Advertisement

CIS Corner: The CSIS file suggests deeper organizational problems with the Vanier Cup

Andrew Bucholtz

Quick, what do you get if you mix two lesser-known Canadian organizations starting with "C"? You get spy agency CSIS (the governmental Canadian Security Intelligence Service) advertising with Canadian Interuniversity Sport, apparently, and being unhappy with the results, particularly fans' confusion of the two organizations following a tent-sharing agreement. Still, apart from all the obvious jokes ('Which organization's more well-known?' 'Will CIS use CSIS background checks when hiring a new CEO?' 'Why can't the CBC make a satirical comedy about Canadian university sports?' 'If CFL teams won't give Kyle Quinlan a job, will he follow Peyton Hillis and try to land intelligence work?') and the tone-deaf nature of the one part of the deal CSIS was reportedly happy with (the infamously threatening ads on the big video screen during the Vanier Cup), there are some legitimate questions arising from Bob Mackin's report on CSIS' dissatisfaction. Most importantly, does having so many issues arise with a major sponsor of the game suggest that CIS needs to do parts of the Vanier Cup differently?

It's clear that the CSIS-CIS pairing certainly didn't work out as the government organization had hoped. Whether that's the fault of CIS or CSIS itself is up for debate, but Mackin's piece includes several comments from CSIS employees in their post-event report, and those are anything but encouraging for the university organization. Here are some of the highlights:

In the post-event report, under the heading "What didn't work," CSIS admitted to brand confusion and communication breakdown.

"Sharing a tent with CIS was not successful. Not only do the two organizations share a similar name, we lost prominence because we were told not to install our own tent—therefore many people assumed we were part of the university organization.

"The tent was too white, large and did not look professional. Our setup is usually symmetrical with red tent, table, giveaways—we simply had two pop ups that looked out of place. The kicker here—there was plenty of room on site for our tent—which is not what we were told."

The report said CSIS was originally told to set up at the Vancouver Convention Centre and B.C. Place staff initially shut the recruiters out on game night.

"It was difficult getting hold of [name censored]. This was especially crucial when our two recruiters were refused entry to the Vanier Cup (to see our ads and to give out lanyards as planned). The recruiters felt a little uncomfortable at being treated as 'intruders' by the B.C. Place security. Was B.C. Place security not advised?"

It's important to keep in mind that we're only getting one side of the story here, and that this is from an internal report (and the "What Didn't Work" heading), not official comments to media. Still, that's not what any organization is hoping to hear from its sponsors, and the issues raised there are problematic. Of course, those aren't necessarily the fault of CIS officials either, though; the Vanier Cup was officially paired with the Grey Cup this year for the first time in a long while, and while that was a stunning success from the perspective of providing major national exposure for one of the best CIS games ever, it led to plenty of logistical issues, not all of which should be placed at the university organization's door. When you throw in this with other reports of marketing and sponsorship issues during the Vanier Cup and the sudden departure of long-time CIS marketing director Peter Metuzals (plus the complete elimination of his position) following the event, though, it suggests that CIS has some work to do to get their organization in order for this fall's Vanier Cup.

Of course, that Vanier Cup will also be paired with the Grey Cup in Toronto, so some of the same organizational issues may arise. If CIS wants to make the 2012 event a success from a financial perspective, they're going to have to promise their sponsors that they can do a better job than they apparently did with CSIS last year. That's not necessarily all on the university organization; much of what goes on at the stadium during Grey Cup week falls under the CFL's purview, and it's easy to see crossed wires between CIS, CFL and stadium officials as likely causes of the problems with the CSIS arrangement.

All parties involved need to work together to ensure we don't see a repeat of these issues with 2012 sponsors, though. The relationship between CIS and the CFL may be a bit more frigid than usual at the moment following the wave of players heading back to school instead of signing with CFL teams, but both organizations still need each other; CIS remains the most important pipeline to the CFL for Canadian talent, while the CFL (and in particular, the Grey Cup-Vanier Cup pairing) remains one of the best ways to promote the CIS product. For Canadian football to thrive over the long term, strong amateur and professional leagues are both needed, and those leagues have to work together.

Whether the CSIS issues were thanks to coordination issues with the CFL or just internal CIS problems, strong action needs to be taken to ensure those problems won't show up this fall. We've heard a lot about the importance of the 100th Grey Cup, but the Vanier Cup matters too. If it's going to continue to survive and thrive financially, CIS needs to be able to assure potential sponsors that they can provide a better service than they did with whatever happened with the CSIS deal.