i think we might have few enough entrants to get away with the extended
downtime between groups. not all chairs have the obsessive-compulsive
nature needed to do on-the-fly changes.
we do seem to be requiring more people at a work station, and a tendency to
put out all the workstations. that means 7 times 3 or 21 people for each
group working on course.
a rookie cant and shouldnt work by themselves, but i used to work a station
all by myself without a problem.
i might have inadvertently caused some of this when i redesigned the
worksheets, implying that three people are required at each station. i did
intend that each station have at least one experienced person.
james
OSP - Over-Simplifying Problems
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ba-autox@autox.team.net [mailto:owner-ba-autox@autox.team.net]
On Behalf Of Kevin Stevens
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2006 11:02 AM
To: Donald McKenna
Cc: ba-autox@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: SFR, new run/work format
On Jan 21, 2006, at 10:26, Donald McKenna wrote:
>
> The main objective for implementing the new format is to be able, more
> consistently, to have adequate numbers of workers for each group
> and, in
> turn, minimize/eliminate the delays caused while chairs take the
> time to
> solicit, and then wait for, volunteers to work more than one work
> assignment. Obviously as an additional objective, this change is also
> intended, by requiring fewer volunteer workers, to more equally
> spread the
> work time amongst all participants.
The latter isn't an obvious nor necessary benefit. You don't have
any more or fewer total work assignments (volunteers aside) with the
work groups divided up differently. If you have to ask for
assistance with smaller groups, it means that you have surplus
workers in the larger ones. There's no reason you can't review the
work sheets and ask for volunteers to SWITCH work groups, or to have
non-fixed work/run group assignments, rather than to have people work
twice. I'm not saying either of those are or aren't more workable -
just pointing out that your conclusion doesn't follow as the night
the day.
> As you can see, unlike either of our previous eight or six run/work
> formats,
> four of the work groups are scheduled immediately following their,
> respective, run group. Accordingly, in order to facilitate on-the-
> fly worker
> changeovers, thereby minimizing changeover times between run
> groups, all
> competitors in these four run/work groups must exit the grid area
> immediately after running, park their vehicles and quickly report
> for their
> work assignments.
Good luck with that - San Diego has groups arranged similarly, and
I've observed not only consistent and LONG downtime between groups,
but a noticeable increase in regular late-to-grid offenders, with the
resultant sand-bagging and slow-to-finish grid problems.
DEFIINITELY try to run multiple grids if you take this approach, but
I still think you're going to have problems.
The best solution I've seen to the problem is 8 run groups with a
very active event chair or designate handling work assignments, along
with open work group signup that doesn't have a zillion slots for
"Course". Working course is popular for some reason, make it limited
and exclusive, not the default assignment.
KeS
|