IGDA Elections – David Edery
February 14th, 2010 by Macguffin in UncategorizedIf you’re coming to this post without having seen the lead-in, you can find that post here. It links to all the other assessments I’ve posted. You can also find my disclaimer there – I’m on the Boston IGDA chapter’s board and support the candidacy of Darius Kazemi.
Mr. Edery’s statement is easily the best I’ve ready so far in the series (I’m not reading ahead, so everything up to the “D”‘s.) It comes across like a real political platform – it’s easy to see that thought has gone into it.
He comes right out of the gates and tells us why he’s running – he feels the IGDA is a mess. He says that he wants to bring people back into the fold by giving them lots of specific benefits for their $48 a year – including remote access for all IGDA members to the Leadership forum content (a cursory search of 2009 Leadership forum videos on the Googles leads to precisely nothing), expanding the Webinar series, and introducing a legal program similar to the current medical insurance program.
Mr. Edery’s background is on the business-side, and this comes across – partially because of his tone and partially because he hammers these credentials. He was the Worldwide Games Portfolio Manager for Xbox Live Arcade until last year, and since then has his own games consulting company. The picture painted by his LinkedIn profile, his blog Game Tycoon, and his candidate statement (linked above with his name) are of an intent and intelligent biz dev guy who wants the IGDA to succeed, and feels that the road it has been traveling the last couple years leads straight to irrelevance.
He deals straight-up with the time question, saying that he’s done research with the current board and is ready to commit the same time as they have found is needed, plus extra in order to get his priorities accomplished. He also notes that, since it’s his own company he’s working for, he has a lot of control over his schedule.
Questions for Mr. Edery:
From your blog’s profile, you live in the Seattle area. The Seattle IGDA chapter has been a ghost for a long while, only recently getting back off the ground. Do you attend meetings with the local chapter, and what do you think the Seattle chapter should do to continue becoming more vital?
RE: the Seattle SIG, I’ve been discussing its resurrection with Tom Buscaglia (who also happens to live in the area) and have already agreed to join the advisory board. We’ve discussed a variety of ways to make the SIG more vital, including networking events featuring “local celebrities” and frankly, some opportunities to have fun.
Ms. Burkett feels that the best way to revitalize the IGDA is to revive local chapters; your stance is that we should instead make membership more attractive by offering more tangible bennies. Will this not just lead to more disinterested, disconnected members? Where do the local chapters fit into your strategy for the IGDA?
RE: member benefits — there’s no inherent reason why better benefits would equal “disinterested, disconnected members.” Better benefits = more reason to join, pure and simple. What we do to engage the membership is an important, but separate, question.
What do you think the IGDA’s role in the industry-wide Quality of Life discussions should be?
RE: QoL — the IGDA needs to promote case studies and research which clearly demonstrate the strengths of a healthy work environment. The IGDA should also showcase studios that are truly positive examples. (In other words, focus on the carrot; there’s already a “stick” in the form of negative publicity caused by upset spouses, former employees, etc.)
Do you think the IGDA’s dependence on studio sponsorships for money is a bad thing? If yes, what will you do to begin changing this? If no, why not?
RE: studio sponsorships — I shared some thoughts on this very subject a while back. (http://www.edery.org/2009/04/the-future-of-the-igda). Bottom line is that there’s no simple answer to this question. The IGDA is already struggling like so many other not-for-profit organizations during this recession. Transitioning away from studio sponsorships won’t be possible until the IGDA is confident that enough people will pay for membership on their own. Which leads me back to increasing the value of membership…
Tags: igda
February 15th, 2010 at 2:32 am
RE: the Seattle SIG, I’ve been discussing its resurrection with Tom Buscaglia (who also happens to live in the area) and have already agreed to join the advisory board. We’ve discussed a variety of ways to make the SIG more vital, including networking events featuring “local celebrities” and frankly, some opportunities to have fun.
RE: member benefits — there’s no inherent reason why better benefits would equal “disinterested, disconnected members.” Better benefits = more reason to join, pure and simple. What we do to engage the membership is an important, but separate, question.
RE: QoL — the IGDA needs to promote case studies and research which clearly demonstrate the strengths of a healthy work environment. The IGDA should also showcase studios that are truly positive examples. (In other words, focus on the carrot; there’s already a “stick” in the form of negative publicity caused by upset spouses, former employees, etc.)
RE: studio sponsorships — I shared some thoughts on this very subject a while back. (http://www.edery.org/2009/04/the-future-of-the-igda). Bottom line is that there’s no simple answer to this question. The IGDA is already struggling like so many other not-for-profit organizations during this recession. Transitioning away from studio sponsorships won’t be possible until the IGDA is confident that enough people will pay for membership on their own. Which leads me back to increasing the value of membership…