GIA Version 5.0

In an exclusive interview, Donna Baker, the Gemological Institute of America's fifth president, takes you inside the organization's first-ever “strategic review.”

By Rob Bates and Gary Roskin, G.G., FGA, Senior Editors -- JCK-Jewelers Circular Keystone, 2/1/2007

For most in the diamond industry, the term “strategic review” has ominous connotations. It's the phrase De Beers used when it consulted with Bain and Co. and then proceeded to turn itself—and the industry—inside out. But Gemological Institute of America president Donna Baker, only the fifth president in the institute's history, doesn't expect a similarly dramatic outcome from GIA's strategic review, conducted by Alliance Consulting.

The review, which will run through the first half of 2007, will simply look at “what GIA can do better,” Baker told JCK in an exclusive interview. “How can we be more responsive to our various constituencies?”

The review was initiated last year when Baker became acting president after William E. Boyajian resigned following 20 years as the institute's head. When Baker received the permanent nod in November, it was seen as a mandate for the strategic review process and having the institute looked at with “fresh eyes.”

Baker described the review as a “natural step” after the prior year's turmoil, especially since both she and lab director Tom Moses are new to their jobs. “Tom's new in his position, I'm new in mine,” she said. “With this change in leadership, it seemed a good opportunity to get a basic understanding of where we are and where we're going.”

Moses noted that the industry has also undergone major changes, and the review will examine how GIA might react to them. “Our core customer, the independent retailer, is beginning to fade away,” said Moses, whose official title is senior vice president, GIA laboratory and research. “So how do we service this new kind of customer—whether it's a big customer, or a big-box chain—as an education organization, or as a lab?”

Baker said GIA's “core mission” will stay the same: “ensuring the public trust in gems and jewelry.” And she doubts the institute will attempt any dramatic steps, such as spinning off its lab, which was suggested frequently in the aftermath of last's year's lab scandal.

But she also said GIA was taking a “hard look” at how it operates. “We are listening very carefully to what our constituencies need. We want GIA to be more transparent, more responsive, and more accountable. You will see a noticeable difference in these areas by the year's end.”

The review will scrutinize what is arguably GIA's most important component: its lab. For all its problems, the lab is still considered the most prestigious, thorough, and well known in the industry. But in 2004 it famously fired four graders for being “improperly influenced” by clients. That widely publicized scandal vaulted Baker and Moses into their current positions.

The lab still has other problems, including perpetually delayed turnaround times that, many have complained, interfere with trade business. So it's no coincidence that one of Alliance Consulting's specialties is in operations and that improving lab service is now a top priority for GIA. “You will see better turnaround times within the next year,” Baker promised. Moses added, “In the end, our success will be in the performance and response time.”

The lab will also become more interactive and might install new software for its Web site, to allow reports to be downloaded once they're available.

GIA also wants to expand its international presence. It has opened a laboratory in Bangkok, Thailand, with Ken Scarratt heading the research. Gary DuToit, from the American Gem Trade Association's lab, has joined Scarratt for a record third time.

GIA also is ensuring that all of its laboratories have expensive, high-tech instruments such as LA-ICP-MS, which determines elemental quantity of difficult-to-detect enhancements. New reports are also in the offing. (See sidebar.)

The lab may hire new staff. “We're really looking for that good core of staff who really care to get it right,” said John King, the lab's technical director.

Moses looks back at the legacy of the recently deceased former lab director G. Robert Crowningshield as inspiration for the future. “Bob did it all,” Moses said. “Think of all the great contributions he made to GIA and gemology. But I'm reminded by all of the people who knew him what great people skills he had. I'm afraid we lost some of that along the way, and I hope that we can regain that and expand our sphere of influence. We have to create that spirit in the new generation of gemologists. We have a great responsibility.”

New Reports

The Gemological Institute of America's lab isn't just upping customer service. It's also expanding its offerings. Among the newest reports:

In January, GIA's synthetic-diamond grading report premiered. With the use of several politically correct descriptions (lab grown, man made, created, as well as synthetic) and a brief, consumer-friendly explanation of how synthetics are different from naturals, the new reports could make all parties at least moderately happy.
On the colored-stone front, GIA plans an emerald country-of-origin report, which would include a mention of Colombia where that's confirmed. “We're pretty good at distinguishing between Colombian and Afghanistan material,” says Tom Moses, senior vice president, GIA laboratory and research, who notes that discovery of the Atocha ship's sunken Colombian emerald treasure resulted in an extensive scientific database for Colombian material.
GIA has already begun to provide source-type reports on sapphires and rubies. These reports are not as specific as a country-of-origin report, but one can gather enough information to narrow down the primary sources. That should aid, for example, Sri Lankan and Madagascar sapphires that have the same appearance as Kashmir sapphires but not the pedigree. It also allows the laboratory to offer a report that helps consumers decide—based on beauty, not country of origin—whether the eventual price tag is justified.
A new pearl report is in progress. It will include comments regarding nacre thickness and possibly a reference to whether the thickness is appropriate for durability. “We studied nacre thickness, and it seems that there is a threshold where there are durability and stability issues,” says Moses. “We may end up stating whether or not the nacre thickness makes it or it doesn't. This still has yet to be determined.”

Whether a pearl is saltwater or freshwater, each is examined for its own merits, says Moses. “They each come from different environments and from different animals. We will be comparing Tahitians to Tahitians, South Seas to South Seas, and akoya to akoya.”

GIA technical director John King notes that more information will be available with the new pearl reports. “We will have an educational piece to accompany these reports,” he says. “It should answer any concerns the retailer may have, as well as general information to help the consumer make an informed choice.”