Being a 2nd year team we are still working out the bugs. The main problem we are having is that except for a few ppl the rest of our team is not following direction given to them by the “team leaders.” i was wondering what type of system of “power” other teams have came up with to “govern” their team. (mentors aside). Is it better to make it known who the captains or, or something else plz help!
Well, besides mntors, we have a student team leader. He is not assigned to a particular sub group.
Below that, we have a Manipulator team leader for the arm, manipulator team leader for the end effector (new adition), programming leader, electronics leader, CAD leader, and drive train leader.
Now keep in mind, there are only like 2 to 3 people on each team besides teh team leader and some people do multiple things.
If you need any hlp, just PM me and let me know.
Our team is set up as such:
Mentors are the top of the pyramid
|
The President answers to the mentors
|
[LEFT]The VPs of Robotics, Support Services, Manufacturing answer to the President [/LEFT]
|
In the subgroups are the team members who answer to the leaders of the Sub-Groups
|
The sub groups are incharge of smaller tasks such as mechanism design, student recruiting, field construction, etc.
No one is allowed to go straight to the mentors. All questions, comments, and concerns must come thru me which i then pass on to them to relieve the stress of 40 kids asking questins all the time. As for the problem of the team members not listening we have a grade riding on how well we perform, i do not know if your robotics team is a class but this policy may help if you are.
Best of luck from Team 932. 
If you’re trying to esablish a chain of command I sugest our nice ELS system (efficient leadership system). We had the same problem last year. We had way to many people who wanted to do one thing, and when we told them to switch around a little they would just slack off until it was their turn again. So we developed the ELS. The ELS establishes leaders based upon the aspects of FIRST. We call these the FIRST class leaders (no pun intended).We have two build captains (maybe three soon). We have a marketing and chairmens captain, we have a programming leader, and we have a project manager to keep them organized. The next in command are what is called the secondary leadership force. These are the people who have found their position on their team and have proved themselves worthy in this field. They report to the FIRST class leaders.Then below them you have the “aspiriations of the future” these are the people who just would like to do a little of everything. Granted they don’t have positions of leadership but most of them are happy with where they are. They move from station to station working on different things every day,
My suggestions to you is to put up something along the lines of a calander. When should so and so be done. If they start to goof off just point to the calender. I also find that having lots of leaders helps the entire team as a whole. The more strong points you have the more stable a structure.
Our team has the mentors, myself (Student Team captain) and another senior pretty much in charge of the students.
We technically only have one mentor with authority, and one student, but the other student mentioned and all mentors are pretty much obeyed.
I know your problem though; Sometimes it is hard to get newer, and especially younger, students to work at something. I find myself having to constantly assign jobs and communicate among groups. Combined with the work I do communicating with our Northrop Grumman support, I have become more of a project manager.
//end off topic
I find if you give praise for a good job, or at least an effort, you will see a better morale and will in the students. All of my rookies want to do well, and this can be used as a motivator. Also, NEVER, EVER, chastise for poor work unless it was due to lack of effort; if they can’t solve or figure something out, don’t sigh or show any sign of dissaproval, find some way or someone to help them understand. It has been quite an experience learning, but I can see myself maturing mirrored with better results from the students in general.
My team is trying out a new sort of leadership this year. Previously, there has been limited student leadership, which led to some conflict two years ago. Now, in response to that, a well qualified student from each of the build teams has been invited into the leadership field with the mentors, attending additional meetings about management and overall running of the team.
There is no set student-president, just five student leaders (mechanical, electrical, programming, strategy, and team-spirit/advertising) who have close contact with the inner workings of the team, but still work as an equal part of their build teams. These ambassadors keep the high up decisions tied to the student’s general desires, while not opening up too much opportunity for elitism or envy from the other student build-team members.
These student leaders were basically just picked by the mentors over time as showing initiative, or leadership within any build team. I was selected as the Electrical leader for my team without any real initiation, I simply started making suggestions and stepping forward, and I ended up invited to the meetings of mentors over the summer. Additionally, we haven’t set regulations on who can be a “student leader” so anyone who really steps up to the FIRST challenge can end up a leader.
holy I’m having the very same problem lol. Our system is set up with team leaders for each thing and two co-leaders (myself being one). only it doesnt seem to work well, because everyone wants to do there own thing lol… It’s dishearting at sometimes… I don’t want it to fall behind last we did last time, and I dont want to be stepping on peoples toes ethier… its furstrating
Currently on the team there is about 33 students, 2 advisors, various mentors, and all of the parents. Our team is structured like a corporation, allowing for maximum organization within the team. When you view the structure of a corporation you think of CEO’s, Officers, Departments, and more, which is exactly what we decided to use.
We have the CEO’s of the corporation being the two advisors, followed by the three departments which include Animation, Manufacturing, and PR/Marketing. Under those specific areas are the main jobs of the department. For example, below Manufacturing there is the Construction, Programming, and Design of the Robot. Under PR/Marketing (Communications) we have Public Relations, Marketing, Sponsorship, Fundraising, Website, Chairman’s Award, and the Newsletter. Seeded off of Animation is Sound, Modeling, Texturing, etc. When joining the team, members are placed in the department that best reflects their interests and future goals. Each of these departments has a student representative – which may be one of the team officer’s - President (Chairman), Vice President (Co-Chairman), Secretary, and Treasurer.
The Officers function as team leaders and are elected through a basic voting process (nomination/paper ballet). The officers are given tasks based off of there role (ex. Treasurer handles financial data, does Business Plan, etc.) and are responsible for keeping members on task. Although, some may think that the President is a higher rank than VP, or the other positions, Cybersonics maintains equal managerial responsibility and decision-making.
However, what differs us from other teams is that the departments are 100% student run - advisors/mentors/parents assist but do not complete any given project. We also require total student participation.
Click here to view our team structure
I hope this helps - contact me with any further questions.