As the new co-chairman of the Collision Industry Conference’s Industry Relations Committee, Aaron Schulenburg hopes a new approach to the committee’s presentations at the quarterly meetings will shake things up a bit by offering one-on-one interviews on the CIC stage with industry participants willing to share unique -- perhaps at times controversial -- ideas and perspectives.
“We want to talk to somebody who may have very strong opinions about something that’s very relevant in the industry, and give them 40 minutes to work through that and to be challenged and to be pushed and prodded, in order to have some intellectual dialogue and maybe even potential debate about some topic that really does affect the industry,” Schulenburg said in introducing the idea for the change at CIC in Richmond, VA, in early May.
Schulenburg, also the executive director of the Society of Collision Repair Specialists, said CIC committees often focus on the idea of having discussions on topics they feel the industry would benefit from “gaining more alignment on.” He said he doesn’t disagree with that mission, but said that often leads to panel discussions with multiple people on two -- or three, or even more -- different sides of an issues each getting just a few minutes to present their view, rather than a more in-depth discussion.
He’d said he’d like his committee to instead have a one-on-one discussion with the idea of “encouraging thought-provoking, candid conversations on timely topics that confront burning issues in the industry and that explore sometimes uncomfortable truths or perceptions” without “the goal of gaining alignment getting in the way of talking about the things that need to be talked about.”
Schulenburg said he’s seen issues raised from the floor at CIC that then never get addressed by a CIC committee, and he thinks sometimes that’s because of the committee structure or that goal of fostering alignment. He thinks his committee’s new approach could help address that.
“Sometimes you have to better understand the challenges to figure out how to fix them,” he said.
He compared it to podcasters who get “very serious guests…to talk about very serious issues, but without some of the guardrails, without some of the structure, without the more traditional approach.”
The committee’s challenge, he said, will be to locate those willing and able -- perhaps given limitations placed on them by their employer -- to “be candid and be unfiltered and have the real conversations and share those perspectives.”
As an example of the format for the one-on-one conversations the committee would like to see, CIC Chairman Dan Risley peppered Schulenburg with questions about why he felt a need for the committee to take a different approach, and about what he sees as differences in CIC in the past and moving forward.
“I think the value of CIC [when it started] and today are very similar,” Schulenburg said. “You’re in the room where you get to influence the conversation. You’re in the room where people can listen. You’re in the room where they can take it back [to the decision-makers at their company]. You're in the room where you can say whatever you like. But I think if people don’t feel like the real issues are always tackled, then they’re going to take to the internet versus being here in the room with their peers to address those issues.”
Schulenburg will get his first opportunity to try the new format at the next CIC, being held July 23 in Philadelphia.
