Getting your fellow mentors on board

[Jon Stratis]

Mentor cohesion is critical for teams, and can be hard to achieve. I've found that every mentor comes in with their own preconceived notions and those can be very, very hard to change. Some people are just more hands-on than others, and that expresses itself as being on different points of the mentor-built/student-built spectrum. The real key to getting everyone on the same page is communication over the long term. You won't get there overnight, but if you can create a common team culture over the next few years, you'll find that new mentors coming in will adapt much more quickly.

When I think about it, right before kickoff is really the wrong time to try to address these sorts of issues. If you get people together for a meeting to discuss it, some will feel like it's an attack on them and how they work, and could react negatively, causing issues for the team that carry into the season. Really, the right time to start addressing it is at the end of the season, allowing you to work on progress during the off-season, then reassess after the next season.

Instead of tackling this as a discussion of mentor-built/student-built, I would go after it as a discussion of team leadership. Work with the mentors to create a leadership structure within your mentor group. For my team, we basically have our faculty advisors on top, and then one mentor leading each of the primary areas, and the other mentors working with them. This type of leadership structure allows for natural mentoring within your mentor group, helping people get on the same page.

Next, bring in your student leadership. Establish (if you haven't already) a leadership structure for the students and empower them to guide their mentors towards the level of involvement the team needs. Putting that power into the students hands, and ensuring (through individual mentoring/discussions when needed) all of the mentors respect it, helps to reduce friction within the mentor group and allows your team leadership to act in a united fashion.

Above all else, expect progress to be fairly slow. Creating a team culture doesn't happen overnight.

[Monochron]

Originally Posted by Nick Seidl

Additionally, they are all good about sharing their opinions (which is awesome!), but I'm running into problems getting that conversation to a conclusion. Lots of talking, not much listening to each other or coming to conclusions going on. How do I play referee between the grown ups?

Lots of planning ahead before meetings may help here. Coalesce your thoughts outside of the meeting, write them all down concisely, and then discuss that with the group.

For coming to a conclusion, the best thing I have found personally is to not talk much, but try to distill down opposing view points in your head while others are talking. At some point speak up with something like "it sounds like X and Y are the leading plans" and move the discussion to X and Y's pros and cons. After enough discussion people should be receptive to the "well we need to just pick one, see how it works, and re-asses while we are in process".

If there is enough support for an idea, even if you don't agree with it, it may be best to go with that. Having multiple people feel like they are meaningfully contributing may be more important than doing something the way that you think is perfect.

[Nick Seidl]

Thank you for the feedback so far. I run into the problem that I have mentors in the "students can hold the screwdriver and watch while I build a robot" camp, the "mentors are just there to keep you from hurting yourself" camp, and everywhere in between. In the past few years everyone just kind of did their own thing and we found ourselves somewhere in the middle (which is where I want to be anyway). Not being on the same page causes conflict, but not to the point that we don't function, and GP still prevails in our interactions.

I think I need to play the "benevolent dictator" card since leadership by committee isn't getting decisions made. I need to make the best decisions I can with their advice of the other mentors in mind, and go with what I think everyone can live with. I also liked what I read about writing my thoughts out before presenting them. I know that I am a better writer than speaker.

In other words, I need to introvert less hard.

[FrankJ]

First you need to decide exactly what your team is. A social club that builds robots on the side? A competitive whose primary goal is to win competitions or outreach awards? An educational tool to teach life skills? Completely student run? Completely mentor or coach run? Student run within parameters set by the powers that be? Most team are a mix and all have their merits. Decide what you team is. Having a business plan or a mission statement is a useful tool, but don't let it box you in.

You also need to decide what motivates your mentors to want to devote time to the team. If a mentor wants to do something with their hands, then you need to provide an outlet for that. The team coach is a mix of carnival barker, cat herder, and director.

While our coach has the final say, our team at the mentor level is mostly by consensus, but a few things are by executive fiat. Having to following school policy is an example of a non-debatable. Establishing a team handbook is also useful. Once a decision is made, make a policy and don't keep revistiting it. When having meetings, have an agenda with time allowed for discussion. At the end of the allotted time stop discussing and make a decision.