Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamHeard
Especially at regionals, we generally come the most prepared to the pre-match discussion (I get good scouting data, plus the scouts discuss and pass along an ideal plan to me). Also, since we're usually in contention for top 8, we're usually one of the few teams in the match (later in the days) that still are truly affected by win/loss.
However, even with that being said. I ALWAYS (barring a huge time crunch) ask the other teams what they would like to do to start the conversation. More often than not, they are pretty much in agreement, and we just elaborate on that and make a more formal plan.
From there, if there are disagreements. I explain my point of view (often many teams didn't initially understand the importance of assists this year for example) and their eyes usually light up and they go "OH!" and learn something new, and generally agree with us.
Rarely do we truly have a conflict down there, and we try to resolve it as best as possible. I will never FORCE a team do anything (not that I could), as a team that has a bad attitude about a plan will often not follow it. And I'd rather know pre-match they are doing their own thing, versus having it all fall apart during the match. Sometimes I will explain to teams that them showing off a feature versus playing smart to win the match is WORSE in terms of getting picked in most games, but I generally try to avoid getting down this route as often the argument is too far gone and no consensus can be reached.
I always end with asking if everyone is both happy and comfortable with the plan. I want it to be a discussion that leads to a consensus decision.
Even with all that, I still get complaints and compliments in cases where I wouldn't expect them. Times when it seems like everyone agrees and is happy, I'll get a complain that I "talked too much", when I was really just leading the discussion and everyone was included. Some of the times I walk away from a match where we had some tense discussion and I know no one felt good about it, and I'll get feedback that my honesty and thoroughness was appreciated, even if we disagreed.
|
All of this is spot on.
Coaches (either students or mentors) could learn a lot from following the methods Adam just outlined. I follow a very similar, if not identical, model for coaching.
I'll add a few things. As much as I love the robots, this competition is about inspiring STUDENTS. I believe students are not only inspired by robots but by relating with older scientists and engineers.
To facilitate relationships, I am very intentional about asking students and coaches their names. Knowing a name is powerful tool. It breaks down barriers, communicates appreciation and interest, and gives people a sense of belonging.
Also, find ways to compliment each team's robot. Especially as a coach of a high performing team, finding features to praise about a teams machine will mean the world to those students.
-Mike