[archiver]

Posted by Chris.   [PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]


Coach on team #308, Walled Lake Monster, from Walled Lake Schools and TRW Automotive Electronics.

Posted on 1/14/2000 6:31 AM MST


In Reply to: Are you so sure?? posted by Daniel on 1/13/2000 1:41 PM MST:



You don't need to tell me about NUMMI - I work with them (I do crash sensors for Toyota vehicles). However, that is one of those synergy type agreements that I mentioned. They happen in industry but it's a small percentage. The general rule is that you need to keep ahead of your competition.

Also, your point seems to imply that I don't like alliances. That's not exactly true. I'm all for two teams teaming up to go against two other teams (in which a defensive team pairs up with an offensive team in your analogy). What I don't like is to have to doctor the other team's score to help my own. The only situation that I can think of that this occurs (outside of FIRST) is in gambling scandels where one team tries to win close so they can win gambling money by betting on the other team.

The other thing this game reminds me of is the classic story of the group of people looking for some buried treasure. Every person is needed in the team to find the treasure. Without any part of the team, the whole team loses. Then when they finally find the treasure, everyone starts stabbing each other in the back until only one is left with the whole treasure. That is what I think of this game. The alliances help each other to score, then start stabbing each other in the back in the last 10 seconds. Doesn't that seem kind of goofy to anyone?

I love the game during the elimination matches. I would love the game if we used the qualification system from last year or the years before that. I am really opposed to doctoring the score. Sure it adds a different dimension to the game - I just think it's a bad dimension.

I can also see how my comments about winning and losing may not have gotten my meaning across very well. I should have put that in another post. I never meant that this game doesn't have winners and losers. What I meant is that every time someone complains about the game, someone else always has to come back with, 'well it isn't about winning and losing, it's about the lessons. Therefore, the game itself doesn't matter.' It also seems that there is a push within FIRST to eliminate winning and losing. I just wanted to make a case that winning and losing is important and that we shouldn't go away from that since part of the inspiration will be lost.


: The NUMMI Analogy
: = = = = = = = = =

: You say that companies never team up with their direct competitors? Think again.

: GM, a company we all know well (if only from FIRST), realized that their factories had a skill. GM really knew how to run a business with workers. They had people as workers and hence great quality control. Let's call this a 'defensive' strategy.

: Now lets travel around the world to Toyota. Toyota realized that their factories had a skill: robotics. The Japanese were way ahead of GM in this department, with some of the most advanced machines of any car manufacturer. They had no union ensuring that human workers kept their jobs. Let's call this an 'offensive' strategy.

: These two competitors got together, had a little handshake, and built a plant (NUMMI) over in the San Francisco Bay Area. Together, they were unbeatable. Perfect offense merged with perfect defense had created the most successful plant either of the companies had ever known. Bonus for teamwork!

: So. You may be offense, you may be defense, or you may already be NUMMI...but working together is the only way to be the BEST. Think about it.

: -DL

: PS - if you want another example I'll find you another. there are millions.