Average lifespan of a team

[Andrew Rudolph]

Our team has never had any engineers and a real serious money backing. In our First year we came in 6th @ regionals, then the second year 3rd @ regionals. So if you dont have any engineers its not a reason to quit.

[Jeff Waegelin]

Originally posted by Spooks180
And can't forget the engineers, those too [/b]

BAH! Who needs engineers when you've got H!

--------------------------------------------------

This message brought to you by the FEDS, reminding you it IS possible to run a team without the help of engineers

[David Kelly]

now that we're on this subject, does anyone know if the Baxter Bomb Squad will be back next year? You could defently feel a lack of their presence this past season.

[Mike Martus]

FIRST has been concerned about the life span (longevity) of teams for several years. In fact, three years ago they formed a task force of about 10 team leaders to discuss this very topic. The warning signs are there if you look.

If you look back the last few years several teams that have been chairman’s award winners and finalists have not been able to sustain the effort and some have left the competition.

Often called burnout, this is what happens when team members expend so much energy and effort to rise to the top that their personal life as well as their professional life is compromised. Choices have to be made and often it affects the FIRST team.

The problems as I see it is that many teams are built around 1 or 2 persons. If either of the people stop participating for whatever reason the team stability is compromised. Teams that are constantly bringing in new persons to revitalize the energy seem to have a better chance at longevity.

I know with our team we have a turnover rate that has been manageable to this point. Being able to get other people involved is a conscious effort by the entire team. Each year we have several new teachers and engineers to replace the ones that need a rest or have moved on to other challenges.

FIRST takes a lot of time and effort. Not just during the 6 weeks + competition but year round.

Idea? Should teams that have been chairman’s winners still compete for the award. Or should the pressure be taken off the team by having them exempted from the competition. Like the Hall of FAME status. I am sure they would continue to do great things but with less pressure. Comments.

[Matt Leese]

Originally posted by Mike Martus
FIRST has been concerned about the life span (longevity) of teams for several years. In fact, three years ago they formed a task force of about 10 team leaders to discuss this very topic. The warning signs are there if you look.

If you look back the last few years several teams that have been chairman’s award winners and finalists have not been able to sustain the effort and some have left the competition.

Often called burnout, this is what happens when team members expend so much energy and effort to rise to the top that their personal life as well as their professional life is compromised. Choices have to be made and often it affects the FIRST team.

The problems as I see it is that many teams are built around 1 or 2 persons. If either of the people stop participating for whatever reason the team stability is compromised. Teams that are constantly bringing in new persons to revitalize the energy seem to have a better chance at longevity.

I know with our team we have a turnover rate that has been manageable to this point. Being able to get other people involved is a conscious effort by the entire team. Each year we have several new teachers and engineers to replace the ones that need a rest or have moved on to other challenges.

FIRST takes a lot of time and effort. Not just during the 6 weeks + competition but year round.

Idea? Should teams that have been chairman’s winners still compete for the award. Or should the pressure be taken off the team by having them exempted from the competition. Like the Hall of FAME status. I am sure they would continue to do great things but with less pressure. Comments.

Removing the ability to win the Chairman's Award again would seem to work, except for the fact that it presumes that teams only do what they do because they want to win the Chairman's Award. Frankly, I hope that's not true. I hope they do it because it's the right thing to do. So if that's the case, not letting them win the Chairman's Award again doesn't really accomplish all that much.

I think when it comes down to it, it just requires teams planning far enough in advance to bring new people in to take over when the original people leave. I don't really think there's all that much FIRST can do to change that unless they want to dramatically alter the competition.

Matt

[Jessica Boucher]

Originally posted by Matt Leese


Removing the ability to win the Chairman's Award again would seem to work, except for the fact that it presumes that teams only do what they do because they want to win the Chairman's Award. Frankly, I hope that's not true. I hope they do it because it's the right thing to do. So if that's the case, not letting them win the Chairman's Award again doesn't really accomplish all that much.

Matt

I hope so too, but reality tells me that it is probably what you fear. I remember listening to members of one of this years finalists about what they had to do for next year to win the thing ("ok, this time we'll need 20 more FLL teams and 10 more FIRST teams by next season to compete"). I dont know, I agree with Mike, though.

[Andrew Rudolph]

I think that if you win the chairmans award they should for the next 4 years that team can't enter. The reson is all students should be able to try at the competition.

Andrew

[Jeff Waegelin]

I personally believe regulation like that is unnecessary. There should be no reason to remove a team from competition for the Chairman's Award just because they've already won it once. If a team is truly deserving of the award, they should be allowed to win it as many times as the judges deem fit. If a team wins the award one year, then does something spectacular the next, they should not be denied the recognition of the Chairman's award (or even be denied entry) because of previous success.

Jeff Waegelin

[whsrt_lilguppy]

Team politics, money, and mentorship are all definite factors that can lead to a team's extinction, especially now when sponsorship is so hard to find for many teams. But it's not like they still can't go on. If their members are dedicated enough and willing to do anything to survive and keep the team going into the future, I think they could definitely do it. For example, my team has been plagued by horrible leadership and very little funding and almost no engineers for the past two years, but all through it, our most dedicated members still come back, still help out, work hard, and never dim their spirits.