GW: What attracted you to join the GMIC and glass industry last October?

In my previous job, I was a director at a professional association, and while the members were great to work with, I realised that after many years in this more academic environment, I wanted to return to my roots with a trade association. The GMIC opportunity immediately attracted me because it represented a key industry that has deep roots in many communities, much like the industry in the Michigan [USA] town where I grew up. Organisationally, I saw committed members and the financial resources to make targeted investments in new programmes to support members and the industry. Taken together, it seemed like a great group to talk to, and I’m glad I did.

GW: What was your perception of glass as a material before taking the role, and have your opinions now changed?

Outside of an appreciation for art glass and mid-century barware, and a desire that my city had more recycling, I really didn’t have a strong perception of glass as a material. I didn’t connect it with almost everything I do daily – my technology; windows and furniture in my apartment; car and transit; cooking and containers, etc. It’s so ubiquitous that’s it’s almost invisible. And I don’t think that lack of perception is unusual with the average consumer. I’ve realised glass, both as a material and as an industry, has a great story to tell, and I want to help GMIC tell it.

I’m eager to learn more about glass, so I hope Glass Worldwide readers will reach out and share their thoughts on GMIC and the industry. I tend to be more analytical, connecting smaller ideas into a larger model, so I’m always eager to talk with members and non-members, and to hear new perspectives. Also, while I’ve had the chance to visit with several manufacturers, I want to visit with suppliers and universities as well, and to learn more about adjacent industries and organisations.

GW: What legacy does previous Executive Director Robert Weisenburger Lipetz leave behind?

Bob leaves behind a great legacy at GMIC. His will certainly be remembered as being the driving force that brought the Glass Problems Conference (GPC) to GMIC, as co-organiser with Alfred University. He also built a strong financial foundation for the organisation and sustained us through the pandemic, even as the conference couldn’t be held in person. On a personal level, Bob was very welcoming during our three-month transition together, and always happy to share his industry knowledge. I continue to reach out to him for advice and organisational history.

GW: Following the recent GMIC strategy meeting in Toledo, what will the GMIC’s priorities be in the short, medium and long terms?

It was a very productive day-and-a-half planning meeting with the executive committee. The new strategic plan will be GMIC’s first in 10 years, and obviously the world looks very different now. But one thing that remains constant is the need to provide value for members and the industry, and that will be our focus. The committee covered a lot of ground, and the plan isn’t final, but key strategic initiatives include:-

• Development of multi-channel communications and marketing, so GMIC can be a stronger collective voice for the industry. We’ll have a new website, social media, and branding.
• Industry advocacy, including messaging for policy makers and the public; and data on economic impact, environmental issues, and a sustainable future for glass.
• Workforce development initiatives, including new mentoring and scholarship programmes, and new awards to recognise excellence in all areas of the industry. We also recognise the need to reach out to communities that have been traditionally underrepresented in glass.
• Development of new education courses and industry training; collaboration on best practices and industry research; and coalition building.
• And bringing all of these together, a new focus on engaging members wherever they are and with the whatever resources they need from GMIC.

GW: How would you describe the main benefits of GMIC membership?

I think right now our main benefit is collaboration and communication with peers in all segments of glass, both for manufacturers and suppliers. We provide excellent technical education through the GPC, and last year we partnered on a webinar. We now need to build on those benefits with more robust education programmes, communication, and industry advocacy.

GW: How important to your role is interaction with GMIC’s current President Scott Cooper (Global Glass & Materials Science Discipline Leader R&D at O-I) and other Board Officers, Trustees and GMIC staff?

Scott [Cooper] and the GMIC leadership have been incredibly important in guiding me in this new role. Scott stayed on for another year as President to help in the transition and has volunteered his time and knowledge to orient me to the industry. He also set up meetings with Toledo area manufacturers, including Libbey, NSG and Owens Corning so I could learn directly about issues central to the see industry. I also got to tour several plant operations, which was awesome. I continue to appreciate Scott’s leadership, and the support of the entire board and executive committee.

I currently live in Chicago and work remotely, so starting a new job with a new industry has had some challenges. Fortunately, in addition to our members, Donna Banks, the other GMIC staff member, has been a great resource. I’ve leaned on her deep knowledge of the membership and industry, along with her historical perspective of GMIC, to develop in my new role. I may eventually move to Columbus, where our office is located, but in the meantime there will be short visits to Columbus and lots of Zooms.

GW: With current and planned GMIC Board Officers and Trustees coming from diverse companies such as Acuity Brands, Air Products and Chemicals, Corning, Emhart Glass, Gallo Glass, Glass Service USA, Guardian Glass, Johns Manville, Libbey, Linde, Messer North America, O-I, Owens Corning, RoMan Manufacturing, SORG Services USA, Stoelzle Glass, TECO and Vitro Architectural Glass, how beneficial to proceedings is input from such a wide cross section of glass industry representatives?

We are indeed fortunate to have such a cross section of the industry as members, and to serve on the board [of] trustees. I’m also happy that our board includes international perspectives; it was another thing that attracted me to GMIC.
I think diverse voices lead to better decision making. One of the things I’d like to explore is finding ways to involve even more members in our governance. For example, by reinvigorating our committee structure and inviting new members to volunteer. I’m hoping that as we begin to implement the new strategic plan, more industry folks will want to get involved in our work.

GW: How useful is the GMIC’s Glass Manufacturing Industry Report and are there plans for a fourth edition?

We are planning to produce another edition of the report. I think industry research, and the ability to aggregate and share this kind of information, is a key competency for a trade association. I do plan to review how the report is produced and priced, especially for members.

GW: Having partnered with other bodies such as GlassTrend and US EPA Energy Star to co-host events in recent times, how important in general is collaboration to the GMIC achieving its goals?

I think partnerships and collaborations are an absolute necessity if GMIC is to achieve the ambitious goals laid out in our plan, and I look forward to building new partnerships. We’re a small organisation but we represent a vitally important industry, so we need to increase our impact with mutually beneficial collaborations. More broadly, I think associations understand that coalition-building is now a key element of strategy, particularly as members have so many demands on their time and so many other options for making connections.

GW: Do the GMIC and Alfred University complement each other’s contributions as co-organisers of the annual Conference on Glass Problems?

Very much so. Dr. S.K. Sundaram was one of the first people I had an extended conversation with at the last GPC. I had just come on board, so I really appreciated his insights on the industry and the organisation of the conference. He and Alfred are excellent co-organisers, especially with the technical content for the conference, along with GPC Advisory Board. I have deep experience organising conferences, so we all complement each other well.

GW: What can attendees expect at this year’s 84th Conference on Glass Problems on 6–9 November in Columbus, Ohio, USA?

The GPC Advisory Board met in February and has outlined an excellent technical programme. We received 38 abstract submissions – a record for recent conferences. Attendees can expect sessions in multiple tracks, including Melting and Controls; Combustion; Decarbonisation; Emissions; and Sustainability, among others. We’re also going to have more breaks and more times for exhibits. And as usual, we’ll have at least one short course to kick off the conference. The separate Symposium on Thursday will be ‘The Future of Glass Manufacturing.’

GW: Looking beyond 2023, will the traditional location of Columbus, Ohio remain the host city for GPC?

I think it’s likely we’ll have new conference sites in the future. In conversation with the GPC Advisory Board and Dr. Sundaram, there was clear consensus to explore other locations that are still central to the bulk of our members in the Midwest. I’m sure Columbus will remain in a rotation of cities, but I think offering participants new conference locations and experiences will be another tangible outcome of GMIC’s new direction.

GW: As preferred journal of GMIC and official journal of GPC, how does Glass Worldwide contribute to these bodies’ goals?

Our collaboration with Glass Worldwide has been a fantastic benefit for GPC participants and GMIC members in general. Bob [Lipetz] spoke very highly of the Glass Worldwide team and the coverage you’ve provided over the years, and I look forward to our continued partnership.