[techhelpbb]

Originally Posted by philso

Techhelpbb creating leaders in his team is what makes the team sustainable, not some big one-time donation or some fancy piece of CNC machinery.

I doubt a tool alone will make a team successful because FIRST intentionally set the contest up in such a way that you don't need that. If one reviews the build tools FRC193 uses and FRC11 uses (we are in the same school and mentors can move between teams) you'll quickly note that FRC193 doesn't usually use most of the fancy CNC tools we have. They do just fine without all that. In fact it makes the FRC193 work more accessible to the students of all knowledge levels. That's important because FRC193 members are the first 2 years of school and move up to FRC11 which are the last 2.

On the other hand - if you goal isn't aligned entirely with the competitive angle of FIRST. If your goal is expose your students to skills that do revolve around those tools, then the presence of those tools is much more valid. In those cases the tools matter. In the same way having access to an FRC robot to deeply experiment and test matters.

My goal was always a little more grand than merely winning a FIRST game. When I was a student at that high school there was no FRC. There were rooms full of computers and people were afraid if you touched that stuff you'd break it so they did not encourage you to do so. When I was a student/valedictorian at the same time at the vocational technical school you learned the curriculum but to be honest, at least in Electronics, you never got a lot of apprentice opportunity. There was no sense of community and I knew what that was because I, like my brother, had the opportunity to apprentice with my Father (I've been working since I was 10 years old). I never even got that at the local community college. Sure you had a few select local business that drove those programs but it was a small percentage. If you took those programs the odds were you would be working for those people. No joke - my brother and I took all the same classes till we both got our Associates. My brother ended up working for a very predictable group of companies well past getting his Bachelors. Eventually that was the exact problem. Like a coal miner you entire future was embedded with those opportunities and they paid you pretty low because they had you in all directions. I always viewed this small participation as a direct weakness of the system. It was education to a goal - not always encouragement to excel even beyond that goal. This is where the opportunities those tools represent do matter. Consider this in the context of a small percentage of people doing the work and in the sense of building to the goal of competing versus inspiring something more grand.

This is also where too much tool can be a problem because too much of a tool doesn't teach you to stretch a tool's capability. You end up teaching people that robots look like FRC or any machine that isn't from Haas is too little to be meaningful. VEX proves you can teach many FRC related fundamental concepts cheaper but you still are consuming VEX. So one walks a balance to teach the tools to inspire to go beyond and merely driving consumption.

I think sometimes you need those 'big' donations: time, money or resources. I think there are opportunities where a one time shot in the arm is not just symbolic and shiny but it pays out multiple fold when it is timed correctly. Sometimes you just need to change the balance and this is true in the corporate world as well. On the other hand - if all you are doing is pouring those big donations in then you aren't being effective and maybe you should stop. Good leadership in a team would identify when those big donations are the most effective and make sure they are. Leadership can also destroy the value of these donations entirely. The leadership of some huge enterprises can easily demonstrate how you can burn billions and still deliver absolute junk.

So to say we create leaders in a team and it will be sustainable is not entirely the whole story. When you lead you need to lead in a way that inspires directions that drive values that are attractive in the community of that team. That is why FRC11 has survived 20 years. It has greatly filled a need within Mount Olive High School and the community that has made it grow. When leaders left and when leaders faded the direction still attracted new people to lead. Sure I burned myself out going BIG a few times and I wasn't always satisfied with how it played out. However I honestly don't think if we never went BIG we would be better off - I think we should just learn how to time it correctly so those moments don't burn people out. Once you do get burned out then you have a working example of were the team leadership or the community needs some work. I have seen that 'burn up the 2% kind of leadership' myself in various places but that's not really leadership we want to impart or should encourage.

For example take my interest in making a Makerspace. I burned myself out real good getting that Haas CNC stuff running for FRC11. It was too much tool for the school's need and I never asked for it. I would have been happy with a CNC router table. Instead the leadership got ambitious and went all in on the Haas. It wasn't tooled well. I pulled nearly $10,000 out of my pocket to make that right and I did so with basically no warning. When those machines came in late I warned that it would limit what we could do and honestly it wasn't heeded. The sub-team I led as mentor with the student leader did turn out several professional quality parts. We had the same parts made by professionals and the quality was the same. It was massively expensive. It drove hardship at my job because as fast as we finished one part or another there was something else on the critical path which prevented me from getting back focused entirely on my day work. In the end I had to back down from that level of commitment because it wasn't under control. It still drives value into the community and my contributions remain. I believe in the value of it I just don't believe it can reach it's full value in 6 weeks and to be honest that was what other people seemed to expect. So I set out to remove that time limit by doing it as a separate workflow from the leaderships of: FRC11, FRC193 and Mount Olive High School (also has the added benefit of not being locked to just FRC11/FRC193). In that I hope to remove the factors that burned me out and that limited the return. With that I hope to train other mentors and students that will impart knowledge and leadership back into FRC11/FRC193 and if willing other FRC teams. So I am burned out but I am not burned up. This is not to talk ill of FRC11/FRC193 either. Like stated: they don't need those Haas machines to be competitive but now they have them and one of my goals is to make sure they continue to bring value and inspiration so the unique opportunities they represent are not wasted. To achieve this are the basics of access and commitment but also to inspire people that they can do this.

To my point - I may now be less involved with mentoring CNC and leading any part of it myself for the next 7 weeks for FRC11/FRC193 but in part my contribution to the community is what will make that aspect sustainable. Leadership doesn't always have to be aligned, in fact, sometimes great leadership needs to be a touch disruptive with a vision still compatible with those being led. FRC11 is a 20 year example of leadership that: struggled, fought hard, that went BIG, that sometimes didn't get where it expected and sometimes it burned out but it still delivers on inspiration to the people it serves - hence it sustains. Maybe the stuff we collected along the way wasn't the only thing of value to the team but it is a means to an end and I am certainly not going to suggest to any donor they didn't play a role in leading that way or that their donations didn't help inspire. Especially when other teams walk through our shops and it impresses on them what can be achieved which is something I often hear from them. Maybe they don't need all that stuff to be a competitive FRC team - but they see the opportunities that FRC brought to us and it inspires them to imagine a greater future and all the cool stuff they could do (even when it's just sitting there idle).

In the end maybe that Haas experiment ends up with a new local Makerspace. That's worth something even if it hurt.