Event Organization

[MNbiker]

The Chicago Region is hosting a Solo2 event at the Neon factory in Belvidere, IL (SW of Chicago) on Saturday, July 19th. I'll be going, and have a hotel booked the night before in Rockford, just a few miles up the road. Anyone going over to the Milwaukee event on Sunday is welcome to crash in my room & catch 2 events, instead of just one.

Last time I checked, there were only a few open spots left for the event, so you'll need to pre-register soon!

Here's the event flyer:
http://www.scca-chicago.com/solo/2003/images/event4_flyer.pdf

Register here (new users need to sign up and select a number):
http://register.scca-chicago.com/

-Steve Garnjobst

[Jon Kotek]

I would go but since I am going to the 20th gig and my wife would kill me if I took an entire weekend to autocross.

[MNbiker]

You guys missed an excellent event! The facilities were excellent, the drivers were friendly, and it was valuable to watch some top national-level drivers. Here are a few random thoughts:

-The course was an out & back layout on a lot about the size of two Midways set end-to-end. It was about a 40 second course (but a fast 40 seconds!). The course was really easy to follow. I spent the whole day refining lines, versus trying to figure out where the course went.

-It was a 5 hour drive from my house to the hotel were I stayed Friday night. The easy 5 minute drive to the event Saturday morning made things pretty relaxed.

-The event was 100% pre-registered/pre-paid, with a 150 driver limit. Registration took maybe 1 minute, with the line never longer than 1 or 2 people.

-The Chicago Region is really well organized, and is militant about course work. The hard work really paid off - I was done with 6 runs by 2 PM.

-These guys were more careful with cone counting than any event I've been to. They had radios at every station, and a designated station worker, whose only job was to radio in cones/DNF's. In addition, each station had a tally sheet to record all cones/DNF's. After each run for a heat (4 heats total), a guy in a golf cart drove the course and picked up the tally sheets to use for scoring audit. The whole process took maybe 2 minutes, so they must have been auditing during the next run.

-We had 4-5 workers at each station, so you didn't have to work very hard.

-Having lots of space for paddock & grid really helps! They had enough grid space that you could leave your car in grid all day - along with air tank, food, etc. They had workers at grid, pre-stage and stage directing cars. There were never more than 2 cars lined up at any point, and the event flowed really well.

-There were TWELVE! STX cars at the event. Pretty cool change from not even having the class at MAC events. I ended up in 4th place, only .5 out of first, which I was fairly happy with. I could easily have been in first with one mistake-free run.

-Watching Tracy Ramsey and about 6 other MR2 Spyders in action now has me lusting after one of those cars big time. It's amazing how well the Spyders handle for a stock car. (BTW - Tracy is a REALLY good driver!)

-The ESP & FS cars were a hoot to watch (unless you were a course worker, that is!). Those beasts were big, loud & all over the course - brought back memories of my youth...

-Steve

[Drew]

Steve,

Thanks for your description of the Belvidere event. Sounds like I should have tried to make that one too.

In particular, I was glad to see your description of the Chicago Region event procedures that you observed. As you can probably see in my article in the June Right Line about a Miliwaukee Region event, there are a number of similarities in the way these clubs control their events and leave as little as possible to chance or luck. The results are consistently good events that are actually more fun than events where things are less organized.

The more we look at how other events are conducted, the more we can learn. A fresh look at MAC event procedures, with some committment of those ideas to paper, with the expectation that those procedures are going to be followed from event to event, would probably be a good thing.

Some improvements have been made recently to MAC event procedures. However, just days before MOWOG 4, there were a number of postings (by those in charge of the upcoming event) suggesting a variety of changes to the procedures. IMO, any club that has that much lack of direction and discipline needs to take an honest look at itself and what's going on within the club.

Drew Baumbach

[Jon Kotek]

Not to hijack this thread, but just like when your troubleshooting a car or an electrical problem you cannot make tons of changes all at once, it will never work. I think there is some good communication going on that will slowly make our club better.

Jon

[Drew]

Originally posted by Jon Kotek


Not to hijack this thread, but just like when your troubleshooting a car or an electrical problem you cannot make tons of changes all at once, it will never work. I think there is some good communication going on that will slowly make our club better.

Jon

Jon, you make an entirely valid point about the danger of trying to make too many changes at once. And I agree with your second sentence up to a point. My concern is that the way we're dealing with our problems doesn't seem to be getting us very far. MAC is struggling with some of the same procedural problems it had when I started in 1999. Instead of a serious, concerted effort to put some solid procedures into effect, we carry on some conversation on this message board, and then ALMOST expect the EM for the next event to put together a new set of procedures that we hope will work. The club might slowly get better with such a laid back approach, but I don't think many of us will still be autocrossing by that time.

In case no one has noticed, attendance at MAC events is dwindling at a time when we're pretty much the only game in town as far as autocrossing is concerned. BMW is no longer holding open events. LOL no longer has regular autocross events in Minnesota. Nordstern has one scheduled for St. Cloud. COM only has NCCC events in St. Cloud. All of these clubs used to have several events per season in addition to MAC events. And all the clubs had from around 50 to 140 entries per event. Of course, that was back when everyone was using DCTC. And the lack of a big site is the primary reason the other clubs aren't having local autocrosses. Likewise, the lack of a big site is probably a factor in part of the decrease in interest in MAC events.

But is that any reason not to do better with whatever we have? Someday MAC may have a great site again. If interest in autocrossing in the Twin City area is dying out and there are small turnouts, will we be able to afford what a large site might cost? Or, on the other hand, suppose we're lucky enough to eventually obtain a large site, and we get large turnouts. Could we handle 2 or 3 times as many entries with the way our events are being run now?

Milwaukee had 187 entries at their event last Sunday, and everyone got 6 runs without too much sweat. That's because they go into their events knowing what they're going to do, and they stick to the plan. And most people that have been there before have seen it work before, and they get on board with the program to make the event work.

Like I said, we need to look at what other clubs are doing successfully, and sit down come up with a real plan of our own.

Drew Baumbach

[Dave Keillor]

Drew,

In addition to small sites, the lack of good organization at MAC events is likely another contributing factor to dwindling attendance. It can get frustrating.

Dave Keillor

[Drew]

Originally posted by Dave Keillor


Drew,

In addition to small sites, the lack of good organization at MAC events is likely another contributing factor to dwindling attendance. It can get frustrating.

Dave Keillor

Thanks Dave. That really was what I was getting at. But as I look back at my post, I should have been more explicit about it.

Good organization is really the key to more fun events, no matter what size of site we have available to us.

Drew Baumbach

[weidnerpaul]

Dave,
As far as your comment

"In addition to small sites, the lack of good organization at MAC events is likely another contributing factor to dwindling attendance. It can get frustrating.

Two steps forward, one step back...

The last two events we've signed up all workers when collecting $$$, the event has run smooth and on time thru the drivers meeting, which was rarely true in the past...
I didn't stay past registration at MOWOG3(fathers day) but from what I heard they did 3 sets of 2 runs and were done by 3:30, successful by any standards.

Mowog 4 ran late due to a long launch time (course design with a repeating section) and the changeovers took a little longer, however without the AM organization we would have definitly had less runs.

If we can take what we've learned in the past two events and apply them for the rest of the season including changes for what didn't work we can only get better.

IMHO we have turned the corner to running the events smoother with the worker signup and policing, at least we're doing something, making changes rather than just wishing for faster turnovers etc like we did in the past.

My gut feeling is we should go with two sets of three runs, I believe Patrick W. alluded to the fact that they do this and it works well, this would cut the number of turnovers down from 8 to 5 (assuming three run groups) and if we figure at least 10 minutes for a turnover we would save 30-45 minutes. This would be the next area to save some time.

My ramblings for one night...

Paul

[DCM]

Say Josh,are you reading this?

What was the attendance for Mowog IV?

Are our bills paid?

Do we have enough cash on hand to continue to run MAC events?

Is this the end of MAC?

I have heard it said that MAC is the premier club in this area. Now stop complaining!

Patience everyone.

Dwight [I don't take this personally] da prez

[Dave Keillor]

I'm not complaining, just offering an observation. I've attended zero MAC events this year because of schedule conflicts, so my observations are based on last year. On balance, last year's events were less well organized than in previous years. Drew makes a good point in saying that lack of good organization will bite us when/if participation increases as the result of a bigger site.

I read most of the posts as offering constructive criticism and/or suggestions. I know of at least one person (not me) who no longer participates because of the frustrations of late starts, long chang-overs, timing snafus, etc. Are there others? I've attended large events elsewhere that went like clockwork so I know it can be done. Maybe it's already being done this year at MAC. Hopefully I'll be able to participate in the next event and find out.

Dave Keillor

[Drew]

Originally posted by DCM


Say Josh,are you reading this?

What was the attendance for Mowog IV?

Are our bills paid?

Do we have enough cash on hand to continue to run MAC events?

Is this the end of MAC?

I have heard it said that MAC is the premier club in this area. Now stop complaining!

Patience everyone.

Dwight [I don't take this personally] da prez


A post in another thread notes that there were 62 entries at MOWOG 4. And my point was that 62 entires is a far cry from the number we used to have show up at our events. And the 62 entries at MOWOG 4 came on the heels of MOWOG 3, which a number of the people in charge of running that event described as having been very successful. Plus, there are no longer any other autocross opportunities within the Twin Cities besides MAC events. Why aren't we getting all those people who no longer have a place to autocross?

Our bills are paid and we have enough cash to run events. I can tell you, though, that Midway is a bargin compared to other existing and prospective sites. It costs us about 50% more than the cost of Midway if we want to stay until 5PM at St. Cloud. Another prospective site has a higher rental, a request for a substantial damage deposit, and the cost of providing portable toilets. Every other prospective site that quoted a price in the last three years (except for HTC) was substantially higher. (Raceway, Elko, Valleyfair)

I'm not suggesting that this is the end of MAC, nor am I making a judgment as to how MAC ranks among clubs in our area. However, right now, if MAC is the premier club in this area, it's because it's the only club that's been able to obtain and retain a site in the Twin Cities.

I don't think there have been any other posts in this thread that could be considered complaints besides mine. And my posts haven't been intended to be complaints. I am trying to point out that it's time to take an honest look at ourselves as a club, and the way we're supposedly going about improving our events. We can be patient to the point of the motorsports "community" losing interest in our activity. When we reach that point, it's time to make a more concerted effort to address the situation.

Drew Baumbach

[weidnerpaul]

Another thought on the low participation at MOWOG 3 & 4

MOWOG 3 is Fathers day, I know I didn't run because of it, that may be a reason for the lower turnout then.

As for MOWOG 4 --- remember the AM was rainy, and the course didn't dry out until the first run group was almost done. I have 7 pre-registered forms that were never used as they didn't come --- I'm suggesting that part of the lower turnout was weather related, and MOWOG 5 being at St Cloud will not be a great test of turnout either.
I say we stay the course with the new registration, worker signup/accountability and analyze it at year end after we get MOWOG 6,7 and 8 in(MOWOG 8 is 90% sure at the Allright parking lot thanks to Chucks hard work).
As a club we can go forward, or slide back, I believe we are going forward---slowly, but yes, forward.

Paul

[MNbiker]

MAC Board,

I think the club has made significant improvements in event management this year. However, this information MUST be documented, if we hope to continue improving, or even maintain our current level of event management. Is someone willing to volunteer to create and maintain an Event Manager's Handbook that can be posted on the website and used for future events? We REALLY need to capture the best practices and processes from events, so they can be replicated.

-Steve

[Jerry Schro]

The Event Masters Handbook did exist.

I used it at Henepin Tech (I think) two years ago when I tried event master for the first time. It was a ring binder EM's guide with an agenda for the drivers meeting and check lists for worker sign up. I thinks it also had a copy of the rules in it. It was very useful and I wish it had been available at MOWOG II. Maybe its buried in the trailer or in some past EM's trunk.

I think the best minds of MAC Autocross should come together at the next meeting, compile the EM/Autocross procedure manual and act on the suggestion that it be published on the website. Then it won't be lost, and will be avilable for all to see and use.

Jerry Schroeder

[Drew]

I'm in full agreement with what both Steve and Jerry said in their posts above. I believe certain improvements have been made, but we haven't really committed to those changes, as there is still discussion going on about registration procedures and run group structure. Further, we need clearer lines of authority and responsibility, rather than "whoever happens to be EM is in charge for the day."

I think that we need to look at more than just things like what steps do we tell people to follow in registration. We may need to examine the whole organization structure of our events. Note I didn't say "change" the whole organizational structure. But we do need to look at it. Some of us have been managing to get out to some farther out events this season. Steve especially is seeing a wide range of operations. Observations at these events can give us a lot of first hand knowledge about what works and what doesn't.

Jerry's comment about an existing EM handbook is important. If that handbook can be located, we should use it as a starting point. We may find that MAC had some procedures that were used in the past that have fallen by the wayside, and that we should consider using again. Whatever we come up with, it should be accessible on our website, as Jerry said. When more people understand what the club is doing when it puts on an event, there will be more cooperation. And that will translate into a smoother running event.

Drew Baumbach

[Jeremy Engel]

Ok, so I rarely read this section of the message board, but Drew if you would actually show up for once you would see drastic changes. Darryl and I completely started over with the organization of Mowog 3, even with glitches we ran an almost flawless event with over an hour of fun runs. We had (if memory serves) 92 entrants, which if you compare numbers is up from even last year. We haven’t had much over 100 since the year after we lost DCTC. For Mowog 4 there was no discussion of changing anything. Rex was the EM and Darryl and I were there to keep what we started going…if there was discussion it wasn’t from the people running that part of the event. Our only delay was having to install a new printer between run groups and the fact we had to wait over 45 seconds between launches. Worker turnover was excellent at both events, actually the workers for the first time I can remember beat the timing trailer as far as readiness.

As far as an old EM manual, its worthless… Things are nowhere near what they used to be and if you have to show up to an event find the manual and then read how to be and EM, you don’t belong there. What we need is a reference where we can keep a checklist for the day so that it doesn’t need to be brought and or found every time.

The only thing we need to know from our past will not be found in a handbook. The one thing that worked for us in the past was the fact that there where nearly 15 people running the events, not just the EM. Right now everyone thinks the EM runs everything. This is the most untrue in thinking. The EM’s only responsibility is to get there earlier and setup the course and run the drivers meeting. In the past we had around 5 people to run the timing and scoring and most of them never even stepped foot in a car to drive all day.

One other thing that helped was the fact that we used to setup the course the night before. Can you imagine the hours saved in the morning if the course was setup when you got there. We also need to work on getting everyone that is so dearly needed in the morning to get there at 7:00. We can’t afford to get our core people there and 8:00 with everyone else.

I don’t want to rip on anyone here, but if you want a more organized club, realize we have completely changed the way things are run, show up early, and better yet step up to the plate and be there when we unlock the trailer at 7:00 and grab a stack of cones or a pile of waivers and get out there and organize.

Yes I am pissed and yes this probably got harsh, I am tired of most people in this club pointing fingers that things need to be done. I bet that if we took 10 random people and put them in a circle around a stack of cones, 9 out of ten of then would point and say someone should setup a course and get things organized. And then complain when the one to pick up the stack could setup the course and run the event by themselves.

I would also like to praise all of those who do show up at 7:00, get dirty, sweaty and then go home last with little praise every single event. My hats off to you!

Jeremy

[Drew]

Wow Jeremy. You've given me so much to work with here. But I think you're helping me make my point.

First, I was wondering when someone would make a remark about my not being at the last two MAC events. Before I went to Milwaukee, I thought about whether or not I should skip the MOWOGs, and I came to the conclusion that unless you have made a committment to handle a certain responsibility at the event itself, then you have no obligation to attend if you choose to attend a different event. After all, what we do is a hobby, not a job.

But why did I go to Milwaukee on 6/15 and 7/20? The purpose of my 6/15 trip was twofold. I wanted to get the experience of running at their excellent site, but I also wanted to observe how they conducted their events to see if there were ideas or methods we could use to help in the organization of MAC events. I corresponded with Pat Washburn in advance on this, and he arranged for me to be free from most work responsibilities so that I could observe and talk to people. And I believe I met and talked to every top person there. During registration, I sat at the different stations; I asked questions; I took notes; and I took pictures. I spent time observing tech inspection. During the timed runs, I spent time in the timing bus with their chief of timing and scoring, watched their operation, got an explanation of their entire process and got copies of the forms they used. I talked to the guy in charge of keeping track of workers reporting for assignments. I tried to get some familiarity with their entire operation and take pictures of everything I could. When I got back, I wrote up a four page article for the Right Line about my trip and observations. I did these things because I was making my own effort to help MAC. And of course I embarked on this effort after MOWOG 2 at St. Cloud, and before your changes in MOWOG 3.

But in addition to what I was trying to do for MAC in Milwaukee, I found I enjoyed myself very much - so much so that on 7/20 I really wanted to go back to Milwaukee. 6/15 and 7/20 were the first two MAC events I've missed by choice since I started autocrossing in 1999.

I stand by the statements I've made and that you seem to be disputing. Since we lost DCTC, we had an average of 101 per event in 01, 90 per event in 02 (not counting St. Cloud), and 73 per event in 03 (not counting St. Cloud). And as I said before, the decline came at a time when there are no other clubs offering autocrosses in the Twin Cities. (Another interesting thing I noted when looking back through prior results - the number of SI entrants has dropped off dramatically, suggesting fewer new people trying out our events.) As for MOWOG 3, I counted 94 last year and 88 this year - fewer, but not a significant difference.

As for your statement that there was no discussion of changing anything, look back at the thread prior to MOWOG 4. There most certainly was discussion of changing registration procedures. Fortunately, Darryl finally posted a clear statement of what the procedures were going to be. While I have not criticized the idea of considering new procedures, I am stressing that posting a variety of possible changes to procedures practically on the eve of the event sure doesn't give the impression of good organization.

Next, you pronounced the old EM manual to be "worthless". Did you find it and review it to come to that conclusion? I only suggested we use it as a starting point. And who said anything appointing an EM and then having them find and read the manual on the day of the event to learn how to be an EM? Come on, Jeremy. The purpose of a (new) manual, which should be placed on our website, is to be a resource to current EM's and prospective EM's, as well as everyone else at the event so that they have an understanding of what the EM's role is at the event, as well as all the other event procedures. Wouldn't that be likely to make the EM's job easier, and things go smoother?

I will say that I think you're exactly right about what should be the limits on the EM's responsibilities. I alluded to that in a previous post. Right now the EM is often viewed (incorrectly) as being ultimately responsible for everything at the event. And that's exactly one of the reasons we need a serious look at the reality of how we're actually running our events.

Although you said you didn't want to rip anyone in your post, I'm not going to let your remark go by that I need to "step up to the plate" and be there to help get things going at the event. Since I got seriously involved in club operations, I have been there working at events, doing tech, checking in with the site management, helping clean up and doing a final policing of the site at the end of the day. And often I was the guy that was the last person to leave the site. (Does that mean your hat's off to me?) In addition to working at the events, I spent a lot of time (up until Chuck Bower took over sites this year) working on site matters. Met Council Rep, MAC event scheduling, meeting and making arrangements with site owners, insurance, city permits, etc. A significant amount of those responsibilities required taking time off of work, charged against my vacation time. So I think I've "stepped up to the plate" enough to have the standing to express some views and strong opinions on the state of our club's operations.

Finally, your subtle suggestion that I would be among the group of 9 people pointing fingers and saying that someone should get to work and get things organized is way off the mark. But the general idea that you're alluding to I agree with completely. There needs to be a change in perceptions and attitude in MAC. This is supposed to be a "club" with about 150 members - not a group of 140 autocrossers and 10 employees.

You shouldn't be so defensive, Jeremy. I complimented, not criticized the fact that you and Darryl made changes in MOWOGs 3 and 4. But I'm also urging a more in-depth look at our whole operation. We shouldn't be getting so impressed with ourselves because some new procedures worked well in one or two events that we feel we need to give no more thought to the topic.

Good, well thought out, effective event organization and management will result in satisfying events, less work on an individual basis and a more respected club.

Drew Baumbach

[Jon Kotek]

Wow this thread is now totally hijacked.


I don't think Jeremy was totally going for attacking you Drew but I can understand his frustration in the fact that he tends to step up to the plate. As for a drop in attendence I think our lack of sites hurt us more then how we run our show. I think if we made an effort to get more people out there we could very easily. However I would rather get our ducks in a row (Which I think we are doing) before we get egg on our faces in the public. (I bet we could get the strib or Ppress out there to do an article on us easy) At that point when we have 150 entraints I want to make sure we can handle it.

Not to look back but I remember a year or so we had timing issues, computer issues, and worker issues. The Mowog IV I thought ran very smooth, there were no timing issues, no computer issues (ok the printer) and I never saw worker turnover go so good. And I hope that Jeremy will share with Marshall and I anything to help us EM the next MOWOG.

Jon

[SkarTisu]

I'll be at the club meeting on Wednesday along with Jon. Drew, if you're there, will you share with me the notes you took from Milwaukee, please? I get the feeling I've walked into a minefield, and want as much information as possible so I can do the best job of EMing that I can.

If you're not going to be there, will you e-mail at mskare@madgenius.com, please? I want that info! :)

I thought the changes in registration were very helpful, and smoothed things considerably. I don't understand why we went away from 3 runs/round to 2. I'm told it has something to do with cooling the vehicle back down, and the length of time cone shaggers are on the course. Something to discuss further, of course.

As far as lack of attendance, *I* am going to point my finger at the economy. Less and less people have several hundred dollars sitting around with nothing to do nowadays to spend on prepping an autocross car and making events. Remember, even though autocross is relatively cheap, it's still a rich-person's sport.

- Marshall

[Drew]

Originally posted by Jon Kotek


Wow this thread is now totally hijacked.


Jon

Why is it that when a thread about an event devolves into a series of posts bantering back and forth about "cute cars", it isn't referred to as being "hijacked"? Well, nevermind.

When I first read about the changes that had been made in MOWOG 3, after I got back from my first trip to Milwaukee, I immediately offered positive comments about the effort in an e-mail to the MAC Board on June 16. I wrote in part:

"I'm glad to read that MOWOG 3 went so well. It appears some very effective changes were put in place....
When I checked the MAC message board postings this morning, I was more than pleased to read that a number of the procedures that I'm itching to share with everyone were already successfully used in MOWOG 3. I take that as a sign that MAC is on its way to re-establishing event procedures that really work and that participants understand. I hope to add some of my observations from Milwaukee that may be of additional help to MAC in continuing the effort to have consistently solid events."

Jeremy was one of Board members that I sent the above message to.

Since that time I've only described the effective event procedures I've seen elsewhere, and I've urged MAC to undertake a thorough review of its current procedures to continue the efforts already started. To support my general premise that a broad scope review could be a good thing for MAC to do, I noted the the decline in attendance at MAC events - something that started well before the changes that were successfully used by Jeremy and Darryl in MOWOG 3.

So what happens? Instead of showing an interest in what I was bringing to the table to help improve MAC events, some of the responses so far are that I'm complaining, I don't show up at MAC events, I don't help out, I don't step up to the plate, and that I'm hijacking a thread on the message board. All of which I now seem to need to defend myself against.

If people want participation in this club, try welcoming a member's efforts to add to what you've done, rather than attacking him personally.

Drew Baumbach

[Drew]

Originally posted by SkarTisu


I'll be at the club meeting on Wednesday along with Jon. Drew, if you're there, will you share with me the notes you took from Milwaukee, please? I get the feeling I've walked into a minefield, and want as much information as possible so I can do the best job of EMing that I can.

- Marshall

No problem, Marshall. I'd be glad to share whatever I have on Milwaukee events with you. However, you can read about it right now if you want. My article about their event is in the Right Line on the MAC website.

However, don't worry about walking into a minefield. There isn't one. I just seem to be encountering a lot of resistance to the idea that MAC should undertake a thorough review of its organizational structure relating to competition and put together comphensive set of event procedures. This is not something that can or should be done for the next event. It probably should be looked at as a project for next season.

I've not suggested we abandon the changes made starting with MOWOG 3. I hope they continue. When a discussion started about further juggling of registration procedures for MOWOG 4, I was glad to see Darryl wrap it up with a clear statement that they were going to continue to use the procedures they started in MOWOG 3. (See my response to Darryl's post in the thread prior to MOWOG 4.)

I'm sure things will go fine as EM for MOWOG 5. Jeremy and Darryl are getting plenty of experience and should be very helpful to you.

Drew Baumbach

[Jon Kotek]

I guess I didn't see it as an attack on you Drew. As for the hijacking comment I was only going to lighten the mood a little. I think Jeremy's frustration comes from the fact that there is only a few people doing most of the work, and when someone says something to the effect of how things are not improving that can be a little harsh on someone. Because of personal issues this was my first event and I have seen an almost night and day difference on how things run. I am going to try to get more involved now that I have more time.


Jon

[Drew]

Originally posted by Jon Kotek

I think Jeremy's frustration comes from the fact that there is only a few people doing most of the work, and when someone says something to the effect of how things are not improving that can be a little harsh on someone

Jon

If that's what Jeremy's feelings are, he can relax and not be so defensive. I've been one of the few people doing most of the work the last few years, and I'm frustrated with some long term trends I've seen in the club. But rather than say he hasn't helped make improvements, I applauded his efforts. However, I don't think what's been done so far by itself is going to solve all the club's problems. There are a number of aspects of event organization and management that haven't been addressed yet.

I'll say it again for the umpteenth time. MAC needs to build on the recent successful changes by undertaking a comprehsive review of its event organization and procedures and writing a new overall plan.

Drew Baumbach

[Jon Kotek]

Well I don't know exactly what Jeremy feels, I am just making a wild ass guess. I think alot of people put out alot of work at this club and end up getting burned out by trying to move an iceburg.

Jon

[weidnerpaul]

Why is it that when a thread about an event devolves into a series of posts bantering back and forth about "cute cars", it isn't referred to as being "hijacked"?

Drew,
I never take it personal or like a hijacking cause I know that the outrageous attacks I get about the "cute" car are due to envy --- or from Wisconsin and I consider the source:D :D

I think this threads discussion has been healthy overall, and it's happening because these are people who care about the club and have invested lots of time and energy in the club.

As I've stated before in this thread, I think Jeremey & Darrell started some good new procedures that worked well at MOWOG3 & MOWOG4.

See you all at the meeting on Wednesday,

Paul

[Drew]

Originally posted by weidnerpaul



Why is it that when a thread about an event devolves into a series of posts bantering back and forth about "cute cars", it isn't referred to as being "hijacked"?

Drew,
I never take it personal or like a hijacking cause I know that the outrageous attacks I get about the "cute" car are due to envy --- or from Wisconsin and I consider the source:D :D


Paul,
I guess it was predictable that you would respond to my mention of a cute car. Now for my predictable response: You're HIJACKING this thread! :D




As I've stated before in this thread, I think Jeremey & Darrell started some good new procedures that worked well at MOWOG3 & MOWOG4.



And I've said that even though I wasn't there, it sounds to me like they did also.

Drew

[jberman]

We had 62 cars with times at MOWOG IV.

I really like the suggestion of 2 heats of 3 runs each, instead of 3 heats of 2 runs each. The region I used to run in (down in Indiana) did the same thing, and if the day was getting really long, we sometimes trimmed everyone's second heat to 2 runs instead of 3.

Let's discuss @ the meeting...

- Josh

[washburn]

In defense of Drew, I must add that by going out to see what's going on in other places, he is doing the club a service. We can't get too hung up on things, and we cetainly cannot take this stuff personally. If Drew didn't care about the club and all of us members so much, he wouldn't have said a thing. Just showed up, paid the entry fee, worked the minimum and went home. That's fine if that's what you want to do. That's why were here...to give people a place to play without getting hammered for not doing more. While a certain percentage of us will step and and want to get more involved, that percentage traditionally does not fluctuate a whole lot.

Influencing this percentage to the degree that it can, however, is the overall face we put on the club. Event operation, organization, and yes, internet traffic, define what that face looks like. I think it is important to operate in the most positive, organized manner we can. Even with a little site and the occasional low turnout.

I am very sorry to have missed the season so far. It is, unfortunately, by my choice. Not so much that things aren't going well, but when given the choices of which autocross do I go to, I have to pick the one with the bigger site and higher turnouts. I really want to see the new changes that have been made first hand...it sounds like we are going in the right direction for sure. Thanks to those few who are making these changes for the better! (If you guys would stop scheduling dates on top of all my other events, I would be there in a heartbeat!) :)

Not sure what my final point is in this little ramble, but I encourage people to get out to other events as well. It doesn't threaten the MAC events...it can only make them better. Now back to our regularly scheduled thread. ;)

[Jeremy Engel]

I would like to start with two things. First, I have been out of town for a few days and have just read up on the follow up. Second, Drew I do not want you to feel like you have been attacked, I really do think you are a great guy, a friend, and a asset to the club…

I am glad to see that this topic of event organization has gotten so much attention this season and so much discussion.

Here is my biggest frustration…it’s the fact that some people that don’t come to the events are still saying that the club needs to work on things and that we need to sit down and rework things. Prior to MOWOG 3 Darryl and I met and completely reworked the entire days organization. It worked very well. What is there to do? Drew you keep saying we need to reorganize everything…WE DID! Come out and see it.

Also, I think it is great that you went to Milwaukee and the entire time was devoted to research for our club…but it can’t end with a report…if it does (in my mind) you put yourself in the place of a finger pointer. The club doesn’t need anymore pointers. I know how much work you have put into this club and continue to put in. Most of the work you do is all behind the scenes, and that is essential to the club to run…people behind the black curtain that never get seen or praised and that alone leads to burn out. I praise you for everything you have ever done or the club.

SO… Know what we have done with the club Drew, what is it that you think the club needs to do…and don’t say reorganize…we have done that and the last thing we need to do right now is start again. I will agree we need to right everything down that Darryl and I have started and continue to tweak.

Drew this is not a poke at you, I just want this club to live up to what it can be and I feel that is you intention too.


Jeremy

[914 Dave]

Here's my .02 worth.

Paul.... consider the source? I was ready and willing to call you out on that one AT THE MEETING. Yes, I came all the way from Gods country, the land of beer, brats, and, well, more beer, to the meeting this past Wednesday, and guess what- you weren't there!!! But, while you were missed, it is understandable, as someone mentioned some family matters needing your attention. Hope all turns out well, and you can make St Cloud with that, uh, cute car of yours...

Washburn- you gotta get involved and show up a little... totally just kidding, I appreciate the help you have given me and the 914, and in doing the novice school. But really, the changes J and D have started do seem a real improvement, and perhaps with your more worldly resume of event experience, you could have some more good feedback on even more changes, but hopefully changes for the better, and not just for the sake of change...

J and D. Thanks for all your help on the new, revised systems. Not that alot of huge changes were made, but some good ideas backed up with a little backbone have made things go smoother. Due to rain, the last event was a smaller turn out, and due to distance, St Cloud may be a little smaller than a midway event as well, but it will be interesting to see how the clubs new proceedures will flow with an 80-100 car event. I kinda think it will be smoother than last season. I'd be all over the idea of a page or 2 of "guidelines" for running an event and scripting the meetings. Perhaps something laminated and two sided so as to be all weather. Maybe also a clear plastic sleeve or page protector to go over the run group/work station listing, and a grease pen, to make that a little more all weather also. I'd like a copy of the "script" as Nathan ("silveracer" the other 914) and I will be up to the plate for the MOWOG 7 in October. Also, if we, that would be me, Nate, and either/both of you guys could get togather at MOWOG 5/6 to look at the proposed track, I'd like the help in setting up something fun....

[Drew]

Jeremy and all,

Thanks for your posts on this topic. I've probably pushed kind of hard to keep the thread going because I think it's critical that things really continue to happen in the club, particularly in the case of event organization. I honestly feel that the efforts that Jeremy and Darryl put into MOWOGs 3 & 4 can and should be the catalyst that will propel MAC to the comprehensive assessment that I'm trying to promote.

And I think that recognizing their individual efforts is key to realizing what should be done here. If Jeremy and Darryl took on the task of personally running every event from here on, there probably wouldn't be such a need for MAC to review its event procedures and write up a plan. But, with the loose way event management is currently structured, what do we have in place to keep our events running this way? Currently, we don't have a MAC Event Plan that an EM is expected to follow. Sure, right now EMs will continue to try to replicate what has been working well recently. But I think that it's inevitable that over time there will be a gradual dilution of the currently successful approach that we now have. Jeremy and Darryl changed critical procedural aspects of the event like registration, run groups, support personnel, worker assignments, and even the drivers meeting. But have those changes been established in such a manner that events will be running the same way next season? Can participants expect the procedures to be the same from event from event, and therefore be more on board and up to speed? If they are, the participants will also be a factor in the success and satisfaction of an event.

Okay, so what am I hoping to see MAC do? First, let's clarify the fact that I didn't call for a complete reorganization of our event procedures. (See an earlier post in this thread, where I said I wasn't suggesting we change everything.) What I'm saying is that we need to look at everything - not just the organization of the event day - but everything from the context of the "big picture". I think you made a good point, Jeremy, when you said that much of what I've done in the club has been more or less behind the scenes. Similarly, a comprehensive review would probably look at a lot of aspects of MAC events that could be considered behind the scenes, rather than purely event day procedure.

I think a big picture point of view would include some areas like these:

Types of events: Autox, others, points series, special larger event.
Sites: How far out should we look? Just how much can we budget? Are there untried ways to gain acceptance from site owners? How can we better sell ourselves? Charity partnerships? Could a commercial sponsor become a connection for a site?
Event Promotion: Should we post a flyer for each event with event info and directions? Ads?
Other areas of event procedure that maybe are only being considered in isolation: Online payment, tech procedure, penalty recording, results posting (how do we get them posted faster - day of event or next day?), records and backups of data.
Awards: Trophies or discounts for services at sponsor businesses?
EM resources: Retain copies of previous course designs? A new EM manual?

The above list is general, and I"m sure there would be more things to consider once we got into the process. But there would be a couple of other key elements that could help keep everything tied together. First is obviously that it should all be put in written form.

The second is that I don"t think we can just write up comprehensive event procedures and expect everything to run like clockwork from then on. What's missing from the current club structure is coordination and oversight of all the essential elements of our events on an ongoing basis. Although the MAC By-Laws provide for the Sites/Events/Competition Committee to "oversee" events, that committee, which usually consists only of the site person, hasn't traditionally been empowered with such all-encompassing coordination and oversight. But MAC has grown to the point where random, voluntary pitching in to get jobs done isn't always the best way for us. So I'm pointing out what I believe is a need of the club without suggesting any blame, because there is no blame due to the fact that the current club structure doesn't really provide for the type of authority and control we now need to insure consistently smooth running events.

MAC has a number of committed members who volunteer to fulfill the various tasks necessary for us to put on an event. But despite the obvious willingness to cooperate with each other, the efforts are fragmented. Coordination would provide a more consistent and integrated effort. It would be a way to make sure things get done in a timely manner, and decide how to resolve problems.

So, in a nutshell, that's what I'm proposing. Not something that will be done to undo anything Jeremy and Darryl have done for our events. On the contrary, since they've made changes that work, it would be better to solidify those changes by building a solid plan around them, and making sure as many members and participants as possible are familiar with the way MAC runs its events. And we should have a way to insure that whatever procedures we have in place are the ones we follow for an event. This is something that would make sense to start working on now, with an eye toward introducing any significant additional changes next season. But we should stay the course with the current improvements that are working.

I hope this clarifies the general idea I'm promoting.

Drew Baumbach

[SkarTisu]

I'll chime in with Drew on this as well. One of the things I learned from running R/C events was that your biggest ally of all is consistency. Run the races the same way, every time. That way people know what to expect, either through experience in coming to multiple events, or by learning of the format through communication the first time they show up.

When I started doing things consistently, organization started to feed upon itself. I knew where all my supplies were, so I didn't have to look for them, I could just grab them. The racers knew that when I said it would be 4 minutes to the first heat race of the night, that MEANT 4 minutes whether they were ready or not. So, the racers started making sure they were good and ready well beforehand, which cut down on my pleas to get people on the track in a timely fashion.

So, having a single source of EM information would be invaluable I believe. It would give new EMs a cookbook to use so they don't have to "look" for things, and it would give participants confidence that MOWOG V 2003 will be organized the same way MOWOG I 2004 will be.