Gracious Professionalism(TM)???

[Al Skierkiewicz]

Jeremiah,
I feel that making the terms more official lends credence to that belief that these terms have meaning for us in the organization and it gives us something of a handle to explain our purpose and general method of conduct to others outside of the organization. I use these terms almost daily when speaking to others about the competition and the way we treat each other. Those who have never heard of First can now take away a term, a phrase, a mental reminder, that there is something that is competitive and yet shares information and celebrates science and technology.

[oddjob]

For me, Gracious Professionalism doesn't fit with the "sport for nerds" aspect of FIRST. The excitement at regionals is tremendous and GP makes me think of dull lectures and boring triple checked leisurely work. Maybe we should brainstorm some new trademarks for FIRST that actually convey the real experience.

[JaneYoung]

Originally Posted by oddjob

For me, Gracious Professionalism doesn't fit with the "sport for nerds" aspect of FIRST. The excitement at regionals is tremendous and GP makes me think of dull lectures and boring triple checked leisurely work. Maybe we should brainstorm some new trademarks for FIRST that actually convey the real experience.

What part of this has to do with dull lectures and boring triple checked leisurely work? And what is boring triple checked leisurely work anyway, oddjob from earth?

Jane

[Garret]

For me, Gracious Professionalism doesn't fit with the "sport for nerds" aspect of FIRST. The excitement at regionals is tremendous and GP makes me think of dull lectures and boring triple checked leisurely work. Maybe we should brainstorm some new trademarks for FIRST that actually convey the real experience.

What makes you think FRC is a "sport for nerds." I have never thought that and I know at least my team would never think that. On our team we varsity football and basketball players, the ASB president, chairman of VIP, and others who I would not consider nerds. FRC is the "sport fo the mind".

Also, at least for me, Gracious Professionalism (and the FIRST mission) is what makes FRC my favorite robot competition. Gracious Professionalism is, in my own opinion, the most useful thing most kids can get out of FIRST. This is because technical and engineering skills can be learned from almost any program or technical class, but the communication skills and sense of responsibility and ethics that you get out Gracious Professionalism are unique to FIRST and much harder to learn in the classroom.

The FIRST experience is not solely about robotics and engineering.

[Mr. Van]

Originally Posted by Garret

Gracious Professionalism (and the FIRST mission) is what makes FRC my favorite robot competition. Gracious Professionalism is, in my own opinion, the most useful thing most kids can get out of FIRST.

I think this gets to the heart of the matter: If Gracious Professionalism is the best thing about [IFIRST[/i], if it is central to "changing the culture", should it be limited to FIRST events and teams?

I had thought that Gracious Professionalism was something that Dr. Flowers wanted to become part of the culture of engineering specifically, and society as a whole.

Perhaps with the trademark, other events, competitions, activities and groups will be cautions about adopting Gracious Professionalism as part of their culture. It certainly prevents them from using the term in anything official without FIRST's express permission. I think this is what the original post was trying to get at.

-Mr. Van
Coach, Robodox

[Garret]

Perhaps with the trademark, other events, competitions, activities and groups will be cautions about adopting Gracious Professionalism as part of their culture. It certainly prevents them from using the term in anything official without FIRST's express permission. I think this is what the original post was trying to get at.

That's a good point. I had not looked at it like that.

However a trademark protects the usage of term "Gracious Professionalism" in respect to labeling a product or service (specifically recognizing the originating organization) not the philosophy and actual actions/state of being of gracious professionalism (that would be a patent), meaning that other groups could still adopt a similar philosophy just under a different name. Just because it is a trademark there is no reason that other groups cannot adopt this philosophy. The only thing a trademark protects is the name itself in cases in which another organization claims the term as its own, it has nothing to do with usage of the term in day to day activities.

I do not think that there is anything wrong or ironic about them putting a trademark on Gracious Professionalism or Coopertition, all this is doing is adding legitimacy and protections to FIRST. I would hope that people would see the benefit and necessary protections that intellectual property rights bring in this case, I just do not like stretching in order to find irony in or find fault with something is truly a great thing.

[Mr. Van]

I can see that the rationale for the trademark is so that someone can't take Gracious Professionalism and make it part of a corporate publicity campaign or other such absurdity. That makes sense to me.

I suppose I'm still thinking that it would be wonderful if all robotics competitions - hey, why not all competitions in general - would recognize and promote Gracious Professionalism on the part of their competitors. Of course, they can, and many do, but they're all now trying to come up with their own name for the same idea.

In any case, I think we can all agree that the idea of Gracious Professionalism needs to spread. (I wish that Gracious Professionalism was the watchword of the day and a guiding principle in the boardrooms of corporations and the offices of politicians.) However we manage to do that - trademark or not - is a good thing.

-Mr. Van
Coach, Robodox

[Chris is me]

Just because the name is trademarked doesn't mandate that FIRST not share it - they just have to regulate it (they could sell rights to use it for $1, for example)

[Alan Anderson]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

Just because the name is trademarked doesn't mandate that FIRST not share it - they just have to regulate it (they could sell rights to use it for $1, for example)

FIRST definitely doesn't want to keep all such trademarked terms (and patented processes) to itself. Indeed, Dean Kamen occasionally jokes about suing organizations for non-infringement.

[JaneYoung]

Originally Posted by Mr. Van

In any case, I think we can all agree that the idea of Gracious Professionalism needs to spread. (I wish that Gracious Professionalism was the watchword of the day and a guiding principle in the boardrooms of corporations and the offices of politicians.) However we manage to do that - trademark or not - is a good thing.

Mr. Van's posts have been making me think today. Thinking is always a good thing. This one me helped remember a post from another wise mentor, Rich Olivera. I've been thinking about incentives and what they could be in a business, political, educational, or sports environment.

I've wandered away from the trademark discussion and into incentives for practicing Gracious Professionalism. Sorry about that.

Jane

[gblake]

Originally Posted by Mr. Van

...
I suppose I'm still thinking that it would be wonderful if all robotics competitions - hey, why not all competitions in general - would recognize and promote Gracious Professionalism on the part of their competitors. Of course, they can, and many do, but they're all now trying to come up with their own name for the same idea.
...

Mr. Van
Coach, Robodox

I suggest writing a letter or sending a message to a specific person at FIRST HQ (maybe the new Pres?) and asking if they want this to happen.

If the answer is "Yes", then start convincing those other programs to use (rather than reinvent) a good "wheel".

Let us know the result.

Blake