Another Debate Question - Rules, Volunteers, Divisions and Tournament Sanctioning

[neutral80]

I was determined to stay out of this and maintain my lurker status of almost a decade, but there is one issue that I consider extremely important and would like to see discussed on this forum in the context of plans for the next quad.

Almost everyone can agree that the situation at USFA is a complicated mess. Both slates have plans to fix various things and for greater transparency and accountability. This is all good. Many of the proposals are excellent. But the same organizational problems that allowed the current situation to develop continue to exist, and a change in administration won't fix the organizational flaws.

I would like to put forth a theory that most of the USFA's problems can be traced back to one of 2 basic concerns, and that correcting those problems is the key to future success.

1. USFA rules are not enforced uniformly. The result is lots of personal conflict at every level of the organization. We need only look at the process leading to the upcoming election for examples of the rules being ignored or only partially enforced, and the resulting ill will and quandary over what to do. Bad rules are not changed because certain people simply ignore them while others work hard to comply. Not surprisingly, those who comply resent those who do not. I think we need to move as quickly as possible to an organizational structure where all of the rules are codified in one place and well organized and distributed and available to all, so that anyone who makes a genuine effort to determine the applicable rules will be able to comply. Then we need to ensure that those rules are uniformly enforced for everyone. Ignorance of the rules should not excuse a failure to comply. Members of all divisions and sections would follow the same rules, and all tournaments would follow the same rules. While the level of competition might differ from one tournament to another, the rules would be the same, and they would all be enforced equally. Uniformity is particularly important for qualifiers, and it appears that there is a great disparity in the fairness of qualifiers in different parts of the country.

2. Much of the business of the organization is handled primarily by volunteers. In any organization run by volunteers, sooner or later, you get what you pay for. There are many dedicated volunteers in this sport and they have made it possible for the sport to develop to the level we have reached today. It would be impossible to overstate the debt of gratitude we owe to our volunteers. However, at some point, the organization needs to mature and realize that we cannot expect full time dedication from volunteers. You can never hold a volunteer to the same level of accountability as a paid employee. The complaints that we see almost always focus on the volunteers and practically never on the paid staff. We need a professional organization, where people are hired to perform specific tasks or fulfill specified roles, and held accountable for their performance. The paid employees may then utilize volunteers in whatever manner they deem appropriate. A small board of directors (perhaps with the portfolios being attributed to the candidates currently running for office) would oversee the professional staff. By limiting the number of volunteers who would actually have an impact on USFA policy to such a small number of directors, we would routinely see elections, campaigns by truly dedicated individuals, and platforms and proposals, just as we are seeing now.

If we relinquish our volunteer USFA positions, we also give up a certain amount of input and control over the policies of the organization. Each volunteer has a different motivation and seeks some sort of reward in one form or another. That generally takes the form of some sort of policy influence. Each volunteer believes that the very fact that they volunteer entitles them to set USFA policy in some manner. The problem of failure to apply rules evenly and volunteers believing that the fact that they volunteer authorizes them to set policies is magnified many times over at the sectional and divisional level. I would argue that there is plenty of room for volunteers in this sport at the club level, and in the organization of tournaments, publicity, etc., but that the administration of the sport itself, the business of the USFA, needs to be handled by professionals. I would argue that most of the national committees and the division and section officers could be eliminated. Those committees and individuals who fill an actual need of the organization would be retained by the professional staff in a voluntary capacity, but the organizational mandate for these positions could be eliminated.

I would propose that one paid employee of the USFA could replace all of the division officers, and actually save the national office time in the long run, by eliminating the need to deal with all of the local politics. (In fact, with the technology changes that are being proposed, it might be that this function could be absorbed by current staff.) That one employee could be responsible for sanctioning local tournaments by establishing a uniform national procedure for this purpose, and requiring the hiring of a USFA representative to attend the tournament and ensure compliance with USFA rules. This would eliminate most of the bickering at the local level and standardize the procedures for tournaments. We would no longer have safety rules and other USFA tournament requirements routinely waived by local division officers as not necessary or applicable in their jurisdiction. We would no longer have "interpretations" of USFA rules by local individuals that nullify many of the USFA rules. The playing field would be leveled for all those fencers desperately pursuing ratings in local events. A free market system would operate, allowing anyone who wanted to host a tournament and make money from that event to do so, whether they were currently in control of division politics or not, so long as they complied with all USFA rules and hired an independent certified person to oversee the bout committee and ensure compliance with those rules. The USFA employee would need to establish the requirements and designate the individuals qualified to serve as the USFA representative to attend the tournament and ensure compliance with USFA rules. In the beginning, that could be any referee rated 5 or better from outside of the host division or section, or whatever criteria the USFA employee thought would ensure compliance with USFA rules. All of the volunteers who currently host tournaments could continue to do so simply by complying with USFA rules. All of our favorite tournaments could continue to exist, whether they are hosted as volunteer events or benefits for a particular cause or as for profit ventures.

Over time, we might even begin to see entrepreneurial groups capable of hosting outstanding events set up an extensive circuit of tournaments all over the country, at various levels of competition. They would comply with all USFA rules, offer a high quality standardized tournament as a product, and fill a demand for quality local and regional tournaments. The market would determine the rate to be paid for quality referees, the minimum age and qualification level of those referees, the quality of the venue, the events to be offered, the event fees, etc. Again, this might be a situation where a well organized individual operating for profit could do a much better job of putting together a tournament circuit than our current system of volunteer division officers. Such a for profit tournament circuit can never develop under the current structure of division sanctioning of tournaments.

[T]

Originally Posted by neutral80

I would like to put forth a theory that most of the USFA's problems can be traced back to one of 2 basic concerns, and that correcting those problems is the key to future success.

1. USFA rules are not enforced uniformly. The result is lots of personal conflict at every level of the organization. {snip...} I think we need to move as quickly as possible to an organizational structure where all of the rules are codified in one place and well organized and distributed and available to all, so that anyone who makes a genuine effort to determine the applicable rules will be able to comply. Then we need to ensure that those rules are uniformly enforced for everyone.

I am glad that you decided to come out of your lurker closet and post such an insightful thread. Your first point is directly related and caused by your second comment.

2. Much of the business of the organization is handled primarily by volunteers. In any organization run by volunteers, sooner or later, you get what you pay for. There are many dedicated volunteers in this sport and they have made it possible for the sport to develop to the level we have reached today. It would be impossible to overstate the debt of gratitude we owe to our volunteers. However, at some point, the organization needs to mature and realize that we cannot expect full time dedication from volunteers. You can never hold a volunteer to the same level of accountability as a paid employee. The complaints that we see almost always focus on the volunteers and practically never on the paid staff. We need a professional organization, where people are hired to perform specific tasks or fulfill specified roles, and held accountable for their performance. The paid employees may then utilize volunteers in whatever manner they deem appropriate.

USFencersforchange have been advocating this from the beginning. I agree completely with your sentiments about the contributions that our volunteers have and will continue to have on our association. However, the USFA needs to shift its operational paradigm from a volunteer-driven organization to a professionally-driven organization. This is discussed in some detail on our website under "Organization Re-structuring". In Kalle Week's interview, one of her primary concerns is developing a volunteer database. While this is a great project, it doesn't address the fundamental structural problems the USFA now faces... that is, the reliance on volunteers to conduct the 'business' of the association.

Each volunteer believes that the very fact that they volunteer entitles them to set USFA policy in some manner. The problem of failure to apply rules evenly and volunteers believing that the fact that they volunteer authorizes them to set policies is magnified many times over at the sectional and divisional level.

And more than setting policy, some (not all and probably not many) volunteers feel they are entitled to spend money that is not there's and to take funded trips that serve no real purpose to the sport or the assocation. By not having an accountability of who is getting trips to where and spending money on what, as USFA members, we have no idea where all that money went which resulted in our deficit. If we had a professional CFO (or whatever you want to call that function) we would know who was to blame and the ED could take action (or the President could if the ED was to blame).

I would argue that there is plenty of room for volunteers in this sport at the club level, and in the organization of tournaments, publicity, etc., but that the administration of the sport itself, the business of the USFA, needs to be handled by professionals. I would argue that most of the national committees and the division and section officers could be eliminated. Those committees and individuals who fill an actual need of the organization would be retained by the professional staff in a voluntary capacity, but the organizational mandate for these positions could be eliminated.

Common sense, organizational structural theory material. Unfortunately, several people who have posted to this discussion board recently will think that you are crazy. On the contrary, however, your ideas are insightful and the direction where we must head if we want the organization to grow (or grow-up). And this goes for your ideas about eliminating divisional and local politics through a national office that coordinates tournament sanctions, with the aim to level the playing field for everyone, etc.

Can all of these structural changes take place overnight? No. And they probably won't be able to be accomplished in 4 years either. But we can take the necessary steps to start the process rolling.

[CadetVet]

Originally Posted by neutral80

You can never hold a volunteer to the same level of accountability as a paid employee. The complaints that we see almost always focus on the volunteers and practically never on the paid staff. We need a professional organization, where people are hired to perform specific tasks or fulfill specified roles, and held accountable for their performance. The paid employees may then utilize volunteers in whatever manner they deem appropriate. A small board of directors (perhaps with the portfolios being attributed to the candidates currently running for office) would oversee the professional staff. By limiting the number of volunteers who would actually have an impact on USFA policy to such a small number of directors, we would routinely see elections, campaigns by truly dedicated individuals, and platforms and proposals, just as we are seeing now.

Although I would have expected myself to agree with this statement, I find that I strongly disagree on several counts. First, what we (and many organizations do) is use volunteers until they are "smoked down to the filter." True, people get good at certain tasks, but we don't really do a good job of bringing in - and trusting people - through a development pipeline. The good folks get burned out, but there aren't people who are developed to step in their place. The "top" of the volunteer pyramid is entrenched - but this wouldn't change simply because they get a paycheck - most corporations are remarkably inefficient, too.

Second, people of all skill levels fall in love with the sport. When they find out that they are mediocre fencers - many look for other avenues to stay involved (I'm a case in point). I'm not going to give up my paying job for a $25/hour USFA job... put simply, the USFA couldn't pay enough for the amount of work it requires.

Third, although I hate slippery-slope arguments, I have to ask - why should we "professionalize" the administration - unless we "professionalize" the bout committee and referee cadres? After all, the have a direct effect on the competitors and the competitions - and arguably work harder than most anyone else at our large events.

Far as I can tell, the current financial conundrum was, in part, caused by paid employees. Paying someone doesn't make them better at the task.

Ultimately, I do think that we can manage better - whether we're using mercenaries or an all-volunteer army. We shouldn't let our volunteers burn out like we do. We should do a better job of rotating people in - even if that means occasional quality issues.

[gorgie101]

Originally Posted by CadetVet

Although I would have expected myself to agree with this statement, I find that I strongly disagree on several counts. First, what we (and many organizations do) is use volunteers until they are "smoked down to the filter." True, people get good at certain tasks, but we don't really do a good job of bringing in - and trusting people - through a development pipeline. The good folks get burned out, but there aren't people who are developed to step in their place. The "top" of the volunteer pyramid is entrenched - but this wouldn't change simply because they get a paycheck - most corporations are remarkably inefficient, too.

Second, people of all skill levels fall in love with the sport. When they find out that they are mediocre fencers - many look for other avenues to stay involved (I'm a case in point). I'm not going to give up my paying job for a $25/hour USFA job... put simply, the USFA couldn't pay enough for the amount of work it requires.

Third, although I hate slippery-slope arguments, I have to ask - why should we "professionalize" the administration - unless we "professionalize" the bout committee and referee cadres? After all, the have a direct effect on the competitors and the competitions - and arguably work harder than most anyone else at our large events.

Far as I can tell, the current financial conundrum was, in part, caused by paid employees. Paying someone doesn't make them better at the task.

Ultimately, I do think that we can manage better - whether we're using mercenaries or an all-volunteer army. We shouldn't let our volunteers burn out like we do. We should do a better job of rotating people in - even if that means occasional quality issues.

Quoted for Truth. The bold is to highlight something that I totally agree on.

Thanks for the post.

[MyrddinsPrecint]

Originally Posted by neutral80

I would propose that one paid employee of the USFA could replace all of the division officers, and actually save the national office time in the long run, by eliminating the need to deal with all of the local politics. (In fact, with the technology changes that are being proposed, it might be that this function could be absorbed by current staff.) That one employee could be responsible for sanctioning local tournaments by establishing a uniform national procedure for this purpose, and requiring the hiring of a USFA representative to attend the tournament and ensure compliance with USFA rules.

What division are you a member of? Do you go to division meetings? I know divisions are run very differently in different areas of the country, but it seems to me that this is the smallest part of what division officers do in New England.................

[Schiavona]

Originally Posted by neutral80

I would propose that one paid employee of the USFA could replace all of the division officers, and actually save the national office time in the long run, by eliminating the need to deal with all of the local politics. (In fact, with the technology changes that are being proposed, it might be that this function could be absorbed by current staff.) That one employee could be responsible for sanctioning local tournaments by establishing a uniform national procedure for this purpose, and requiring the hiring of a USFA representative to attend the tournament and ensure compliance with USFA rules. This would eliminate most of the bickering at the local level and standardize the procedures for tournaments. We would no longer have safety rules and other USFA tournament requirements routinely waived by local division officers as not necessary or applicable in their jurisdiction. We would no longer have "interpretations" of USFA rules by local individuals that nullify many of the USFA rules. The playing field would be leveled for all those fencers desperately pursuing ratings in local events. A free market system would operate, allowing anyone who wanted to host a tournament and make money from that event to do so, whether they were currently in control of division politics or not, so long as they complied with all USFA rules and hired an independent certified person to oversee the bout committee and ensure compliance with those rules. The USFA employee would need to establish the requirements and designate the individuals qualified to serve as the USFA representative to attend the tournament and ensure compliance with USFA rules. In the beginning, that could be any referee rated 5 or better from outside of the host division or section, or whatever criteria the USFA employee thought would ensure compliance with USFA rules. All of the volunteers who currently host tournaments could continue to do so simply by complying with USFA rules. All of our favorite tournaments could continue to exist, whether they are hosted as volunteer events or benefits for a particular cause or as for profit ventures.

Your ideas are very interesting and I quite agree with the notion of sanctioning tournaments being removed from the division level.

BUT, you are marginalizing many areas of the country with the USFA employee idea. With your idea, the fencers in Hawaii and Alaska are to pay for flying some one to watch over their 10-20 fencer tournaments? Or if the USFA rep is picked from the local pool of fencing people how do you end the same problems that exsist now? Or do you believe that it's all right to discard these weaker fencing areas? I'm not trying to rain on your parade, I'm just trying to show that "one size doesn't fit all"

[Schiavona]

Originally Posted by MyrddinsPrecint

What division are you a member of? Do you go to division meetings? I know divisions are run very differently in different areas of the country, but it seems to me that this is the smallest part of what division officers do in New England.................

MP, doesn't the New England division run ALL the USFA tournaments in the Division?

I'm not sure it's like that anywhere else.

[telkanuru]

Originally Posted by Schiavona

MP, doesn't the New England division run ALL the USFA tournaments in the Division?

I'm not sure it's like that anywhere else.

If you mean, do we have a set tournament team that travels to each club and runs their tournaments, no.

We do provide score-and-time machines and BC supples to the club for the running of the tournament.The division also pays for referees, depending on event, but the hiring of is the responsibility of the host.

[MyrddinsPrecint]

Originally Posted by Schiavona

MP, doesn't the New England division run ALL the USFA tournaments in the Division?

I'm not sure it's like that anywhere else.

NE Division officers run tournaments, fix gear, drive gear all over the place (sometimes even to collegiate events rather than Division events!), help other clubs plan events, help other clubs hire refs... there's the newsletter, and Pomme de Terre...........

Not all of these things are mandatory. The New England division would certainly be fine if they never again helped out a college team. They would probably even be fine if they never again helped a far away poorly organized club actually hire enough refs for the ill-advised tournament.

Most of the better clubs in the area have enough electric strips so that even without the division equipment, we could fill a season with events. Hell, there's even enough clubs with score and time slowly making up the larger percentage of total boxes that that soon won't be a huge issue either.

But a person living in Colorado won't know which refs are available for that high school meet you're trying to host while the other club is holding a Y-10 event, won't be able to put good directions into the newsletter to your oddly located tournament, and won't be able to answer the phone when people get lost and call the venue.

Or help run Pomme.


As much as being in the New England Division is herding cats, I'll still take them.

[epeemike81]

Originally Posted by MyrddinsPrecint

there's the newsletter

no there's not. we discontinued the newsletter last year. there's the website.

-m

[MyrddinsPrecint]

Originally Posted by epeemike81

no there's not. we discontinued the newsletter last year. there's the website.

-m

I consider the email newsletter a newsletter......

But it is significantly less work than a mailing.

Although there are occasionally things mailed by the division, or at least mailed TO the division.

[CadetVet]

I was reading an article on the web about a fencer in Rhode Island - and one of the things discussed was the expense (link here). Nothing special about the article, itself - it's one of the many articles that we all need to get in our local papers. However, while reading it, an idea sprung up (and didn't die of loneliness).

Most NAC's have a boatload of potential volunteers in attendance - parents. All we need is a way to organize them and compensate them (I know, compensation shouldn't be necessary for a volunteer, but us referees certainly cherish our honorarium).

These are different than the "professional" volunteers that the USFA is looking for to deal with more sophisticated tasks.

Here's what I suggest. We find a group of tasks that need a collective effort - be it venue-related or USFA related. We put a booth up by Christine, et al, at check-in - with a list of tasks, etc., for the day. We let them use the referee break room (which is empty most of the day) for this effort - if appropriate. First come, first serve. Compensation is a certificate good for a future NAC entry fee (expiring at Nationals that year, with Nationals volunteers compensated with entry fees for the next season).

Sure, it will take a little management and task rearranging, but if we can figure out a way to enlist and manage this ready group of low-cost labor (for those of us that are parents, we know how excruciatingly long and boring fencing days can be), we may accomplish several goals: 1) getting stuff done cheap, 2) getting folks more personally (rather than financially) invested in the sport, 3) helping parents cope with sitting there all day watching Junior struggle through hours of tedium, and 4) building more esprit de corps amongst our parent community.

Anyhow, just a thought.

[epeemike81]

Originally Posted by CadetVet

I was reading an article on the web about a fencer in Rhode Island - and one of the things discussed was the expense (link here). Nothing special about the article, itself - it's one of the many articles that we all need to get in our local papers. However, while reading it, an idea sprung up (and didn't die of loneliness).

Most NAC's have a boatload of potential volunteers in attendance - parents. All we need is a way to organize them and compensate them (I know, compensation shouldn't be necessary for a volunteer, but us referees certainly cherish our honorarium).

Perhaps a database of some kind to track potential volunteers and their skill sets...

I do believe one of the slates has suggested this.

-m

[teacup]

Christine Simmons is requesting volunteers on the Summer Nationals information page. I wonder how many people have responded.

Personally, I tried to volunteer to help with bout committee at NAC's and was told if I couldn't be there for the whole time, the tournament committee wasn't interested.

Now maybe there was something wrong with me personally and they didn't want my help or maybe there is nothing that could be done for only one or two days, but no other options for volunteering were suggested.

[KD5MDK]

Were you volunteering to help on the table or as a runner type? Generally, working on the table is among trained volunteer activities, and Summer Nationals is so hectic that it's not available to trainees as I understand.