Keep FIRST in Michigan (FiM) from killing FIRST Lego League

[gblake]

Originally Posted by Ed Law

I appreciate your clarification about your combative tone. It seems that you were attacking everybody in Michigan that does not agree with you even though they did not make the rules. But now I understand, thanks.

I'm not attacking anyone; but you might catch me disagreeing with a policy or two (and supporting one or two).

Originally Posted by Ed Law

Let me first answer your question. I am going to rewrite it from "To keep all the parents happy in our school district, we will have to make FLL K-8, FTC 5-12 and FRC 6-12" to "To keep all the parents happy in our school district, the program will have to be change d to K-8 for FLL, 5-12 for FTC and 6-12 for FRC."

Thanks to Mr V's help we now know that FIRST HQ will prevent participation by any student who is too old for a program, and will allow participation by all other (younger) students.

So, I'm guessing that means the "program" doesn't need to change. FIRST HQ will enforce FIRST's rules (I'm thinking that FIRST HQ owns the "program"), and schools will enforce school system rules.

Am I overlooking some reason for a third set of rules (FiM rules) to be introduced? I realize that you are Ed, and you are not FiM; but if you happen to know FiM's reason, I'm curious.

Originally Posted by Ed Law

Yes, you and I are miles apart on this issue. And I am not trying to convince you. My biggest disagreement with you is with your philosophy which you quoted "If it ain't broken, don't fix it." Just because there is a saying by somebody in the past does not make it right or the truth. Many people have said many things in the past. It depends on the context. Not everything can be applied to every situation. I am a firm believer in Kaizen (continuous improvement). We put a lot of emphasis on Kaizen at my place of work. Many of us work on Kaizen projects on the side. Even if something is not broken, we try to improve process/product that affects our work, to make it more efficient, to make us more productive, to make work life more enjoyable. It directly translate to the bottom line. Customer satisfaction will increase and the company will be more profitable and competitive. A company that does not change things and wait until it is truly broken will most probably not going to be able to survive for very long in this global competitive economy.

Ed, we agree here more than you know.

I'm familiar with kaizan-style quality improvement methods. I have the tee-shirt (OK, it's really a polo shirt, but that's close enough). Here is how I use the phrase, "If it ain't broken, don't fix it."

Properly applied, that phrase is part of exactly the sort of thinking that is at the core of those methods. In those methods you start by identifying defects, and then you look for their root cause(s), or at least for a way to exert some control over parts/processes that will have a desired effect on the defect.

In addition to the obvious defects that exist when a product or process doesn't satisfy a requirement (function, performance, whatever), lost opportunities to make a product/process cheaper, or otherwise better, are defects in something (I won't quibble about what that "something" is).

However, if no one involved in an improvement exercise can identify a defect, neither the product or process is changed just for change's sake. Changes are only made for an identified reason. In other words, you don't fix it if ain't broken.

Bringing the conversation back to the thread's general topic... I continue to look forward to learning what motivated FiM's plans to enforce a local change in the ages/grades allowed to participate in local (local to the communities affected by FiM policies) FIRST programs.

I know the FiM volunteers are earnest, sincere volunteers working very hard to accomplish something good. It's for that very reason, that it should be very easy to describe what defect, whether it was a lost opportunity or an outright failure to satisfy some requirement, they are attempting to affect.

Blake