Crescent Valley High Team 955: Hierarchy for Decisions

Purpose

There is a lot to be said for leaving students in control of the robotics team. It makes them more invested in the outcome. And it gives them experience with making executive decisions. However, these advantages are greatly diluted when the team is not successful. That is what we have seen for several years now.

Adult direction can correct the mis-direction of the team. But only if the students listen. The current culture of the team is to ignore adult input.

Given how deep that culture is in 955, how deep their antipathy to adult input, fixing this will take more than suggestions. (We've been trying suggestions. They were ignored.)

Several of us are thinking that the team structure needs to be reworked to explicitly put mentors at the top of the decision hierarchy.

I also think the student hierarchy needs to be strengthened. Decisions need to stick, and not questioned by students who didn't happen to be in attendance when each decision was explored. Right now decisions don't stick, even when they are reasonable decisions. That is because any student can question a decision, bringing any forward progress in implementing it to a standstill.

To address these problems I think we need to go to a strong hierarchy. Decisions by sub-team leaders must stand unless there are very good reasons to change them. That means underlings can not stop work. They can question a decision, but only quietly and only directly to the leader.

Overall team captain must have veto over sub-team leaders.

Even more important, mentors must have final say. If the students are making a bad decision, we must be able to step in and correct the problem.

Currently students do not show respect for mentors. The powers we would be putting in place need to give mentors the power to correct that.

These powers must be used with discretion. It is important to maintain the enthusiasm and energy of all the students.

Ideally I would like to return power to the students at some point. That point would be when the students have internalized the appropriate way to make decisions. The right way to operate as a team. The right way to manage a project.

It may be possible to address this using the point system of rewards. That system already has the lose of points listed for insubordination. If that is not enough we can expand on our options.

There is still the possibility students will not be happy with a mentor decision. And it is also possible a mentor decision should be reviewed. For that reason I think we should allow appeal of mentor decisions to a Council Of Mentors.

Summary

• Sub-team captains should consult team members for decisions, but can make the decision as they see fit. Team members may not stop work progress while questioning a decision. They must implement the decision even if they question it.
• An exception to the above is that if there is a question of safety, anyone may stop the unsafe work.
• The overall Team captain can override the decision of the sub-team captain if this is required for overall team or robot functioning.
• Mentors can override decisions by all students.
• Decisions of mentors can be appealed to the Council Of Mentors.
• Decisions by the Council Of Mentors cannot be appealed.
• Overriding decisions must always be done carefully. If done too often, or without discretion, it is possible to kill enthusiasm.

There are many ways to succeed. But there are infinitely more ways to fail. Team 955 has in the past been exploring all of the miriad ways to fail. The universe won't last long enough to complete that exploration. Therefore students must listen to the advice of adults, people with enough experience to avoid many of the dead ends.