>>MPI Raises Suppliers Dues Almost 40 Percent…Citing an investment in technology and education at chapter, regional and global levels, Meeting Professionals International board of directors voted to increase supplier dues to $450 from $325 – a 38 percent increase – effective next month. <<

 

I've always called MPI my "mothership" - the first industry professional organization I joined, I was pleased that planners and suppliers/business partners were equal. Now this and I wonder:
- Suppliers support the chapters with discounts (or comped) venues and equipment to support education. Does this mean they are supporting chapter education even more?
- Where does this put the equality of the membership?
- The MPI Bylaws do not address equality of membership; they also do not distinguish between what are called "Regular" members. Doesn't this now differentiate?

Am I the only one disappointed in this turn of events?

Joan

---

Joan Eisenstodt - Eisenstodt Assocs., LLC - Meetings & Hospitality Consulting-Training-Facilitation-Washington, DC 20004 - joanleisenstodt@gmail.com

Wow. I've got to say that's a very heavy increase, and really aggressive in anticipation of much more revenue, I guess, coming into the supplier side during the economic recovery? I know, also, that the major meetings orgs have been talking about creating efficiencies by collaborating to reduce reduncancies, also....I guess we'll have to stay tuned to see how this turns out....

---

Tyler Davidson | Chief Content Director | Meetings Focus 655 Montgomery Street, Ste. 900 | San Francisco, CA 94111 p. 415.782.2250 | f. 415.788.1905 | www.MeetingsFocus.com

Joan & Charles, I join you in voicing my concern over this decision by our Association.  For one, I have always valued the equanimity of our membership - meaning registration fees that were the same for all. That said, I must say I recognize and appreciate all the financial and in-kind support MPI's suppliers have given both internationally and at the local level over the years.  Thanks to this support, I have personally enjoyed some of the most memorable experiences and have been exposed to many elements of our industry I might have otherwise missed.  As for the withholding of rebates for education, and directing that education to MPI approved speakers -- this leaves me unsettled, and here's why:  I became one of MPI's approved speakers about 4 years ago, first as a speaker on CSR and then in 2010 as a speaker/trainer for the Global Certificate in Meeting and Business Events.  The MPI Foundation picked up the tab for our initial CSR Training, but after that, no future gatherings/training in person were supported.   Accredited Trainers had to pay MPI to become one, as well as all expenses.  I have been honored to speak on behalf of MPI, and grateful to participate in training that I have been able to apply beyond the MPI audience into teaching at Glendale Community College (Glendale CA) and other speaking engagements.  But I do think it is important to note that the training did come with a price -- $1000 to participate, self-paid expenses to get oneself to Cancun (or Europe) for the training, lodging, meals and transport - for me, a $3,500 expenditure (almost as much as my CMM).  Along with the prestige of being one of the MPI Accredited Trainers, the ROI included those skills acquired and connections made both with other instructors and students.  I had the availability and was assigned to train in Korea last spring, and then again in San Diego.  Both were amazing experiences, and I was proud to represent our organization while helping guide our future leaders in their careers.   As a CSR Speaker, I presented twice to my own chapter (once paid, once not), once to MPINC (paid) and once to MPIOC (unpaid).  I never received a request or referral from MPI International for my services. Yet, The ONLY concern I have ever had was that of MPI's history of igniting exciting programming and opportunities for members, only to let them fall off the radar within short order, and with no communication to those who so willingly invested in them.  For both CSR and GCMBE, leadership for the groups within MPI faltered in short order (within a year).  Funding disappeared, communication ceased, opportunities vanished.  Many reasons exist for this, which don't really matter.  What does matter is that once again, the ball has been dropped.  In fact, when I wrote to MPI two months ago, asking just who was in charge of the GCMBE program, and what's going on with it, I was told my email would be forwarded to the appropriate person.  To date, I have received no communication, and while some members of the Accredited Training Group may be actively involved in some kind of programming, the bulk of us are not.  I guess I can't complain because I was fortunate to get a return on my financial investment through my two training gigs, but many of my colleagues have not been so fortunate, and I can only imagine it has left them with a bad taste in there mouths.     Take that to the next level, that MPI is seeking out others to be their approved speakers, and that is adding salt to the wound.  C'mon, you've trained several of us (designated some of the best and ignored some of the best), and we're not the ones you're asking to present your education??    On a local chapter level, perhaps chapters can learn to be self sufficient through revenues earned locally and with no support from MPI? I think for many it will present financial hardship, resulting in cutbacks to member benefits & experience.  Maybe the money kept by MPI will support programs that are provided without charge to the chapters?  Maybe, as you mentioned, MPI is in a world of financial hurt and needs to come clean with the membership about the state of its affairs and ask for support, rather than calling upon half of its membership to pick up the slack?  If we all gave an extra $25.00 on our memberships, wouldn't that make a difference?  It would not surprise me to find the organization struggling financially, given our economy and the challenges we have faced.  However, the rationale for their decision is one that makes no sense and needs to be reconsidered.  Thanks for providing the space for this conversation.