Quote:
Originally Posted by MysterE
...snip...
"What would it take to make your program the best robotics program in the state - or in the South."
So, if you had to draft a plan to answer this question, and if money were 'relatively' no object, how would you setup that type of program?
-Daniel
|
My recommendation would be to offer example programs you could model of repeatedly successful teams.
I would recommend contacting the teams that regularly visit Einstein or at least the finals of their division at Worlds and ask them a handful of questions:
Describe build Space
Describe Mentor Support
Describe School Support
Describe student engagement
Describe parent engagement
Describe Sponsor support (parts/fab/more than money)
Describe robot development process (build season and competition season)
Describe Chairman's Effort
Describe who drives the team to excellence and what that looks like.
How often/long do they meet?
How many students and student/mentor ratio.
Ask them what they think makes them a great.
As an LRI I get to interact with a lot of teams. I have also personally visited and worked with a lot of great team. Their recipe for excellence uses a lot of similar ingredients, though proportions are often different, and not universal.
After several visitations, I am often asked, how does team XXX do such and such. Many are surprised by their differences.
One Einstein team I have talked to meets relatively infrequently, and for low durations compared to most top teams. When they do meet, they get an incredible amount done because they have incredible resources on hand and a great bunch of students and mentors
that stay focused on the task at hand.
Some put in an insane amount of hours.
Others have a few very gifted individuals that are truly the backbone (and possibly whole skeletal system).
Still others have a process down. A process to prep students, a process for strategy, and a process for winning.
You will find "in the real world" the same thing. Companies that excel often have a lot of similar attributes, but often have a lot of different things about them too. Some are just the extension of the founders EGO and DRIVE for excellence.* Others have a development process that ensures excellence. Still others have a magnet for people that want to excel and be the best.
I have only talked to about half a dozen teams in depth, but have found a lot of similarities and a lot of surprising differences.
If your Super is really serious, have them not only send you to Worlds to talk to these teams, but ask if you can visit their build sites and talk with their mentors. It is often good to see the actual facilities and machines as one team's "small space" is another teams dream space. Also, some teams do some amazing robots with relatively junky equipment (IE lathes/mills marked for scrap previously and handdrills and hacksaws...) Try to talk with the core mentors, and ideally some of the kids too, but mentors build the dynasties, the kids support them**. I still have on my list a lot of teams I would like to visit. One of the neatest and most unique models (1717) unfortunately is no longer in the same format for me to see. If you can make your way up to Michigan, I should be able to facilitate some introductions and possibly site visits of several teams within an hour or so of Detroit Metro Airport.
It is also worth it to talk with some of the teams that just never seem to get it together. I have observed a handful of common themes there too. With the non-obvious issues being "not invented here" syndrome, which is closely related to "we will prove them all wrong" or "we push to win creativity award every year". I have nothing against creativity, but often it is pushed not for functional reasons, but solely for uniqueness which can change a creative solution to a novelty and sometimes a punch line.
*Note these companies tend to have "lost years" a while after the founder retires or exits the company. Many great FRC teams have followed this same arc.
**Most of the great teams I have talked to have a very high student engagement level usually with a lot of "supporting" level mentors and good processes for improving student skills. Often the robots are student built, but the students are mentor built....