just that opportunity since we will now clearly be a “part of the process” within the gathering of all the key groups that make up the enterprise of intercollegiate athletics.

• Staying away from “the process”- by our own choice- takes us away from a wonderful and needed opportunity to reposition ourselves within the athletics community as an important strategic resource.

• A realization that having/presenting “strength in numbers” among key leadership and decision-makers in collegiate athletics is a significant part of the strategic approach in advancing initiatives and that is just not possible with our current “stand-alone” approach to solving problems. A realization surfaced that sending a CoSIDA rep to such a large and influential gathering as NACDA is not enough to make necessary impact. Proponents felt that having a fish in the large lake is not going to make the kind of difference we need and must have to significantly advance initiatives.

• A realization that for many years now we have been talking among ourselves about the issues facing our profession. We have become quite good at “Preaching to the Choir”, but that clearly has not helped deal significantly with the majority of issues facing us. The vast majority of people in our profession who have been in it for 20-plus years say that our standing and status within the university/athletics community has declined. There became a growing realization that “Preaching to the Choir” is not what we need. We need to “Preach to the Congregation” and that can happen with this proposed relationship and can not happen if we continue to “stand- alone”.

• Former Sports Information/ Communications Directors who have moved into Commissioner, AD, Assoc. AD and marketing-based positions support this “joint-concept” in a near unanimous voice as they feel that such a relationship is imperative for CoSIDA to appropriately and significantly deal with its professional-based issues and challenges. We should clearly listen to them because they have a vantage point and viewpoint on this matter that is very relevant. They want to help, but they find that a virtually fruitless attempt with our current “stand-alone” position.

• A realization, that in terms of NACDA’s approach to us this time, we have received a very “CoSIDA-Friendly” proposal.

If this is declined now, when we have leverage with regard to the proposal and key philosophical components that are important to us, and it is a “Lets Just Try This” for a few years concept, we could be making a very big strategic mistake. This proposal today is very CoSIDA friendly but one five years down-the-line from now, if NACDA would even want to provide one, will be much more NACDA friendly. Much of the independence and self-management that we seek would be infringed. Today’s proposal is one where we have the leverage. A possible one in the future would be one where NACDA would clearly have the leverage and as a result not likely to receive the proposal we have before us now.

WHAT HAPPENS NOW?
The leadership of CoSIDA is now in the process of communicating with our membership about this proposal concept and seeking feedback. Various links on the CoSIDA.com website have been setup so that membership can review this proposal and other documents that relate to it and provide input. There is a “membership feedback” form that has been setup and the membership is encouraged to provide that feedback by the established Dec. 1st deadline. The BOD will continue to hold other discussions about the proposal and at some point around mid-December a final decision will be made so that the BOD can inform NACDA, no later than Dec 15th, of its intentions with regard to this proposal and arrangement.

WILL I HAVE TO PAY MORE TO ATTEND THE OTHER NACDA PANELS AND SESSIONS?
Yes at the present time, but the CoSIDA leadership is hopeful that prior to the first joint CoSIDA-NACDA Convention in 2013 that it will make additional headway in this area as transitional years move forward and it builds relationships with other NACDA associations, especially as it relates to the marketing directors and AD’s. The actual cost will be determined as time gets closer to when the two conventions combine. If we were meeting with NACDA in 2009, that “add-on” fee could be as much as $150 depending on what an individual CoSIDA member wanted to “add-on” to their personal experience. Other NACDA members- for a minimum registration fee of $295 -can take part in all sessions, including CoSIDA’s, which is something we want in order to advance understanding and appreciation for what we do. Our membership only pay a $150 registration fee and that is why we don’t quite have the same full access as our fee is 50% less than all of the other NACDA attendees. As mentioned above, we will work on that moving forward. One should look at this ability to purchase additional convention programming as a “value add-on”. That potential additional fee is only if you choose to view this convention as one that is beneficial from a personal “one-stop shopping” viewpoint. Many CD leadership have commented that this “value add-on” concept is really good for that CoSIDA group since so many have marketing/promotion roles in addition to sports information/communications. To be able to do the traditional CoSIDA convention and then possibly attend and participate in other association’s programming for a reasonable add on cost is much better than either not having that opportunity- as per current CoSIDA- or having to go and spend far more money to attend such a session away form CoSIDA

WILL CoSIDA MEMBERS RECEIVE OTHER NACDA MEMBER BENEFITS?
This is a detail that will still have to be worked out. As CoSIDA will not a full member of NACDA, the amount of member benefits will be less than those of their other fully affiliated groups. Our current registration fee is $150 while NACDA members will pay nearly twice that- $295. Also, none of our membership dues or convention registration fees will go to NACDA whereas with the other fully affiliated groups that is not the case. We might at this time not be receiving individual membership benefit as compared to NACDA membership, but we are receiving numerous collective organizational membership benefits and that is what should be important to us at this time.

WHAT IS NACDA?
Founded in 1966, the National Association of Collegiate Directors of Athletics is the professional organization for directors of athletics at all levels of collegiate athletics in the United States. NACDA currently boasts a membership of 6,100 university and athletics administrators. Executive Director Michael Cleary and Senior Associate Executive Director Bob Vecchione both began their careers in intercollegiate athletics in the sports information/media relations area.

NACDA includes 11 affiliate organizations for which NACDA assumes all administrative and financial duties. Those organizations include the College Athletic Business Management Association (CABMA), the Collegiate Event and Facility Management Association (CEFMA), the Minority Opportunities Athletic Association (MOAA), the National Alliance of Two Year College Athletic Administrators (NATYCAA), the National Association for Athletics Compliance (NAAC), the National Association of Athletic Development Directors (NAADD), the National Association Collegiate Marketing Administrators (NACMA), the International Collegiate Licensing Association (ICLA) the Division II Athletic Directors Association (DI ADA), the Division I-AAA Athletics Directors Association (I-AAA ADA) and the Football Championship Subdivision Athletic Directors Association (FCS ADA). In addition, the Collegiate Licensing Company will hold their convention in concert with the NACDA Convention for a four-year stretch beginning in 2010.