Sustainability In FRC Teams

[gblake]

Originally Posted by eagle33199

...
What first really needs at this point is a college program. Something that can accommodate the students schedule with a longer, less intense build season that doesn't require 40 hours per week of work. Something that lets them be hands-on with the robot, building and shaping it, while introducing more leadership and mentoring opportunities (possibly through workshops or camps designed for the other FIRST programs). Keep those kids involved with FIRST throughout college, and we'll start seeing a lot more of them coming back to help mentor teams after they graduate. And when they do, they'll bring the thousands of companies that don't already sponsor FIRST they work for with them. It's a win-win that helps with both of our biggest issues.

Switch from discussing a single program (FIRST) to discussing, STEM, Robotics, and Inspiration; and you find that there are many, many opportunities for college students (VRCC came to mind immediately for me).

While "we" continue to invest in FIRST because it supplies a large return on our investments, we should remember that FIRST is a subset of STEM and Robotics competitions. We make a mistake if we assume that it is the only game in town.

Regardless, your point about guiding each STEM/FIRST alumnus to invest in the next generations is still valid. Perhaps just not in full-blown FRC mentoring while they are in college. FRC can be a huge time sink.

Blake

[gblake]

The several comparisons between/among STEM robotics programs and sort-of similar arts or athletics programs brought this "question" to mind.

Painting with a very broad brush...

Are the arts and athletics programs sustained by their communities (time, $ and votes); while the robotics programs are sustained by grants and individuals?

If the answer is yes, and if this dichotomy is at the root of many of the symptoms we have listed in this thread, then I think attending to the root cause of our "problems", and having a realistic expectation for the time, $ and effort necessary to affect changes, will lead to strategies for investing that time and energy wisely in sustainable projects.

Let's try an analogy

Sowing expensive seeds in thin or rocky soil, in an attempt to quickly feed the world is a waste of scarce resources. Instead, sowing those seeds in decent soil and living off the yield while you simultaneously get the other soil ready to produce crops is a way to maximize long-term yields. Prep'ing that currently poor soil might take 50 years, or it might take 50 days.

If the answer is that it will take 50 years, then trying to accomplish it in 50 days or 50 months is a good way to create fragile houses of cards, and create a lot of heartburn, confusion and waste.

Also, if in the agriculture analogy the current answer is 50 years, trying experiments to see if you can find a way to cut that time down to 5 years is a smart investment; but until the experiments pay off, don't gamble unwisely using blind luck as a guide.

If pouring externally supplied fertilizer on the poor soil is one way to (appear to) speed things up, pay careful attention to whether that fertilizer might some day run out.

Perhaps starting an FRC team in a "new" location isn't the first step to creating a sustainable STEM inspiration program. Maybe it is one of the last???

Blake

[JaneYoung]

Originally Posted by gblake

If pouring externally supplied fertilizer on the poor soil is one way to (appear to) speed things up, pay careful attention to whether that fertilizer might some day run out.
Blake

As someone who learns a lot about soil enrichment, expensive seed, and the costs/impact of fertilizer due to the fact that I'm married to someone who does this for a living - I like some of the analogies you are making. When thinking about the fertilizer (and to an extent the seeding process), we also have to take into account and look at the cost/waste of run off and how to help prevent it or minimize it as well.

I'm liking this a lot.

Jane

[Garret]

I think the best things we could do to try and help these teams with sustainability problems:
Teach teams how to fundraise. Grants are giving a team a fish, teaching them how to fundraise effectively and around their district's policies will keep them going. (on a related note, anyone got any tips for my team?)
Help teams get more mentorship, and stop starting a billion rookies unless those rookies all have good mentor support as well. There aren't many ways to really combat the second problem though, sometimes you start off GREAT and get unlucky.
Get some information and pro tips out there to help teams work with their district, or better yet, have some of the better off teams write letters or talk to "uncooperative" districts about how great robotics is aand why they should be supportive.

I agree.

Teams who do not receive enough support from mentors and their schools are extremely vulnerable. My guess is that the most fatal or devastating to an FRC team is when they lose mentors (not just because this can mean losing a monetary sponsor as well). When a team loses mentors they lose guidance which without how can students hope to learn the skills necessary to run a team. This statement may not apply to very established teams because those teams have a strong support system and foundation. But for teams who have essentially restarted from scratch each year this sort of foundation and stability is nonexistent and as such the team can fail if they lose that critical student who has been the backbone of the team.

Basically when a team is carried on the back of one or a few team members that team's lifespan (generally speaking) is limited to four years (graduating from high school). If we could figure out how to teach students how to be leaders (not just get something done) but how to manage an organization and tell other team members what to do.

Over this summer I have realized that a FIRST robotics team is much more like a small business than anything else (well at least my team) and as such when a team is composed completely of robot builders and technical people that team cannot exist just like a company cannot exist if it is only made up of engineers.

Again this only applies to teams that are completely student-run due to a lack of mentors/advisors.

I hope some of this ramble makes sense.

[Tom Line]

Originally Posted by JaneYoung

As someone who learns a lot about soil enrichment, expensive seed, and the costs/impact of fertilizer due to the fact that I'm married to someone who does this for a living - I like some of the analogies you are making. When thinking about the fertilizer (and to an extent the seeding process), we also have to take into account and look at the cost/waste of run off and how to help prevent it or minimize it as well.

I'm liking this a lot.

Jane

To continue that analogy then, it's time FIRST remembers to fertilize and water existing teams.

A perfect example is a new FIM program in conjunction with JC Pennys. JC Penny is trying to sponsor NEW teams near their stores. If an existing team starts a new team and gets them up and running, they get a nice chuck of cash as well from JC Penny.

THAT is the type of self-promoting FIRST needs to do. It's the perfect combination of starting a new team and supporting the old. Go a step further though. Convince the sponsor to support not just the new team, but become a permanent sponsor of the existing one as well (If the team budget is below a certain level).

Another example: part of team system is that we will lower the amount a student pays to join based on how much they fundraise. Why doesn't FIRST offer a similar incentive for starting new FLL teams and FIRST teams?

[Chris is me]

I don't really think "start a new team and get money" solves the problem. If anything it makes it worse. There's no financial incentive to help any team that's not brand new, and if you're on the brink of failure maybe you don't have the resources to start 10 or 15 FLL teams. It's great for exponential growth, but that doesn't make any team any more sustainable.

[JaneYoung]

Many teams make ends meet year to year, stretching all of their resources each year to do that. It is good to take a step back and look at what would help the teams move beyond piecing it together like that:

- Savings/working towards saving money for 1 to 2 years ahead.

- Investing in and stabilizing the team in the areas that help guarantee consistency and sustainability. We've learned the value of veteran team members working with and mentoring the younger/newer team members as we move from year to year. Sometimes it works well, sometimes it's a flop - especially when a large pool of seniors graduate and not enough training/mentoring has taken place consistently to keep the team on the level it was. Then we are prone to seeing dips in performance and achievement until we take the time to re-evaluate and stabilize. Same thing with the Parents' Association. Training/mentoring/tweaking/fine-tuning/adapting to change are constants. Teams that understand that and continue to monitor the growth and development of their team are the ones who understand how important all of this is and how valuable it could be when shared with teams who are struggling and who may not be aware of or have the resources/people power to develop in this area. Or - think they don't. I've found that those assumptions (and the attitude that goes with them) can stifle growth and development more than the reality can. Watching a team bust through those assumptions and embrace their own path of challenges and where they want to go with them - is very cool.

Jane

[IKE]

Would this be a good thread to list some of the initiatives that FIRST (both HQ direct and approved from HQ) to help teams continue to be sustainable?

I keep debating (in my head) if this is an idea generation thread, sharing best practices thread, or a rallying thread (that would culminate in some sort of letter, or something else).

[Andrew Schuetze]

Originally Posted by IKE

Would this be a good thread to list some of the initiatives that FIRST (both HQ direct and approved from HQ) to help teams continue to be sustainable?

I keep debating (in my head) if this is an idea generation thread, sharing best practices thread, or a rallying thread (that would culminate in some sort of letter, or something else).

So as FIRST in Texas will need to start the work now to sustain the efforts of the last two years and the current big potential influx of new FTC and FRC teams, Idea generation and if not more important, listing of best practices will be a great help. What has been done by FIRST organizations to help sustain teams that has worked in other regions? You can send me a pm or an email with details if a discussion needs to transpire to facilitate a more complete understanding on my part.