Critical and picky - here I go again.

[Ryan F.]

Hello,

I realize this is a little late, but it's something I wanted to point out. helpfull criticism of robots is great, but watch how far you go with it..because people spent so much time working on these robots. The thing is that I've noticed a sort of elitist attitude on these forums when robots are being criticized. It looks like some people believe that they post a lot here, or that they know a lot more than someone else that they can go overboard on the criticism, or maybe just try to make themselves look good by being picky with someones robot. That's probably not the case with a lot of people..but sometimes it definetly looks like that.

[Mark Pettit]

At L.A., the inspector that was going over our robot was incessantly telling us what was wrong with our machine. He would point at a part and tell us how we should have done it instead. We all kind of knodded and umm-hmm'd at him in agreement so as not to upset him and keep him from passing us on inspection but when we got back to our pit we all commented on what a jerk he was about it since our robot works just fine, thank you. Especially since none of us believed that he could build one better.
Our bitterness escalated all the more when we saw that he was actually a mentor for one of the local L.A. teams.
Yes, Andy, et al., I agree! We should all be in awe of each others' creations and we should all see them as the personal objects that they are to each of us who have put so much into them.
My team is constantly telling ourselves that, "If we had more time, we could have done this. . . " or "Wow! That part would have been better if we would have built it this way. . . ". We respect other teams creations and would never think about telling them how they should have done it.

[kmcclary]

Originally Posted by Mark Pettit

At L.A., the inspector that was going over our robot was incessantly telling us what was wrong with our machine. He would point at a part and tell us how we should have done it instead. [what a jerk]

In this case, not seeing the incident in question, its hard to judge... If it was safety related, listen up! But if it was simply HIS opinion for a "better way", well, he can have his opinion, and you can have yours!

Please be conscious that there's a fine line all inspectors have to walk, between trying to be helpful, "mentoring", and perceived as being "overly critical". OOH, he has no reason criticizing a well working system.

OTOH, there's a disabling concept rampant among businesses, called "NIH Syndrome". (Not Invented Here... IOW, "If WE didn't come up with it, it CAN'T be any good") If your own pride deafens you from absorbing some cool ideas "for next time" which may have made your job easier, THAT in and of itself CAN be a problem.

His experience may have been dearly won, with pain, suffering, long hours, dead robots, or simply some lousy round scores. You never know... Just take notes, and try not to take his comments personally. Look them over LATER, once you've cooled off. If it turns out to be SOUND advice, add it in your bag of tricks for another year.

Hey... I'll admit to ANYONE that *I* am not an expert in everything. I have no crying need to suffer needlessly. If ANYONE wishes to offer me "a better way" to do ANYTHING, I'm all ears! I'll just take the data, and decide LATER if I'll take the advice or not the NEXT time I'm faced with the same choice!

But then, it doesn't mean we're going to tear apart a legal, working robot just to satisfy HIS vision of OUR robot...

Bottom Line: To heck with other's opinions... RESULTS ARE EVERYTHING. If your robot is LEGAL, AND it does what you wanted it to do, it's FINE... The Field will determine if your approach was sound or not. BUT, don't succumb to "NIH Syndrome" and tune them out whenever someone tries to offer advice!

Sounds like you handled it well, and your bot worked out, and that's ALL that matters. Keep up the good work, and Build More Bots!

- Keith

[Redhead Jokes]

Originally Posted by kmcclary

OTOH, there's a diabling concept rampant among businesses, called "NIH Syndrome". (Not Invented Here... IOW, "If WE didn't come up with it, it CAN'T be any good")

That's so funny. I just heard about NIH about a couple of weeks ago from a mentor on another team who described how she'd experienced that in running her own business. She was contracted to provide CEO's with a business report that was very expensive. The CEO would love it. If the CEO took it home to his wife it was often subjected to the NIH Syndrome and picked to pieces.

She and I commiserate about the people who don't appreciate all the work involved, the process, and what was accomplished, and prefer to criticize and blame, point out what SHOULD have been done, plan what should BE done, and expect others to put in all the time and effort to put those plans in place, without offering their own time and energy.

[KenWittlief]

there is another factor at work here - i dont have a catch phrase for it

its very difficult to come up with a geniune new idea - it takes a real flash of insight and brillance - and then to implement a new idea for the first time is 100% new territory

but once you have the first version of your new concept built and working, its VERY easy for someone esle to come along, take a look at what you have accomplished, and find many ways to make it better

one example - I worked for Sayette Technology, the company that originated the idea of putting an LCD panel on an overhead projector, and created the entire LCD projector industry

we build a projector that had two light bulbs and a light sensor and a motor - if the one bulb burned out, the motor would rotate the new bulb into position and turn it on. We sold a lot of these projectors due to this feature alone.

It was a difficult mechanism to get to work right, the wires to the bulbs where heat insulated and it was hard to get it to rotate and stop in just the right position for optical alignment

one of our competitors came out with an automatic light changer - they oneupped us - they had two bulbs pointing at each other, and in the center was a little mirror. When one bulb burned out a little motor flipped the mirror the other way

thats the way engineering is - you normally build on someone else work, find small ways to improve what someone else has already accomplished.

just remembered, there is a catch phrase for this: OneUpManShip

[RyanMcE]

Originally Posted by Andy Baker

If you are honestly trying to point things out that you feel will help this team out, then save it for a PM.

I have to disagree with you here. One of the nicest things about a public forum is that people who don't even ever post get questioned answered just by reading becasue someone else took the time to ask the question already. So when something doesn't seem quite right with a design, or a question comes to mind, it makes much more sense to me write about it publically. Then everyone can come up with ideas to fix the problem or make the design better, and all the lurkers are enlightened as well. If we wanted to PM people all the time, then there wouldn't be much use of the rest of the forums.

As for your other comments about being tactful when critiquing, as you may all know by now I suck at tact. So, is it better for me to simply say nothing when I think something could be improved because I might offend someone, or is it better for me to go ahead and speak my mind, and hopefully somebody will learn or some robot will get better because of it?

[RyanMcE]

Originally Posted by rforystek

but sometimes it definetly looks like that.

Why do looks matter? Oh wait, this is FIRST.

[Andy Baker]

Originally Posted by RyanMcE

I have to disagree with you here. One of the nicest things about a public forum is that people who don't even ever post get questioned answered just by reading becasue someone else took the time to ask the question already. So when something doesn't seem quite right with a design, or a question comes to mind, it makes much more sense to me write about it publically. Then everyone can come up with ideas to fix the problem or make the design better, and all the lurkers are enlightened as well. If we wanted to PM people all the time, then there wouldn't be much use of the rest of the forums.

As for your other comments about being tactful when critiquing, as you may all know by now I suck at tact. So, is it better for me to simply say nothing when I think something could be improved because I might offend someone, or is it better for me to go ahead and speak my mind, and hopefully somebody will learn or some robot will get better because of it?

Ryan,

You have good points here. I regret some of my original post and people have pointed out mistakes in my logic. Their corrections and yours are legitimate points. I was reacting to people who were being downright rude to others at the time.

Thanks,
Andy B.

[kmcclary]

Originally Posted by KenWittlief

there is another factor at work here - i dont have a catch phrase for it

its very difficult to come up with a geniune new idea - it takes a real flash of insight and brillance - and then to implement a new idea for the first time is 100% new territory

but once you have the first version of your new concept built and working, its VERY easy for someone esle to come along, take a look at what you have accomplished, and find many ways to make it better [...]

just remembered, there is a catch phrase for this: OneUpManShip

LOL!

Actually, I think you're searching for "Invention" vs "Process Improvement". Both of these classes of Intellectual Property are recognized by the Patent Office.

It's funny you mention that, as Process Improvement is MY business (I'm a "Mercenary Inventor" by trade... ). FIRST challenges help me keep my skills sharp, and my brain flexible.

Sometimes process improvements can be done by divergent thinking or "Ah HA"! creation, but often it can be by pulling one paradigm's concept into another area. But the easiest way to improvement of all is simply by getting a fresh or MULTIPLE viewpoint(s) on the problem. The New Guy is not INVESTED in a particular approach, nor blinded by past habitual solutions and their DETAILS. IOW, a new POV can often see the forest from the trees, and therefore has a better chance to find quicker and easier paths through the forest. That's why I love gaining new students and mentors, and brainstorming. They don't think like I do (nor does the "group mind"), and won't get caught in the same traps that I alone would.

There's an old Urban Legend of the argument between a teacher and a student in a college Engineering Class. The teacher spoke of "mature technologies that couldn't be improved further". The student claimed you could improve ANYTHING with enough thought and effort. The teacher then challenged him to improve Chopsticks, a technology that has been stable for thousands of years...

The next week, the student came back in with a bowl of noodle soup and some chopsticks. He sat and calmly ate the noodles normally. Then, to everyone's surprise, he stuck in one of the sticks and proceeded to suck up all of the soup through the long hole he'd drilled through its length, like a straw.

Point well taken...

I'm constantly amazed by the creative genius of many teams. EVERY time I attend, I either see something totally novel, or MUCH simpler than I expected would be needed to do a specific task... What fun!!! You could just see the "Ah HA!" and pride in their faces when they spoke of how they came up with it...

I swear at times I have MUCH more fun touring the pits, talking with the teams standing proudly by their machines, and seeing the non-obvious solutions or HOW their widgets and new drivetrain works, than watching the game itself.

If I wasn't such a FIRST fanatic consumed with the idea of starting up new FIRST teams to get more kids involved, and ever end up living in a place without a team possible, I'd definitely either be a Pit Groupie or Traveling Wrenchman long before considering becoming a Spectator...

Originally Posted by Redhead Jokes

That's so funny. I just heard about NIH about a couple of weeks ago from a mentor on another team who described how she'd experienced that in running her own business.

She was contracted to provide CEO's with a business report that was very expensive. The CEO would love it. If the CEO took it home to his wife it was often subjected to the NIH Syndrome and picked to pieces.

<chuckle> As a Process Improvement Consultant, I run into NIH *all* of the time. Some are often insulted by "an outsider" being brought in. To overcome it, it takes a management commitment FOR CHANGE. Then the MANAGEMENT will suppress NIH obstructing advancement, by overriding the stalled team's personnel. If I'm hired to change or improve something, that support is the first thing I insure I have. Otherwise, I'm wasting my time, because the changes won't be USED. Similarly with starting a FIRST team. A creation of a new team is a CHANGE in ROUTINE for a school. If you don't have both top management AND teacher approval (AND support) for it, your job of starting one is somewhere between hard and impossible.

I'm not sure I understand though. SHE suffered from NIH over her SPOUSE'S company, as in "SHE didn't think of it, so it was bad"? Or was it more akin to defense of her spouse "from attack", like "don't you dare be critical of MY spouse's company"?

BTW, another other biggie that runs rampant in large organizations (governments, companies, schools, whatever) is "Empire Building". Your friend may have inadvertently run into that one, too.

Empire Building is where people instead of being paid on profitability or service effectiveness are instead either paid proportionate to the staff size under them, or worse, are only allowed to advance by building a larger group beneath them. A HUGE motivator and IMHO one of the biggest causes of overbloated bureaucracies. Consider: If your pay is proportional to bodies, WHO CARES what they do, or if they do anything at ALL? In fact, any suggested improvement based on increasing effectiveness, which in the end may even POSSIBLY cause a staff shrinkage, is fought tooth and nail without regards to its merit. Governmental agencies often fall into this class. No profit motive for service efficiency, and large Empire Building forces. (Ever go into the DMV, or any major govt building and try to get something done quickly???)

Of course, they won't say their REAL reasons for fighting the suggestions. Instead, they'll attack or quickly try to "discredit the messenger". I once was on a three man team with the unenviable task of having to decide which of three competing over 100 head departments' separately evolved approaches were to be chosen by the parent company to be used for the future. That meant two department's Empires were at risk of being dispersed into other tasks. Not a problem for the employees as they'd be reassigned, but a BIG problem for two of the three managers, who'd lose their Empires, and may suffer a pay CUT. So, ALL THREE of them simply "played the odds" and started attacking our credibility even before we started.

That was a big reason OUTSIDE consultants were brought in to make the evaluation. Imagine an EMPLOYEE trying to politically survive THAT level of "NIH criticism" later after being charged with evaluating three powerful and politically connected Centurions' ways of doing business!

The bottom line is that there are MANY reasons people don't like to hear advice or criticism. Many of the reasons have NOTHING to do with the advice itself (pride, ego, hidden financial motivations, etc.), and people will often DEFLECT it with anger or resentment against the person.

OTOH, there are a lot of jerks out there, too...

The key to keeping sane in that environment is not to take "NIH retribution challenges" personally.

I hope this gives some insight that "being ticked off about criticism is NOT only a school age problem. Adults have to deal with it too. In fact, if anything, reactions may be even WORSE, as their pride, egos, political standing, status, mates, or even their livelihood at times may be perceived to be threatened by criticism from another.

- Keith

[Ryan F.]

Originally Posted by rforystek

but sometimes it definetly looks like that.

The problem is that if it looks like it, that's all you can tell. When someone gives a harsh response etc. how do you know they meant different??

[kmcclary]

Originally Posted by rforystek

The problem is that if it looks like it, that's all you can tell. When someone gives a harsh response etc. how do you know they meant different??

It can often be hard. Sometimes if it FEELS inflammatory, you'll have to go off an evaluate the data later, after cooling off.

IMHO, a few of the best ways to tell is: via the information itself, the motivation for saying it, their word choices compared to the audience (is it audience appropriate?), and the non-verbal communication of the person WHILE they are saying it.

Look at the information DISPASSIONATELY. Yes, this is "your child" you wish to defend. Try to put that aside for a moment. (Yes, that can be VERY hard.) Now, without being defensive about it, do they have a POINT? If so, note it FOR THE NEXT TIME.

But even if they DO mean well, WHY are they saying it? Look at their motivation, and nonverbal posturing when they tell you. Are they REALLY trying to be helpful, or are they simply trying to stroke their OWN egos?

If there is more than one person present, are their words and postures playing childish "pecking order / status games" by stating things in front of OTHERS just to make THEMSELVES seem more important than you?

Are they RUSHED? Sometimes, harried inspectors who have a lot to do aren't as tactful as they might otherwise be in calmer circumstances when they have more time.

If you DO believe they are seriously trying to mentor, ACCEPT their motivation, regardless of audience.

A Mentoring Individual will have a serious expression, speak in plain tones, and will LISTEN BACK. Regardless if you WILL take their advice or not, at least listen politely, discuss and explore the options with them, and don't blame them for honestly trying to help you.

OTOH, if they're in a haughty attitude about it, or broadcasting it loudly ONLY for the embarrassment factor or to put you down for trying, that's totally uncalled for, and unprofessional.

Another factor to consider is the speaker's normal "team dynamic and culture". Some people (and teams) have the habit of talking roughly, or calling each other blockheads all of the time, and no one thinks twice about it. (Our teams mentors are VERY creative, but have a humor style such that at times they often roll their eyes at each other's wild suggestions and tell 'em to go jump in the lake or say "thanks for sharing"...)

If you can, before judging a critical speech, try to find out something about the inspector, so you can judge if it is simply their normal interpersonal style. People come in a wide range between "brutal honesty" and "world class negotiator tactfulness". That doesn't mean anything about their INTENT.

But sometimes they may simply forget they're NOT talking with people with the same working culture, and thickness of skin as they're used to. Now that's THEIR problem. Let them know politely whenever they're starting to cross the line with something like: "Hey, be NICE... [We/I/Our Students] all worked HARD on that approach..."

If they STILL don't get the hint and monitor their word choices a bit more, they ARE jerks...

Does that make sense?

- Keith