Communication Strategy

Debate directly related to English Chess Federation matters.
Brian Valentine
Posts: 574
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 1:30 pm

Re: Communication Strategy

Post by Brian Valentine » Thu Sep 24, 2015 11:54 am

It is a good thing that the ECF is considering a communication strategy and there is some common sense in the document-if this was a blue sky situation.

However the problems the ECF have in this area are about dissent (not just now but over long periods). This paper completely ignores this aspect of ECF affairs. It has 5 aims of communication: 4 outward and 1 inward and absolutely no dialogue.

While one aim is to listen, two are about this "positive profile". The PP concept is very slippery, it could be a good thing or at the other extreme it could mean "stamp out all disagreement".

At all stages the document talks about the ECF and its not clear whether this is: The Board, Council, the Office, or the community of players.

I don't know what to make of it. With the current Board Minutes Saga it can only move things in a better direction, but there is nothing here that demonstrates that the strategy could help the organisation extract itself from the current communications outcomes deficit.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 10364
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Communication Strategy

Post by JustinHorton » Thu Sep 24, 2015 1:04 pm

To be honest, the real problems with any ECF "Commication Strategy" are that

(a) Phil Ehr in particular is an atrocious communicator ;
(b) no "strategy" is going to change this ; and
(c) a liking for producing documents about strategies is among the reasons for (a).
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

David Robertson

Re: Communication Strategy

Post by David Robertson » Thu Sep 24, 2015 1:25 pm

Brian Valentine wrote:...could help the organisation extract itself from the current communications outcomes deficit.
Is this irony? If so, it's superb

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21301
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Communication Strategy

Post by Roger de Coverly » Thu Sep 24, 2015 1:30 pm

I think the new publicity officer has got off to a good start.
http://www.englishchess.org.uk/publicit ... letin-one/
has the advantage of both a chatty style and a lack of management speak.

Jonathan Bryant
Posts: 3452
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 3:54 pm

Re: Communication Strategy

Post by Jonathan Bryant » Thu Sep 24, 2015 1:34 pm

Paolo Casaschi wrote:
Jonathan Bryant wrote: Customers have a choice of whether to buy or not to buy.
You do have a choice not to be a customer of the ECF and not to participate in organized chess activities under their remit. Nobody is forcing you to play ECF rated chess.
This is incorrect. Or at least not at all the full story. If I wasn’t an ECF Member I wouldn’t have been able to play in Spain a couple of months ago, for instance. Sitges is clearly a very long way from the ECF’s remit.

Anyway, you’re concept of choice seems a little broad to me. If I were to hold a gun to your head and ask you to give me money, would you accept you had the choice not to hand anything over. Technically, of course you have a choice. It’s just not much of one.

It’s the same - albeit much less extreme - with the ECF. I have to be a member if I want to play rated chess. And I do want to play rated chess therefore I must pay.


It’s a long time since I did my economics degree but the term 'customer' is definitely inappropriate in the current circumstances.

User avatar
Paolo Casaschi
Posts: 1187
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 6:46 am

Re: Communication Strategy

Post by Paolo Casaschi » Thu Sep 24, 2015 1:59 pm

Jonathan Bryant wrote:If I wasn’t an ECF Member I wouldn’t have been able to play in Spain a couple of months ago, for instance. Sitges is clearly a very long way from the ECF’s remit.
The FIDE rules allow you to switch allegiance rather easily. So if you do not want to be a customer of the ECF and still you want to play FIDE rated chess you can still be a customer elsewhere.
Jonathan Bryant wrote:I have to be a member if I want to play rated chess. And I do want to play rated chess therefore I must pay.
The keyword here is "want". Nobody with a gun on your head forces you to play chess.
By extension, I really want to drive a Ferrari but they are too expensive for me: should Mr. Ferrari give me one for free then?

User avatar
Michael Farthing
Posts: 2069
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2014 1:28 pm
Location: Morecambe, Europe

Re: Communication Strategy

Post by Michael Farthing » Thu Sep 24, 2015 2:02 pm

Errr.. Surely not?
I don't think I'm allowed to join another FIDE affiliated federation (except perhaps if I go deaf or blind). Aren't there transfer fees? Or is that only if you're titled?

LawrenceCooper
Posts: 7173
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:13 am

Re: Communication Strategy

Post by LawrenceCooper » Thu Sep 24, 2015 2:05 pm

Michael Farthing wrote:Errr.. Surely not?
I don't think I'm allowed to join another FIDE affiliated federation (except perhaps if I go deaf or blind). Aren't there transfer fees? Or is that only if you're titled?
I think the minimum is a notification fee of €250 https://ratings.fide.com/fedchange.phtml

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21301
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Communication Strategy

Post by Roger de Coverly » Thu Sep 24, 2015 2:07 pm

Paolo Casaschi wrote: The FIDE rules allow you to switch allegiance rather easily.
I thought it could cost several hundred Euros.
Paolo Casaschi wrote: The keyword here is "want". Nobody with a gun on your head forces you to play chess.
Are chess federations in the business of promoting chess? More often than not, they aren't, being more interested in protecting their monopolies and control.

NickFaulks
Posts: 8453
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Communication Strategy

Post by NickFaulks » Thu Sep 24, 2015 2:08 pm

Paolo Casaschi wrote: The FIDE rules allow you to switch allegiance rather easily.
No, they don't. You must show some connection with your new federation, generally residence, although that can admittedly be defined fairly loosely. Also, there is a transfer fee of at least €250.

Responsibility for transfers of OTB players has now been moved to Online Commission ( don't ask why, or even how ), so it is impossible to say what they may look like in future.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.

User avatar
Paolo Casaschi
Posts: 1187
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 6:46 am

Re: Communication Strategy

Post by Paolo Casaschi » Thu Sep 24, 2015 2:11 pm

Jonathan Bryant wrote:It’s a long time since I did my economics degree but the term 'customer' is definitely inappropriate in the current circumstances.
Maybe the definition changes since ;-)
For example, the HMRC has a "customer service" department and in some of their documentation refers to taxpayers as their "customer". Does that mean I do must have a choice not to be their "customer"? Similarly the NHS refers to patients as "customer" and so on.

In fact, the term "captive customer" is used to refer to a customer that has ha theoretical opportunity not to be a customer but no real practical option to do so. If you want to play graded chess in England and/or FIDE rated chess as ENG you are a "captive customer" of the ECF.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 10364
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Communication Strategy

Post by JustinHorton » Thu Sep 24, 2015 2:11 pm

Paolo Casaschi wrote: The FIDE rules allow you to switch allegiance rather easily. So if you do not want to be a customer of the ECF and still you want to play FIDE rated chess you can still be a customer elsewhere.
I could do that. I don't want to and it'd cost me more than I can afford, but I could. And if the ECF were to pretend that its members were customers, I'd be a lot more likely to do that.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

User avatar
Paolo Casaschi
Posts: 1187
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 6:46 am

Re: Communication Strategy

Post by Paolo Casaschi » Thu Sep 24, 2015 2:14 pm

NickFaulks wrote:
Paolo Casaschi wrote: The FIDE rules allow you to switch allegiance rather easily.
No, they don't. You must show some connection with your new federation, generally residence, although that can admittedly be defined fairly loosely. Also, there is a transfer fee of at least €250.
Depends how do you define "easily". It's certainly possible to switch federation. Like switching your phone supplier there might be paperwork and cost involved. Certainly not impossible.

User avatar
Paolo Casaschi
Posts: 1187
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 6:46 am

Re: Communication Strategy

Post by Paolo Casaschi » Thu Sep 24, 2015 2:17 pm

JustinHorton wrote:And if the ECF were to pretend that its members were customers, I'd be a lot more likely to do that.
You can play with words but it is what it is. You can call me a member, but if I do not have voting rights and no direct representation and if I need to pay to get services from the ECF... then I'm a customer rather a member.

NickFaulks
Posts: 8453
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Communication Strategy

Post by NickFaulks » Thu Sep 24, 2015 2:19 pm

Paolo Casaschi wrote: Depends how do you define "easily".
If you have to move to another country, or even just buy a second home there, I don't think that's "easy".
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.