Getting Mentors out of Comfort zone

[cglrcng]

Originally Posted by KathieK

Please remember we're not about the robots. Are your students being inspired? FIRST's mission:
Our mission is to inspire young people to be science and technology leaders, by engaging them in exciting mentor-based programs that build science, engineering and technology skills, that inspire innovation, and that foster well-rounded life capabilities including self-confidence, communication, and leadership.
If your team is no longer fulfilling the mission of FIRST remind the mentors of the mission statement. Remind them that the mission includes innovation, and in order to fulfill the mission, you may have to take risks and try something new with the robot design.

_________________________

That! ^

Then show them our Performance & Team Awards for the last 2 ~3 years...And our Performance & Awards this year so far...WoooHooo, CHANGE IS REALLY GOOD! Thanks kids.

[Hot_Copper_Frog]

You’ve gotten a lot of really good feedback in this thread so far regarding what teams have done specifically to combat this problem, and how it has worked out for them. Based on the several teams I’ve worked with over the years, here is what I would try:

• Depending on the size and social culture of your mentoring group, I would plan an informal mentor get-together. This would preferably be held somewhere nobody associates with robots. Somewhere like a casual restaurant that serves adult beverages, which can help lighten the mood. Once you have everybody together, just let them all blow off some steam, talk about whatever frustrations you’ve been facing as a team. Then, once everybody has expressed anything they need to, bring up the topic you want to discuss: “I’ve noticed that when we are in the design phase, we tend to go with what we’re comfortable with. I think it might be really beneficial to the students to explore some alternative solutions next year. I know that you all can’t work on much in the off-season, but I think having a mini-design camp for the students in November or December would be great! I would personally organize it and deal with the logistics, and we can see what comes of it. The students have expressed to me that they really want to try more out of the box engineering solutions. I know some of you have been burned by this in the past, but maybe we should let the kids develop some new ideas. The whole point of what we do is to inspire and teach them…maybe we need to change things up a little bit?”

• Make sure that responsibilities are adequately divided amongst mentors and students. Mentor burnout is brutal, and can make even the most cheerful and open-minded mentor a big meanie. Make their lives easier by instituting a strong team structure that lays out all tasks and jobs for each adult and student leader. If your engineers are less stressed, they’ll be more likely to listen to new ideas. If you don’t have enough people to spread the work around, try and actively recruit a few more mentors to reduce everybody’s workload.

• It’s entirely possible that these ideas that the students want to try are either not possible under the current laws of physics, or will be completely unpractical. Your veteran engineers probably know this, and it’s easier to just say “no” after ten years of hearing the same thing, rather than take the time to explain it properly. Pick their brains a little bit and find out why they’re saying no, and evaluate your next steps from there.

Hope that helps!

[Steven Smith]

Read most of the posts before, and maybe I'm oversimplifying, but human beings (engineers included), typically have a reason for what they are doing. You can spend your time guessing as to why they are insisting on a drive train design, or discuss it with them and understand why.

As you understandably didn't share details on your team or what the drive train is, I could see an argument that if you are working on a solid 6WD style drivetrain, and lack sophistication in your scoring mechanisms and intake, then the right answer might be to push back on drive train iteration and focus on manipulator prototyping and practice in the offseason.

There could be a concern with the amount of money needing to be spent on offseason practice bots that might not be fruitful, and a lack of time by your mentors to spend the time to help make it successful.

I could go on for pages on what the problems could potentially be, but I recommend you approach your mentors in a non-combative way. Don't take an attitude of "the mentors are the problem" into the conversation, but instead seek to find out why they are doing what they are doing, and work together with them to see what you can do as a team to get out of the rut.

[GreyingJay]

Just to play devil's advocate here though... sometimes it really is that "the mentors are the problem". In environments like this there is often at least one strong-willed individual who knows everything and can do no wrong. (C'mon, you all know who I'm talking about.*)

Mentors are human; humans are imperfect. It might not be a bad idea to reinforce and emphasize that Gracious Professionalism applies to everyone, not just the students! Engineers are often in this career because they are extremely intelligent, driven, and with that sometimes comes a big ego. And it is human nature, nobody likes to think they are wrong. And with something like FRC when you become passionate about an idea or design it becomes an extension of your own identity, e.g. telling me that you don't like my idea is seen as a personal attack on me.

At least engineers are (or should be) open to quantitative analysis ("if you can PROVE me wrong, I will accept it") but even then, some people just have hard heads!

If this is the case and one or more of your mentors seem to be unreasonably stubborn, then it may be time to have a conversation about what FIRST is about, who should be driving the decisions, letting kids make their own mistakes, etc. It's not a fun conversation to have but it will help the mentors with their own personal development as well.

It's not just engineers and FRC; I volunteer with another non-profit organization and deal with this all the time. And, oh yeah, at my workplace too.

*I know, I know... I'm that guy sometimes. We all do it. The trick is recognizing and acknowledging it and being intentionally open minded.

[JesseK]

Originally Posted by Advice

I need advice on getting our mentors out of a rut without alienating them. Instead of designing a robot based on the game, we design a robot around the drive train design we have been using for years.
...
Is this a case of the mentors just being burnt-out? Please advise.

Fear of retrogressive progress towards on-field success after taking a major risk is a very understated big deal.

The biggest unforeseen (or downplayed) consequence of such a risk is lack of available weight in order to adapt to the game that is being played (i.e. metagame) rather than the game that was thought about during kickoff. Depending on which subsystem took the risk, there may be no celebration of failure because there is very little room to recover from it in order to have any modicum of success at an event. Success is defined differently for each team: some teams want a Win - others just want the robot to work as-intended so the team has something to cheer for on the field.

For example, creating a fancy drive train when the team hasn't proven it can create a successful robot with a simple drive train is probably seen as a major risk factor. If the team doesn't have a proven track record with the simple things, then maybe they're struggling as-is and new engineering talent is needed? Alternatively, if the drive train itself is successful then it may inspire/propel the team to better designs in the future - which the mentors will have to deal with on their own.

This year specifically has one team with a drive train that was definitely designed for the game. This robot can be seen as a work of art because every major subsystem synergizes with the other major subsystems in some way. It also happens to be the most successful robot this year: SideSwipe. Using this robot as the ultimate of design methodologies to imitate may be how to get your mentors out of their rut, if they're humble enough to understand there's a problem in the first place.

[GreyingJay]

^ Yes. On my team we quickly made a decision to stick with "the gold standard" which was a 4-CIM, 8-wheel-drive, 2-speed, custom gearbox drive that had served us beautifully in past years. We nailed that decision down almost instantly because, well, why mess with what works?

6+ weeks later we recognize that, for this game at least, it might have been worth looking into omni wheels or some other drivetrain that maybe wasn't as powerful and fast but more maneuverable. And the possibility of a U-shaped drive chassis that would surround a tote rather than forcing us to come up with ways to lift the tote into/onto the chassis (our original plan) or stack the totes in front of the driveframe (traditional forklift design).

At least now we know!

[Citrus Dad]

Originally Posted by Advice

Thanks for the replies so far, but without getting into specifics how do we get the mentors to open up to more ideas when they won't entertain any?

If the students end up successfully prototyping a new to us drive train or other design feature this off-season, and the mentors dismiss it out of hand again next year, it will crush the students. Especially, since the mentors are not able to work on it in the off-season.

This thread isn't asking how successful your team is or has been, it is asking for help getting mentors to try new things.

The core of your problem: it appears your team is mentor run rather than student run. While no team can be truly led entirely by students because they don't have the institutional investment and breadth of resource knowledge, having students drive the decision making and prototyping is important. Even just saying "student led" even if it's not true give them a legitimate voice on par with the mentors. So this sounds like a structural governance problem that you need to address on the team. Until you take that step I don't think we can give you much useful advice.

[IronicDeadBird]

Originally Posted by KathieK

Please remember we're not about the robots. Are your students being inspired? FIRST's mission:
Our mission is to inspire young people to be science and technology leaders, by engaging them in exciting mentor-based programs that build science, engineering and technology skills, that inspire innovation, and that foster well-rounded life capabilities including self-confidence, communication, and leadership.
If your team is no longer fulfilling the mission of FIRST remind the mentors of the mission statement. Remind them that the mission includes innovation, and in order to fulfill the mission, you may have to take risks and try something new with the robot design.

QFT. Remember keep a clear head when addressing conflict, this mentality appears to me to be the play it safe route. Nothing wrong with doing what you know (except when situation demands you put yourself out of your comfort zone) but I encourage students to try things and make mistakes before they get to the real world. You can pick the wrong drive base for a build season and have fun so do it have fun when you have room to make mistakes.
A great teacher once told me
Take chances, make mistakes, get messy.

[DonRotolo]

Originally Posted by KathieK

and in order to fulfill the mission, you may have to take risks and try something new with the robot design.

One of those risks is possibly losing your mentors if they are unwilling to 'get on board' with the inspiration stuff.

If your mentors are burnt out, allowing students to try new things - with support - can re-energize them.

[nlknauss]

Experienced mentors are huge assets to any FRC team, but student ideas fuel team investment and success. FIRST students are constantly in brainstorming mode and asking questions in order to better themselves and their team. Mentors do need to help students evaluate their ideas in a logical manner, it is a part of FIRST learning. Our team built 3 different elevator lifts this build season before making a final decision on the one that would ultimately be used. Through each iteration, the students asked if we could do it and together we weighed resources like time, money, weight, and the intended function before deciding to move forward. Getting mentors to ask students these questions (or any) can be tough, especially when a mentor knows what the answer will be before asking the student the question. The students may provide an answer the mentor didn't consider. Remembering to ask questions may be enough to rejuvenate the way mentors work with students.

Nate

[GreyingJay]

^ This.

I've been in many meetings -- FRC teams, summer camp committees, work -- that look like this:

Leader A: Let's brainstorm. All ideas are welcome!
Students: *give out multiple ideas*
Leader B: No, those won't work. I really think we should do X.
Students: *variety of pros and cons of multiple ideas*
Leader B: No, no, trust me, we should do X.
Students: *maybe a variation of X, but include Y?*
Leader B: No, it's really got to be X, guys.
Students: I thought you said all ideas were welcome?

Leader B might be brilliant -- she might even be absolutely right -- but this is not the way to foster inspiration and innovation amongst students.

[ASmith1675]

The biggest challenge of being a mentor is allowing some of your ideas to take a backseat and allowing students the chance to wrestle with the challenges set forth in a given game.

I agree with the notion that simply saying "No that won't work" is not the way to inspire and educate. When I think something may not work in a discussion, I instead like to ask questions to spur further thinking about overcoming an issue that I can see with the suggestion. Ex. "Have you thought about Y?" "How would would overcome X?" What I hope this does is allows students to be able to see what my years of experience building robots have taught me.

Often times these types of questions will lead to better ideas from both mentors and students. Mentors will shed some of their inherent biases, and students will gain a greater understanding of some of the details that need to be worked out.


In terms of trying to get mentors to change their biases, proof is your best option. The biggest issue with changing a drivetrain is that it is often (nearly always) the most critical system of a robot. A fantastic mechanism may mean nothing if you can't easily maneuver around the field. Developing a new drivetrain would be a great offseason project. This allows iteration away from the time pressures of the 6-week build (nothing ever goes as smoothly as you'd like). Then during build season you have another tool in your design toolbox that you can use to accomplish the game task.

[M3NT0R]

I'm going to hijack the thread a little bit.

I'm the lead mentor for a second year team, and when we were rookies I was the only mentor. While I'm very passionate about FIRST, I quickly realized that running a team with 1 mentor is certainly a recipe for not good things.

I was successfully able to get 2 new mentors but have unable to been get them to come consistently, and this year has again ended up being somewhat a 1 mentor team. Being a larger team with more resources, I end up being a severe bottleneck as major design decisions generally involve a mentor, and I'm the only one around.

I was hoping by being very relaxed and nonchalant about it would create an environment of interest to the mentors and they would come more often but that definitely backfired.

How can I get these mentors to come out more or be more involved? I'm worried that bringing this up will me lose the once a week they show up during build season.

Side-note, any tips for cold recruiting mentors. I don't have good connections with local companies or industries.

[Hot_Copper_Frog]

Originally Posted by M3NT0R

While I'm very passionate about FIRST, I quickly realized that running a team with 1 mentor is certainly a recipe for not good things.

Yes, I'd agree with that. 1 mentor is generally not enough to accomplish more than the bare minimum of what needs to be done administratively, especially if you are not dedicating 40+ hours/week to the team.

Originally Posted by M3NT0R

I was successfully able to get 2 new mentors but have unable to been get them to come consistently, and this year has again ended up being somewhat a 1 mentor team. Being a larger team with more resources, I end up being a severe bottleneck as major design decisions generally involve a mentor, and I'm the only one around.

How did you recruit these two new mentors? Do they have FIRST/FRC experience outside of this year? Were they made aware of what sort of time commitment and responsibilities would be expected of them? Are these mentors capable (read: trained/experienced in engineering design/electrical design/programming/CAD) of making major design decisions?

Sometimes when adults are recruited to a FRC team, they don't really understand what that entails. Nobody sat them down and explained that FIRST, while incredibly rewarding, will suck most of the free time out of your life for approximately 4-6 months of the year. A lot of adults simply don't have the time or free mental/emotional energy to deal with that but want to help anyway.

Originally Posted by M3NT0R

I was hoping by being very relaxed and nonchalant about it would create an environment of interest to the mentors and they would come more often but that definitely backfired.

I can see why you would feel this way, and from your perspective it makes sense. But your nonchalant attitude probably communicated that it was okay to be nonchalant and relaxed about commitment and adhering to a team structure. If you don't make expectations crystal clear, then in all likelihood you will be met with inconsistent attendance.

Originally Posted by M3NT0R

How can I get these mentors to come out more or be more involved? I'm worried that bringing this up will me lose the once a week they show up during build season.

You need to assign roles and responsibilities. These work best if they have nothing to do with the current people involved -- for example, it would be ideal to have a Team Leader, a Chief Engineer, a Chief of Business Operations, and a Chief of Public Relations, depending on the goals of your team.

Chief Engineer oversees all robot production/design/documentation. Chief of Business Operations oversees financial management and budgeting, administrative matters, food and event scheduling, etc. Chief of Public Relations handles community outreach, team documentation, Woodie Flowers submission, Business Plan submission, Chairman's submission, Animation submission, etc. Ideally, each of these positions would have at least one or two other mentors to help divide tasks.

By having a built in leadership structure at the mentor level, you can assign expectations to each position, and make sure that the position is filled by somebody every season. This way, they know what they're responsible for and it doesn't turn into a personal attack on their commitment to the team. It's much easier to say "Steve, as Chief Engineer you are expected to be present at least four days/week during the build season" than "Steve, you really need to show up more because I can't do all of this by myself!!!".

Originally Posted by M3NT0R

Side-note, any tips for cold recruiting mentors. I don't have good connections with local companies or industries.

You may not have connections, but guess who does? The parents of your students. Holding a parent meeting and asking them to help you brainstorm can be really helpful. Some of them may even volunteer to fill specific mentorship roles for the year, or know a co-worker who would love to get involved.

[nuclearnerd]

Originally Posted by M3NT0R

I'm going to hijack the thread a little bit.
any tips for cold recruiting mentors. I don't have good connections with local companies or industries.

I'm sympathetic to your quest. We did pretty well this year recruiting mentors for our rookie team so I'll offer what worked for us:

• Borrow from an existing FRC team (thank you 4039)
• Check your local college for FRC alumns - there may even be an FRC club, or your local FIRST org can help locate alumns. Students have the most time and energy to spare
• Ask all of the shop / science / tech teachers in your school or neighbouring schools / colleges. Some of them may already be involved in student competitions, and may be willing to switch / merge
• Put a letter out to your state Professional Engineers association - Retirees are the best if you can find some
• If there's a "hacker space" in your community, visit and ask around. Maybe prepare a "pitch" ahead of time, or invite people to coffee and youtube.
• As Megan mentioned - parents! Kids who are interested in robotics often have parents who are interested in robotics. Even if they don't have the technical background, they are usually motivated to help their kids team succeed. In both teams I've mentored, we've had really active "Parent Groups" who took care of things like build season food, hotel reservations, carpooling etc. They were a huge help!

The harder part of your question is getting mentors to come often. FRC Build season is a frankly unreasonable amount of time to commit, especially if your mentors have full time jobs and/or families. The best solution, if you can't find anyone else crazy enough to lead, is to recruit as many "part timers" as you can. Try to get everyone to commit to some minimum amount of attendance / responsibility during the off season, and then plan your meetings / team ambitions to suit.

Good luck!